Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 187 posts

Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video

#71

Post by jjj123 »

moralestapia wrote: post #37
aeturnum wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're mis-reading what he says. People create new stuff, AI (so far) remixes old stuff. Down the line you will be able to order a remix of succession and AI should be able to do that for you but it won't be able to add any interesting additional spin - it's just gonna make it to order (obviously a big deal! which he says). >implying the non-AI content we have nowadays is highly creative and unique You just inserted…

??? Show me a movie in the last decade where the premise of it couldn't be generated by some AI prompt. (I'll even make it easier by stating that said AI prompt can be generic and to some degree trivial; i.e. not the premise explicitly laid out in the prompt).

Believe it or not, but there’s a lot more that goes into filmmaking beyond the premise.

Parasite, The Substance, Uncut Gems, mother!, Krisha, Tangerine, and The Lighthouse are some movies from the last decade that are novel in ways beyond their premises.

No generic prompts to an LLM could create those movies, even if it could spit out a vague 2 sentence premise that matches them.

Note that I’m not saying it could never happen, but LLMs as we have them in 2024 produce regurgitated slop, and require significant creative input from the prompter to make anything artistically interesting.

Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video

#72

Post by walterbell »

threetonesun wrote: post #35
nwgo wrote: post #19

He is wrong. Movies will be automated and when they will be, all these actors will be first one to go. I say this despite him and Matt Damon my favorite actors. 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)

The movie industry is already endlessly pumping out crap with real actors, I suppose it won't get much worse if it removes them entirely. On the other hand, there's a whole other medium for actors that AI can't replace.

In addition to the experiential gap between theatre and film, we have productions which translate from one to the other. Each is a distinct market.

A subset of the Chinese TV version of "Three-Body Problem" consists of video gameplay "footage". The lack of human actors is compensated by over the top footage of cataclysms, which could never be filmed. It's mostly additive to the storyline with human actors.

AI can create new media markets with different cost structures. These will necessarily subtract some attention-minutes from existing film audiences. But it should also lower production costs for artistic filmmakers focused on portrayal of human actors for human audiences.

Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video

#73

Post by legitster »

I think it's a great speech, but I may make the point that he's probably underrating audiences' demand for interesting or new content. Audiences already seem pretty happy with endless iterations of the same few concepts.

His example of having AI generate a kludged together episode of Succession feels exactly like what most shows already do now.

Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video

#75

Post by notahacker »

dartos wrote: post #26
nwgo wrote: post #19

He is wrong. Movies will be automated and when they will be, all these actors will be first one to go. I say this despite him and Matt Damon my favorite actors. 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)

Strong claims. Have we seen any other form of communication and/or artistic expression become totally automated? Even 2d art hasn’t been automated by image generation models. It’s just another tool in the bag.

We haven't even automated live music performances, which are actually bigger business than they were before the existence of recorded music

Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video

#76

Post by josefritzishere »

spiderice wrote: post #28
bdndndndbve wrote: post #12

My favorite quote on this topic is "Why should I bother to read something you didn't bother to write?" 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 mov…

> Why should I bother to read something you didn't bother to write? The answer seems obvious: because it's better. Obviously it isn't better now . But it's easy to imagine a day in the not-too-distant future where AI can shit out 1000 hours of content that is better in every way than what humans create. And it will even feel more human than the human made stuff because the AI will have learned that we like that. What…

I can easily imagine AI spitting out volume. I can't imagine it spitting out quality. Most of what it generates now is just trash. Like the Tourist/bear paradigm in dumpster security there may be overlap between the worst human writing and the best AI writing... but that's not how you make a successful film.

Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video

#77

Post by squidsoup »

mempko wrote: post #64
nwgo wrote: post #19

He is wrong. Movies will be automated and when they will be, all these actors will be first one to go. I say this despite him and Matt Damon my favorite actors. 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)

My prediction. As more and more movies are made with AI, and when they start replacing real actors with AI, people are going to value movies less, and live performances more. I expect AI will bring a resurgence of live performances like live theater. Why? Because we value what people do more than what machines do.

I wonder if we're already starting to see this - have noticed that jazz is becoming popular again with young audiences.

Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video

#79

Post by danjl »

It's funny how folks see their jobs as safe, but nearby jobs that they don't understand as at risk. In this case, actors are safe, but VFX better be worried. Ben knows actors are artists and it's going to be hard for an AI to mimic all the experience and subtleties he's gained over his life. The same is true in VFX, it's just that Ben doesn't understand the art or the process of visual effects.

Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video

#80

Post by danielmarkbruce »

stego-tech wrote: post #70
impomura wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's impossible to answer to this line of reasoning without wasting time so I'll just start right away with the ad hominem. you just don't like art, you don't understand it and you want slop, admit it and don't feel compelled to enter the discussion with your growth oriented bullshit mindset

Literally this. Ben hits the nail on the head that these tools can “write convincing Elizabethan language but can’t write Shakespeare”, along with his metaphor about craftsmen vs artists. These tools can never create art because art is the imperfection of reality transposed from the mind’s eye using the talent of the artisan and their tools. Writing a convincing enough prompt to generate an assortment of visual outpu…

I never created a movie. I can appreciate a good one over a bad one (Argo, Gigli).

Statistically speaking, the number of people who have created a movie rounds to zero. And yet, to suggest basically no one appreciates a movie or the difference between a good movie and a bad one is obviously very dumb.

Post reply on HN