"AI will never write Shakespeare"...
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/chatgpt-or-shakesp...
"Readers Couldn’t Tell the Difference—and Even Preferred A.I.-Generated Verse"
Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
161–170 of 187 posts
Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> Everything he has made is impregnated with meaning.
Eh. He creates dreams via cinema. His work is abstract and open to interpretation, that doesn't mean it is 'impregnated' with meaning so much as you and others personally found meaning in it.
> if you think he is, you’ve misunderstood his work.
Given that no one can claim to understand his work since he refuses to answer questions on it, this is a rather meaningless claim. I can just as easily claim that if you think his work is 'impregnated' with meaning, then it is you who has misunderstood his work.
Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
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...
True, but it doesn't change the fact that some percentage of the population is.
Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There will always be people who are ultra-sensitive to things like this. There are always people that claim to be...
True, but it doesn't change the fact that some percentage of the population is.
I'm kind of skeptical, just because I've seen people claiming things are CGI when they were not, or claiming the CGI was crap when it was fine.
Reminds me of photographs asking people if photos were photoshopped or not and people generally guessed wrong about half the time.
Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
#165"AI will never write Shakespeare"... https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/chatgpt-or-shakesp... "Readers Couldn’t Tell the Difference—and Even Preferred A.I.-Generated Verse"
Did you actually read the article you posted? Few quotes:
- "Beyond the themes and emotions, ChatGPT’s poems were also simpler in terms of their overall structure and composition." - "Understanding poems written by humans requires deep, critical thinking—and that’s a big part of poetry’s appeal, the researchers write in the paper. But modern readers don’t seem to want to do this labor, instead preferring texts that give them “instant answers,” [...]"
So AI didn't write better poems than Shakespear (it's only GPT-3.5, but I doubt newer models are better), and it seems to me that readers couldn't tell difference because they simply can't recognize quality.
Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
First, do all the techbro failures where they thought they were smarter than the industry. Second, show the company where the technologists made the same thing the old school was making, and better. Amazon retail disrupted but didn't destroy physical retail, and certainly didn't replace it, and certainly isn't better at it. Same with AirBnB => hotels, Google/FB => advertising (disrupted with a new type of product...…
Nope, you do the opposite. The list is long on both sides, displaying how difficult it is to know if industry knowledge is an asset or liability. Of course they don't do the exact same thing. Only someone in industry would think to do the exact same thing. The value proposition is the same in each case, that's what matters. The people who don't know Hollywood are the ones taking over the entertainment business. Custo…
> The people who don't know Hollywood are the ones taking over the entertainment business
Really? Who is that exactly? Or is Reed Hastings just a different money guy, which the entertainment business has always had?
Aside from money, where is the actual tech that Netflix is using to "dominate" the industry? And how does it manifest? I know one specific example that you probably have no idea about, and it has nothing to do with actually making a movie.
Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're conflating the reality of the situation with me . I didn't say I wanted AI generated content. Just that it seems like it will inevitably win. All the insults in your comment just stem from an imaginary and inaccurate picture of me, a stranger, that you created in your head. > don't feel compelled to enter the discussion with your growth oriented bullshit mindset Then why respond?
> You're conflating the reality of the situation with me. … I mean, you’re the one talking about a hypothetical future rather than what actually exists.
The hypothetical future where AI continues to improve? Jesus, so hypothetical.
Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
#168"AI will never write Shakespeare"... https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/chatgpt-or-shakesp... "Readers Couldn’t Tell the Difference—and Even Preferred A.I.-Generated Verse"
"AI will never write Shakespeare"... if Shakespeare never existed.
Since it did exist, it can clearly copy him.
Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> Everything he has made is impregnated with meaning. Eh. He creates dreams via cinema. His work is abstract and open to interpretation, that doesn't mean it is 'impregnated' with meaning so much as you and others personally found meaning in it. > if you think he is, you’ve misunderstood his work. Given that no one can claim to understand his work since he refuses to answer questions on it, this is a rather meaningle…
There are very clear themes and currents running through his work - fears around industrialisation and technology (electricity and machinery are recurring motifs), explorations of identity, exploitation both sexual and societal, the facade of the American dream, the cost of pursuing a creative life. I'm only scratching the surface there.
Lynch does actually talk about his work quite a bit, but he prefers to talk about his process and its connection to his mediation practice, rather than explicit meaning of his symbolism.
Re: Ben Affleck's surprisingly comprehensive take on LLMs for video
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Everything he has made is impregnated with meaning. Eh. He creates dreams via cinema. His work is abstract and open to interpretation, that doesn't mean it is 'impregnated' with meaning so much as you and others personally found meaning in it. > if you think he is, you’ve misunderstood his work. Given that no one can claim to understand his work since he refuses to answer questions on it, this is a rather meaningle…
There are very clear themes and currents running through his work - fears around industrialisation and technology (electricity and machinery are recurring motifs), explorations of identity, exploitation both sexual and societal, the facade of the American dream, the cost of pursuing a creative life. I'm only scratching the surface there. Lynch does actually talk about his work quite a bit, but he prefers to talk abou…
> There are very clear themes and currents running through his work - fears around industrialisation and technology (electricity and machinery are recurring motifs), explorations of identity, exploitation both sexual and societal, the facade of the American dream, the cost of pursuing a creative life. I'm only scratching the surface there.
I agree there are recurring themes. That doesn't conflict with anything I've claimed.
> Lynch does actually talk about his work quite a bit, but he prefers to talk about his process and its connection to his mediation practice, rather than explicit meaning of his symbolism.
Which also doesn't conflict with me saying he refuses to clarify or elaborate on meaning behind his works.