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

Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 74 posts

Re: Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

#61

Post by newsomix9xl »

bigyabai wrote: post #59
newsomix9xl wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm saying the "tech = job loss" scenario is somewhat false. Teamsters were horse carriage drivers and then drove trucks. The horse driver job was "destroyed by technology"? Or was it changed? Jobs are not static entities to be defended or lost. They are dynamic opportunities shaped by technology. Every technology creates different opportunities. No one cries for silent movie era job losses or horse driver jobs. If A…

> How it will actually play out is unknown and unknowable. I don't think that's a fair claim to make, either. AI music, AI art and even AI television is all fairly proliferate right now: https://www.polygon.com/23767640/ai-mcu-secret-invasion-open... We're not seeing a radical reconsideration of how art is made, nor a rising watermark in content quality. The chart-topping AI songs are transient and forgettable, the f…

This is the nature of reality - the future is only predictable insofar as it tends to resemble the past.

And that is rare. Novel changes produce nearly impossible to predict reactions because they are unprecedented.

The future is unknown and unknowable. Anyone who says otherwise is trying to sell you a $30k upgrade on a self driving car.

Re: Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

#62

Post by bigyabai »

newsomix9xl wrote: post #61
bigyabai wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How it will actually play out is unknown and unknowable. I don't think that's a fair claim to make, either. AI music, AI art and even AI television is all fairly proliferate right now: https://www.polygon.com/23767640/ai-mcu-secret-invasion-open... We're not seeing a radical reconsideration of how art is made, nor a rising watermark in content quality. The chart-topping AI songs are transient and forgettable, the f…

This is the nature of reality - the future is only predictable insofar as it tends to resemble the past. And that is rare. Novel changes produce nearly impossible to predict reactions because they are unprecedented. The future is unknown and unknowable. Anyone who says otherwise is trying to sell you a $30k upgrade on a self driving car.

Concerning AI "art", the future is already here. We have AI-generated video, music and portraits, and none of them are considered a real artistic discipline.

It's almost like art has inherent social qualities that get watered-down when you reduce the human effort that goes into it. You can't innovate your way out of that.

Re: Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

#63

Post by downrightmike »

ck2 wrote: post #2

What I am curious to learn is how many episodes of a TV series made by real actors it will take for an "AI" to eventually make perfect extensions ie. feed it every episode of the original Star Trek series, at some point "AI" is going to be advanced enough to write a new episode and simulate all the characters perfectly anime and animation in theory will be even easier to do perfectly? the question is can it do it per…

TOS was really cringe and is really out of date. Fun fact the first season of TNG they reworked TOS scripts and it was too wacky. Surprised they got a second season based on season 1 alone.

Re: Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

#64

Post by beej71 »

nottorp wrote: post #40

Hollywood movies have become indistinguishable from each other before "AI" so I doubt anyone will notice.

Seriously. The median number of new movies I watch each year has fallen to zero. And if I want to watch one, I just make some popcorn and watch the preview. Big time-saver.

Re: Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

#65

Post by [deleted] »

jasonjayr wrote: post #31
mrdootdoot wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No job is forever. Tomorrow isn’t promised, and automation already did this—albeit more slowly—throughout the second half of the 20th century. Some people watched their jobs disappear and accepted that they’d become obsolete. Plenty of others pivoted. The counterargument today is that we can pivot much faster. I’m typing this on a $2,000 Mac that can run Blender, render scenes, write code, edit video, and access tool…

The really interesting question is: What are we going to do when a technology so quickly and thoroughly displaces the need for human labor, in a society that constantly demands you trade your labor for the right to exist and participate in society?

[deleted]

Re: Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

#66

Post by mrdootdoot »

qsera wrote: post #38
jasonjayr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The really interesting question is: What are we going to do when a technology so quickly and thoroughly displaces the need for human labor, in a society that constantly demands you trade your labor for the right to exist and participate in society?

I said in another comment. It is not the labor that is being destroyed. It is the destruction of art, of good taste, originality, beauty etc etc. Everything that humans derive joy from, that is being replaced by repetitions of past self. It is the revenge of the LCD of humanity. It will win, and will go insane shortly due lack of real happiness...It is not something that LLMs started or enabled, it is just a catalyst…

If you patronize all these garbage movie studios and multimedia companies by all means - taste disappears.

But if you've used meshy, sora and enough coding models you see the mediocrity is laughable - nobody will consume it.

Any media that is worth watching still has a human with plenty of irreplaceable talent.

Re: Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

#67

Post by mrdootdoot »

jasonjayr wrote: post #31
mrdootdoot wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No job is forever. Tomorrow isn’t promised, and automation already did this—albeit more slowly—throughout the second half of the 20th century. Some people watched their jobs disappear and accepted that they’d become obsolete. Plenty of others pivoted. The counterargument today is that we can pivot much faster. I’m typing this on a $2,000 Mac that can run Blender, render scenes, write code, edit video, and access tool…

The really interesting question is: What are we going to do when a technology so quickly and thoroughly displaces the need for human labor, in a society that constantly demands you trade your labor for the right to exist and participate in society?

I think capital will always be looking for better returns, and as long as human beings can add marginal value somewhere in that equation, there will be demand for human labor.

Working in tech has taught me to stay vigilant. I've seen the cycles and seen people survive each one. Perhaps that's why I feel better prepared for this. Anyone whose job primarily consists of manipulating bits should probably assume that significant parts of it are going to be automated.

Where I disagree is the assumption that we're approaching some kind of escape velocity where automation eliminates useful human labor faster than people can adapt. People need to eat, firms want to make money, and both create enormous pressure to find the next place where human effort has value.

That doesn't mean the transition will be painless, or that everyone displaced will successfully pivot. But there's a very large leap between "AI destroys a lot of existing jobs" and "human labor no longer has economic value." I don't think we've demonstrated the latter.

Re: Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

#68

Post by Planktonne »

unit-vector wrote: post #28
Planktonne wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have no doubt in my mind that right now [...] an amateur with a high-end last-gen GPU or somebody with maybe a thousand bucks worth of AI credits [...] can crank out a high quality 1h+ feature film with only minor uncanny artifacts. Then why are there no examples of this? There aren't even examples of steps towards it--the half hour film that's nearly production quality, etc.

I think this comes pretty close https://higgsfield.ai/@higgsfield.studio/projects/oneiric

I disagree; it remains impressive that we can generate video at all, of course, but it's still got the moment-to-moment incoherence that we've seen for years now, and that's before you get to the quality as a whole.

Re: Digging the grave of my skills: Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs

#69

Post by homarp »

ygxhbcxdg wrote: post #15
homarp wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

on their own computer using open weight chinese models? More seriously 1) >users will generate their own some people write fanfic, most just watch/read instead. 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebel_Without_a_Crew explains how film maker will film, with whatever they have. AI will enable some people to make what is not financially feasible right now for a single person to do. 'Unique' movie/stories creation will con…

Sora was QUICKLY shut down due to the astronomical cost. On what basis do you claim that using language models to generate feature films would be cheap?

because of what /r/stablediffusion is doing.

I assume a not evenly distributed future

Post reply on HN