Did I miss it or did they not say anything about letting people actually use these models, let alone open sourcing them?
Meta Movie Gen
331–340 of 1001 posts
Re: Meta Movie Gen
#332Man, everyone is happy with these advancements, and they are impressive.
I’m here looking at users and wondering - the content pipelines are broader, but the exit points of attention and human brains are constant. How the heck are you supposed to know if your content is valid?
During a recent apple event, someone on YT had an AI generated video of Tim Cook announcing a crypto collaboration; it had a 100k users before it was taken down.
Right now, all the videos of rockets falling on Israel can be faked. Heck, the responses on the communities are already populated by swathes of bots.
It’s simply cheaper to create content and overwhelm society level filters we inherited from an era of more expensive content creation.
Before anyone throws the sink at me for being a Luddite or raining on the parade - I’m coming from the side where you deal with the humans who consume content, and then decide to target your user base.
Yes, the vast majority of this is going to be used to create lovely cat memes and other great stuff.
At the same time, it takes just 1 post to act as a lightning rod and blow up things.
Edit:
From where I sit, there are 3 levels of issues.
1) Day to day arguments - this is organic normal human stuff
2) Bad actors - this is spammers, hate groups, hackers.
3) REALLY Bad actors - this is nation states conducting information warfare. This is countries seeding African user bases with faked stories, then using that as a basis for global interventions.
This is fake videos of war crimes, which incense their base and overshadow the harder won evidence of actual war crimes.
This doesn’t seem real, but political forces are about perception, not science and evidence.
Re: Meta Movie Gen
#333It is really amazing how consistent this model is in demo videos about world object details over time. This spatial comprehension is really spooky and super amazing at the same time. I hope Meta will release this model with open weights and open code, as they have done for the LLaMA models.
Re: Meta Movie Gen
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
> To think that you _need_ to be neurodivergent to be an artist You will notice I never said this. All I said, and is true, is there is a correlation between being an artist and being neurodivergent. > stating mastering the craft itself is worthless Where did I say this too? It appears you're having an argument with a ghost. You're correct, that argument is baffling! I wonder then why you made it up if you're just go…
I'm sorry if I misunderstood, but please clarify how this two quotes don't align with what I said? > But mastering this alone is almost worthless. > And it's magic because then it must not be rationale and it must not make sense, because the neurotypical can't see it. Not trying to take them out of context, but specifying them. You mention, from my understanding, that mastering is almost worthless without the magic,…
I never said the magic is "only" there if you're neurodivergent, I said it seems to me neurodivergent people seem to be more likely to have the magic.
> There's a huge overlap between creatives and mental illness
Keyword overlap, but I don't think it's 100%
Magic is maybe not the right word here, but I do think it's indescribable. It's some sort of perspective.
But I stand by this: > that mastering is almost worthless without the magic
How, exactly, you obtain the magic is kind of unknown. But I do think you need it. Because skill alone is just not worth much outside of economics. You can make great corporate art, but you're not gonna be a great artist.
I think if you're perfectly rationally minded, you're going to struggle a lot to find that magic. I shouldn't say it's impossible, but I think it's close to.
Re: Meta Movie Gen
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assure you that's not enough. These are high quality videos. Once they get uploaded to social media, compression mostly makes imperfections go away. And it's been shown that when people are not expecting AI content, they are much less likely to realize they are looking at AI. I would 100% believe most of these videos were real if caught off guard.
I regularly catch my kids watching AI generated content and they don't know it.
A surprising amount of it is really popular too. I recently figured out that the Movie Recaps channel was all AI when the generated voice slipped and mispronounced a word in a really unnatural way. They post videos almost daily and they get millions of views. Must be making bank.
Re: Meta Movie Gen
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't be. How is any of this going to lead to meaningful art? I don't think you get "The Green Mile" from something like this.
Shameless plug: I just created a short AI film (1) and tried to tell an actual story and trigger emotions. I spent countless hours crafting the script, choosing the shots, refining my prompts, generating images, animating images, generating music, sounds, and so on... For me AI tools are just that - tools. True, you have to yield them some "control", but at the end of the day you are still the one guiding and directi…
Very well done! I’m not ashamed to admit that I cried.
Re: Meta Movie Gen
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’ll never be able to tell them apart.
"Turn this book into a two-hour movie with the likeness of [your favorite actor/actress] in the lead role." This sounds marginally above fanfiction, so I do think it'll be very easy to tell them apart. "Terminator, except with Adam Sandler and set on Mars" is a cute, gimmicky idea, not a competitor to serious work.
Well, yeah. If you explicitly try to come up with a cute, gimmicky idea, it's not going to be serious. Taste still matters regardless of paint, cameras or computers.
Re: Meta Movie Gen
#338> Upload an image of yourself and transform it > into a personalized video. Movie Gen’s > cutting-edge model lets you create personalized > videos that preserve human identity and motion. A stalker’s dream! I’m sure my ex is going to love all the videos I’m going to make of her! Jokes aside, it’s a little bizarre to me that they treat identity preservation as a feature while competitors treat that as a bug, explicitl…
When I read that text my first thought was making some videos of my mom that passed away, since so few videos of her exist and pictures don't capture her personality
This is a Black Mirror episode: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be_Right_Back
Re: Meta Movie Gen
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't be. How is any of this going to lead to meaningful art? I don't think you get "The Green Mile" from something like this.
You're unlikely to get an AI that wins accolades for the same reason that's unlikely with humans: they represent the absolute pinnacle of achievement. The same AI can still raise the minimum bar for quality. Or replace YouTubers and similar while they're still learning how to be good in the first place. No idea where we are in this whole process yet, but it's a continuum not a boolean.
What accolades? The Hollywood self-congratulatory conspicuous consumption festivals they use to show how good they are at producing "art" every year? The film festivals where billions of dollars are spent on clothing and jewelry to show off the "class" of everyone attending, which people like Weinstein used to pick victims, and everyone else uses as conspicuous consumption and "marketing" media?
Pinnacle is not the word I'd use. Race to the bottom, least possible effort, plausibly deniable quality, gross exploitation, capitalist bottom line - those are all things I'd use to describe current "art" awards like Grammy, Oscars, Cannes, etc.
The media industry is run by exploiting artists for licensing rights. The middle men and publishers add absolutely nothing to the mix. Google or Spotify or platforms arguably add value by surfacing, searching, categorizing, and so on, but not anywhere near the level of revenue capture they rationalize as their due.
When anyone and everyone can produce a film series or set of stories or song or artistic image that matches their inner artistic vision, and they're given the tools to do so without restriction or being beholden to anyone, then we're going to see high quality art and media that couldn't possibly be made in the grotesquely commercial environment we have now. These tools are as raw and rough and bad performing as they ever will be, and are only going to get better.
Shared universes of prompts and storylines and media styles and things that bring generative art and storytelling together to allow coherent social sharing and interactive media will be a thing. Kids in 10 years will be able to click and create their own cartoons and stories. Parents will be able to engage by establishing cultural parameters and maybe sneak in educational, ethical, and moral content designed around what they think is important. Artists are going to be able to produce every form of digital media and tune and tweak their vision using sophisticated tools and processes, and they're not going to be limited by budgets, politics, studio constraints, State Department limitations, wink/nod geopolitical agreements with nation states, and so on.
Art's going to get weird, and censorship will be nigh on impossible. People will create a lot of garbage, a lot of spam, low effort gifs and video memes, but more artists will be empowered than ever before, and I'm here for it.
Re: Meta Movie Gen
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
The content bubble apocalypse, where no one is ever watching the same thing and we lose all cultural connections to each other. At least until someone figures out an algorithm/prompt to influence the content, yvan eht nioj style.
The opposite will occur. Very little will change from how people consume content today. There won't be endless amounts of quality content, there will still be very little high quality content. There will be brief bursts of large amounts of garbage that nobody pays attention to (as a small percentage of people flirt with generative media and quickly lose interest; and the vast majority never bother at all). The extrem…
Rich people will afford the subscription costs for curated and verifiable content.
Plebs will get the mass produced stuff, just like it has been for junk food.
In the information case, even if you wanted to sell good quality, verifiable content, how are you going to keep up with the verification costs, or pay people when someone can just dupe your content and automate its variations?
People who are poor dont have the luxury of time, and verifications cannot be automated.
Most people dont work in infosec or Trust and safety, so this discussion wont go anywhere, but please just know - we dont have the human bandwidth to handle these outcomes.
Bad actors are more prolific and effective than good, because they dont have to give a shit about your rules or assumptions.