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

$100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

tryai.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 581 posts

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#451

Post by etempleton »

hbn wrote: post #257

Like most of this stuff, it's obviously impressive technology compared to what existed a few years ago. But the end product has zero artistic value. It's a grey goo of the average of every concept picked up from the concept of the song. A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon with a $0 budget.

Completely agree. Impressive as a tech demo, but that is pretty much where it ends. Give a talented kid an iPhone and they could create something significantly better and more interesting.

And this is the bear case on AI. Sure, if the quality of the output is largely meaningless or binary, e.g. it works or it doesn’t, then AI is useful, but as soon as subjective judgement or taste is involved it is useless.

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#452

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

tejohnso wrote: post #450
hbn wrote: post #257

Like most of this stuff, it's obviously impressive technology compared to what existed a few years ago. But the end product has zero artistic value. It's a grey goo of the average of every concept picked up from the concept of the song. A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon with a $0 budget.

> A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon I should hope that a "talented" creative "with a vision" could, do better, yes. But now a talentless hack devoid of vision can do something half decent too. And if you don't think this is half decent, just replace "now" with "soon".

Yes, and it has me genuinely concerned.

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#453

Post by wat10000 »

abc42 wrote: post #347
hbn wrote: post #257

Like most of this stuff, it's obviously impressive technology compared to what existed a few years ago. But the end product has zero artistic value. It's a grey goo of the average of every concept picked up from the concept of the song. A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon with a $0 budget.

I'm amazed how easily people dismiss this. They used less that an hour of wall clock time and max $50 to do this. How much would it take for me to create videos like this? I'm guessing 1-4 years calendar time practicing half an hour every day just to break my lack of talent. Immeasurable cost given how there's no way in hell I'm going to invest that kind of time for a skill I don't actually want to acquire. Somebody…

It's like using an excavator to arrange a bunch of big stones in a circle and saying it's a new Stonehenge. The excavator is obviously a powerful tool, it took you an hour to do what took the ancients a huge amount of time and effort. But why should anybody care? The stones aren't the actual point of Stonehenge, despite the name. It's the history and meaning.

If the input was a few sentences, an hour of waiting, and $50, why should I value the result any more highly than Excavatorhenge?

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#454

Post by wat10000 »

f6v wrote: post #315
hbn wrote: post #257

Like most of this stuff, it's obviously impressive technology compared to what existed a few years ago. But the end product has zero artistic value. It's a grey goo of the average of every concept picked up from the concept of the song. A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon with a $0 budget.

> It's a grey goo of the average of every concept picked up from the concept of the song. All right, but that's what an average entertainment product looks like. All these new TV shows have exactly the same look and feel about them. The same actors playing the same roles over and over again. People keep comparing AI to some kind of once in a lifetime genius instead of an average person in the field.

Guess what, I don't like or watch those either.

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#455

Post by dudeinhawaii »

Watching the videos and reading the methodology, it feels like "scientist one-shot music video with LLMs" which is... useful but in no way represents how one would use the models.

If nothing else, it serves as a great reminder that you can't offload taste and creative decisions to AI. AI is also not a mind reader. It _may_ do a useful thing sometimes - but it's much better to codify that thing in your requirements if it's something you want to occur consistently.

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#457

Post by contagiousflow »

tejohnso wrote: post #450
hbn wrote: post #257

Like most of this stuff, it's obviously impressive technology compared to what existed a few years ago. But the end product has zero artistic value. It's a grey goo of the average of every concept picked up from the concept of the song. A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon with a $0 budget.

> A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon I should hope that a "talented" creative "with a vision" could, do better, yes. But now a talentless hack devoid of vision can do something half decent too. And if you don't think this is half decent, just replace "now" with "soon".

And do you think that makes the world a better place?

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#460

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

echelon wrote: post #236
sph wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude you have been salivating at the thought of seeing developers fired, now film studios, for months now. Give it a rest, this is unhealthy.

> Dude you have been salivating at the thought of seeing developers fired, I don't think you understand my arguments at all. I don't want people to lose jobs. I don't want the advantages to accrue to a few hyperscalers. I want there to be more work, more money, more societal progress. For everyone. AI currently enables experts in their domains (code, film, game design, music) to get the work of small teams done. It i…

> I don't want people to lose jobs. I don't want the advantages to accrue to a few hyperscalers.

Versus:

> It is now possible for dedicated, hard-working ICs in several domains to produce extremely good products in a short amount of time without external capital and without studio meddling

A contradiction exists: lower-capital requirements means less employment all-around and more profit to fewer people.

Post reply on HN