Live data from Hacker News

Stable Video Diffusion

stability.ai

261–270 of 316 posts

Re: Stable Video Diffusion

#261
post #252

How much longer will it be until we can play "video games" which consist of user-input streamed to an AI that generates video output and streams it to the player's screen?

If you're willing to accept text based output then Text adventure style games and even simulating bash was possible using chatgpt until openAI nerfed it.

Re: Stable Video Diffusion

#263
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't bet either way. Back in the mid 90s to 2010 or so, graphical improvements were hailed as photorealistic only to be improved upon with each subsequent blockbuster game. I think we're in a similar phase with AI[0]: every new release in $category is better, gets hailed as super fantastic world changing, is improved upon in the subsequent Two Minute Papers video on $category, and the cycle repeats. [0] all of…

> Back in the mid 90s to 2010 or so, graphical improvements were hailed as photorealistic Whenever I saw anybody calling those graphics "photorealistic", I always had to roll my eyes and question if those people were legally blind. Like, c'mon. Yeah, they could be large leaps ahead of the previous generation, but photorealistic? Get real. Even today, I'm not sure there's a single game that I would say has photo-reali…

> Even today, I'm not sure there's a single game that I would say has photo-realistic graphics.

Looking just at the videos (because I don't have time to play the latest games any more and even if I did it's unreleased), I think that "Unrecord" is also something I can't distinguish from a filmed cinematic experience[0]: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2381520/Unrecord/

Though there are still caveats even there, as the pixelated faces are almost certainly necessary given the state of the art; and because cinematic experiences are themselves fake, I can't tell if the guns are "really-real" or "Hollywood".

Buuuuut… I thought much the same about Myst back in the day, and even the bits that stayed impressive for years (the fancy bedroom in the Stoneship age), don't stand out any more. Riven was better, but even that's not really realistic now. I think I did manage to fool my GCSE art teacher at the time with a printed screenshot from Riven, but that might just have been because printers were bad at everything.

Re: Stable Video Diffusion

#264

Question for anyone more familiar with this space: are there any high-quality tools which take an image and make it into a short video? For example, an image of a tree becomes a video of a tree swaying in the wind. I have googled for it but mostly just get low quality web tools.

That's what this is

Re: Stable Video Diffusion

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sure feels weird to me as well, that GenAI is always supposed to be end-to-end with everything done inside NN blackbox. No one seems to be doing image output as SVG or .ai.

There is a fundamental disconnect between industry and academia here.

Over the last 10 years of industry work, I'd say about 20% of my time has been format shifting, or parsing half baked undocumented formats that change when I'm not paying attention.

That pretty much matches my experience working with NN's and LLM's

Re: Stable Video Diffusion

#266
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like, at this point, what are the technical counters to the assertion that our world is a simulation? How about this theory is neither verifiable nor falsifiable.

The general concept is not falsifiable, but many variations might be, or their inverse might be. E.g. the theory that we are not in a simulation would in general be falsifiable by finding an "escape" from a simulation and so showing we are in one (but not finding an escape of course tells us nothing). It's not a very useful endeavour to worry about, but it can be fun to speculate about what might give rise to testabl…

[deleted]

Re: Stable Video Diffusion

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For although I love SD and these video examples are great... It's a flawed method: they never get lighting correctly and there are many incoherent things just about everywhere. Any 3D artist or photographer can immediately spot that. The question is whether the 99% of the audience would even care...

Of course they would. The internet spent a solid month laughing at the Sonic the Hedgehog movie because Sonic had weird-looking teeth.

Since that movie did well and spawned 2 sequels, the real conclusion is that the viewers didn't really care.

As for "the internet", there will always some small part of it which will obsess and/or laught over anything, doesn't mean they represent anything significant - not even when they're vocal.

Re: Stable Video Diffusion

#269

Question for anyone more familiar with this space: are there any high-quality tools which take an image and make it into a short video? For example, an image of a tree becomes a video of a tree swaying in the wind. I have googled for it but mostly just get low quality web tools.

That's what this is

Hmm, for some reason I was understanding this as a text-to-video model. I’ll have to read this again.
Post reply on HN