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

141–150 of 187 posts

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

#141

Post by omikun »

andrewinardeer wrote: post #63
spiderice wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Mechanizing the expression of artist endeavour seems silly. Does an LLM know the pleasure and pain that love can instill or does it just regurgitate tokens in a pattern it thinks is best fit?

How do you think most creatives are doing?? Rare is someone who can express anything that isn't a derivative of what came before.

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

#142

Post by omikun »

impomura wrote: post #45
spiderice wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

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

Plenty of mass media are just uninspired derivatives. It seems to entertain a lot of people. I see AI can take care of the mind numbing work of making uninspired bullshit so real creatives can be freed to pursue actual, meaningful art.

Lots of people will lose jobs working on stupid bullshit, of course. That is an economic issue, not a technology issue.

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

#143

Post by TiredOfLife »

blueyes wrote: post #129
ofcourseyoudo wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

fun fact but that is a real stretch to say she was the most famous TV actress in the world when she probably wasn't even the most famous on Family Ties

In 1986-87, when Family Ties was at its peak, it had a rating of 32.7, which means almost a third of all US households watched the show every week. That probably amounted to 60m+ people tuning in, which is close to Super Bowl numbers ... every week. The TV audience was concentrated then in a way it isn't now. Yellowstone gets less than 12 million viewers per episode today. Maybe you think Meredith Baxter was better k…

In 1986-87 there were 5 billion people. The only reason I even know of her is because of a tiny role in an episode of Arrested Development.

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

#144

Post by ruthmarx »

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…

> Maybe it's good to keep babies entertained?

It's more than sufficient to keep the majority of the adult population entertained.

It can perfectly shit out a script for the next Fast and the Furious movie and the audience would never be able to tell the difference.

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

#145

Post by ruthmarx »

squidsoup wrote: post #96
yegle wrote: post #78

One thing I'd really like AI to do (and Ben Afflect touched during his talk) is that once AI is cheap enough to run at home, I'd like to feed it all David Lynch movies/TV shows, and ask it to produce a Twin Peaks season 4.

And you'd never get anything close to what Lynch would make, you'd get the equivalent of fan fiction.

Lynch will be one of the easier things for an AI to replicate given his thing is weird for the sake of weird and being deliberately vague about it. His stuff is 90% atmosphere.

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

#146

Post by ruthmarx »

dham wrote: post #34
moralestapia wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd bet that in two years you could do something equivalent to that "make me a new episode" use case. 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.

Convincing deepfakes is a strong word. There are also people out there who think modern CG looks good, too. There will always be people who are ultra-sensitive to things like this. So convincing might take 2x as long for some vs others.

> There will always be people who are ultra-sensitive to things like this.

There are always people that claim to be...

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

#147

Post by squidsoup »

ruthmarx wrote: post #145
squidsoup wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you'd never get anything close to what Lynch would make, you'd get the equivalent of fan fiction.

Lynch will be one of the easier things for an AI to replicate given his thing is weird for the sake of weird and being deliberately vague about it. His stuff is 90% atmosphere.

Everything he has made is impregnated with meaning. He is absolutely not weird for the sake of weird, and if you think he is, you’ve misunderstood his work.

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

#148

Post by [deleted] »

mkleczek wrote: post #41
spiderice wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> The answer seems obvious: because it's better. Define "better". The point really is that "better" in this context means "made by a human" - not "faked to look like made by a human". People need connection to other people - art is one of the means of communicating _between people_.

[deleted]

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

#149

Post by bestouff »

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…

Once AI is entrenched and the economics work out, it will become way more expensive to shoot a "traditional" movie. You won't find the trained technical staff, the actors, scripts, etc. which will be all out of jobs and doing something else. Like today if you want to run a steam locomotive, it's way way more expensive than their modern counterpart because the infrastructure isn't there anymore.

So yes, the AI will eventually get better even if it doesn't !

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

#150

Post by frm88 »

bdndndndbve wrote: post #109
njtransit wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Additionally, there are lots of examples where cheaper production has produced an inferior product yet the difference in price causes the inferior product to usurp in superior product. Building materials exhibit this effect frequently: plaster vs. drywall, asphalt vs. slate, balloon framing vs structural masonry, etc. In media, TikTok exemplifies this effect. People watch fewer movies (expensive, high quality) and wa…

Cheaper movies in terms of cost are often better than expensive movies because they have a humanity that shows through. Let me know when an AI can make a Jon Carpenter movie

This. Christopher Nolan, but yes. AI can never capture the subtlety of the (failings) of the human mind/memory and the implications. It would have to learn it somehow and I don't see a method with which that can be taught.
Post reply on HN