I wonder how I would have appreciate this if I didn't know it was AI generated and thought it was some fan-made thing.
SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
11–20 of 54 posts
Re: SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
#12AI Mett Porker (I see what you did there) Maybe in my lifetime an AI could generate a few more seasons of Firefly (that got cancelled too soon)? Another AI challenge would be to super-impose Harrison Ford onto Alec Baldwin in the movie Hunt for Red October. That would give nice continuity to the Jack Ryan character across the Tom Clancy movie series (Patriot Games, Clear and Present Danger)
> Maybe in my lifetime an AI could generate a few more seasons of Firefly
You can’t take the Skynet from me
Re: SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
#13So in addition to worrying about fake AI stuff that is presented as real, we now also have real stuff presented as fake AI.
I remember someone a while back tried to pass off a script as being A.I. generated when it clearly wasn't and I thought to myself, will we need to develop a reverse Turing test? Of course some one already thought of that;
Re: SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
#14So in addition to worrying about fake AI stuff that is presented as real, we now also have real stuff presented as fake AI.
Why’s that a worry?
Re: SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
#15The interesting thing here is that Matt and Trey have codified intentionality as a primary writing tool, and whatever this is, doesn't mention that once. That's a pretty major thing to overlook, like a blind spot or achilles' heel of the AI devs.
In fact, this is a blind spot of ALL AI that I've yet seen.
Matt and Trey approach writing scenes with the following intent: if a scene can be described as following up a previous scene with 'AND THEN', it fails.
If the following scene can be described as 'BUT' or 'THEREFORE', they write it and it goes in the show.
This is so simple, yet it's completely absent from what AI is doing, and seemed absent from the example script (I'd have liked a written version of their fake South Park script, as it was pretty insufferable). I'm not sure what beyond expanding context length will be needed, context length is merely a technical problem… but this is a significant failing in what we get out of AI.
This is where the sea of meaninglessness comes from. Good creators have a great deal of context and intentionality in their work, and for all that Matt and Trey are puerile and crass, they've got a clearly expressed agenda artistically (and philosophically).
There's also human creators who are very facile, but very prone to 'AND THEN': AI will have a much easier time replacing humans like this, than replacing Matt and Trey.
Re: SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
#16I wonder how Trey Parker and Matt Stone would react to this?
With Sassy Justice
Re: SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
#17Definitely could be something the South Park guys made as a joke.
But not as wordy, it was painful.
Re: SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
#18Was the intro generated as well, or lifted directly from the real show?
There is a significant drop in believability as soon as the first scene of the generated show starts after the intro. Look at the first few seconds of the first scene. Here, the three boys are just standing statically in the hall while they are talking.
Now take South Park Episode 1, Season 1, from 1997.
https://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/940f8z/south-park-...
Look at the first few seconds of that opening scene after the intro in this very first episode of the real show. Notice that even though there is a lot of time where some of the characters don’t move at all, they still feel a lot more alive than what you saw in that video that is in the OP. And I think part of it is also the use of exaggerated expressions when they do move. The others not moving is ok, because the ones that do move provide a lot of entertainment with those movements and expressions. And of course the voice acting is very passionate as well.
In the years since then the South Park episodes have gotten even better and better animation.
Maybe I am being too harsh, but the lacklustre animation in the first few seconds of the first scene of the OP video made me not watch any more of the video.
If you want to take on South Park, and you want to beat it at its own game, the bar is very high. Both in terms of script, voice acting, and animation.
Re: SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
#19Writers Guild has nothing to worry about
Re: SHOW-1 and Showrunner Agents in Multi-Agent Simulations
#20The interesting thing here is that Matt and Trey have codified intentionality as a primary writing tool, and whatever this is, doesn't mention that once. That's a pretty major thing to overlook, like a blind spot or achilles' heel of the AI devs. In fact, this is a blind spot of ALL AI that I've yet seen. Matt and Trey approach writing scenes with the following intent: if a scene can be described as following up a pr…
My understanding from paper is every character had separate prompt, and somehow they mixed it together.
'BUT' approach would require opposite, start with story, somehow integrate character quirks.