11–20 of 187 posts
This will age like a dead fish out in the Sun. He even contradicts his whole premise of "actors will always be necessary" with his example of a custom generated series episode. Also, >implying the non-AI content we have nowadays is highly creative and unique *facepalm*
He said it would be "janky and weird" and likened it to a remix.
Especially when you're talking about fiction and reading/watching for enjoyment, what does it matter if you can shit out 1000 hours of AI content? Maybe it's good to keep babies entertained? Studios have gotten so into the habit of treating "content" as a fungible commodity, but the fact is that even blockbuster movies still live and die by actually being entertaining.
This will age like a dead fish out in the Sun. He even contradicts his whole premise of "actors will always be necessary" with his example of a custom generated series episode. Also, >implying the non-AI content we have nowadays is highly creative and unique *facepalm*
How soon though? 2 years? 10? 50? He starts by saying this won't happen soon, _maybe_ ever.
I already see really convincing deep fakes on Facebook, etc., it's not an impossible problem anymore, it's just a matter of increasing their quality.
Was it? He concludes that LLMs will never write Shakespeare, or create original work of that caliber, or animate an actor the way Ben Guinness could have done it. I'm paraphrasing but isn't this confirmaation bias from a guy now heavily vested in making movies? Move 37 was so astonishing the world champiion Go player, hardly known for theatrics, got up and left the table. It was considered an insanely "original" move…
This will age like a dead fish out in the Sun. He even contradicts his whole premise of "actors will always be necessary" with his example of a custom generated series episode. Also, >implying the non-AI content we have nowadays is highly creative and unique *facepalm*
> He even contradicts his whole premise of "actors will always be necessary" with his example of a custom generated series episode. He said it would be "janky and weird" and likened it to a remix.
(Also, yeah, there's a very strong interest for him in saying actors will not be replaced, but let's assume he's being frank here).
All the "AI personalities" that are already popping up here and there are already decent enough, again, it will only take a couple years until their quality is on par with meatspace video.
Then it's gg for actors (and many other professions).
https://www.reddit.com/r/vfx/comments/1grgyps/affleck_on_ai_...
This will age like a dead fish out in the Sun. He even contradicts his whole premise of "actors will always be necessary" with his example of a custom generated series episode. Also, >implying the non-AI content we have nowadays is highly creative and unique *facepalm*
>implying the non-AI content we have nowadays is highly creative and unique
You just inserted this, he doesn't say or imply this - he asserted that all of the new ideas (so far) have been generated by humans. Sure lots of it is slop - but all of AI content is slop. That's his point: the new, creative stuff is still coming from humans - even if they are using "AI" tools to do it.
When it pours it rains. They don't know what is in store and what we are working on.
Hint: codename: Project Hailey (named after Ho--y)
Was it? He concludes that LLMs will never write Shakespeare, or create original work of that caliber, or animate an actor the way Ben Guinness could have done it. I'm paraphrasing but isn't this confirmaation bias from a guy now heavily vested in making movies? Move 37 was so astonishing the world champiion Go player, hardly known for theatrics, got up and left the table. It was considered an insanely "original" move…
AlphaGo wasn't an LLM.