141–150 of 191 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disagree, it is content. The Japanese anime (referenced) is specifically made to be marketed and sold.
Almost every piece of art you've ever seen (by virtue of you seeing it) was made to be marketed and sold. Art is overwhelmingly not a charity project from artists to the commons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost every piece of art you've ever seen (by virtue of you seeing it) was made to be marketed and sold. Art is overwhelmingly not a charity project from artists to the commons.
I presume "by virtue of you seeing it" includes other conditions or I don't understand how you can claim such a thing.
Once again, Scam Altman looking for excuses to raise more money. What a joke…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost every piece of art you've ever seen (by virtue of you seeing it) was made to be marketed and sold. Art is overwhelmingly not a charity project from artists to the commons.
Most independent artists will disagree with this statement. They do it for passion, to communicate, to tell stories, to fulfill their own urges. Some works incidentally hit a sweet spot and become commercial successes, but that's not their purpose. On the other hand, the 'art' you see being marketed around you is made specifically to be marketed and sold, with little personal connection to the artist, and often again…
No, you almost never see art that wasn’t meant to be sold. Public art pieces are commissioned (sold), art in galleries were created by professional artists (even if commercially unsuccessful) 99.99999% of the time.
Surely if this wasn’t true, you could point to a few specific examples of art — or even broad categories of art — that weren’t made to be sold and that you have personally seen?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most independent artists will disagree with this statement. They do it for passion, to communicate, to tell stories, to fulfill their own urges. Some works incidentally hit a sweet spot and become commercial successes, but that's not their purpose. On the other hand, the 'art' you see being marketed around you is made specifically to be marketed and sold, with little personal connection to the artist, and often again…
Is that what they tell you when you’re standing in the gallery with a checkbook? Or in the boardroom with a signature? No, you almost never see art that wasn’t meant to be sold. Public art pieces are commissioned (sold), art in galleries were created by professional artists (even if commercially unsuccessful ) 99.99999% of the time. Surely if this wasn’t true, you could point to a few specific examples of art — or ev…
Going back to the origin of this, stating that Ghibli style videos generated with SORA (which the OP initially called "content") are equivalent to Studio Ghibli movies because they are both "art made to be sold" would be wild. A film like Spirited Away took over 1 million hours of work, if making money was the main goal it would have never happened.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that what they tell you when you’re standing in the gallery with a checkbook? Or in the boardroom with a signature? No, you almost never see art that wasn’t meant to be sold. Public art pieces are commissioned (sold), art in galleries were created by professional artists (even if commercially unsuccessful ) 99.99999% of the time. Surely if this wasn’t true, you could point to a few specific examples of art — or ev…
I think you're just interpreting the meaning of "made to be sold" very literally. Of course artists want to make a living and have their art be appreciated, so they expect pieces to be sold; but that is not the main motivation behind making the art, where commercial "art" - advertising, mainstream cinema, pop music, most art galleries, anime, 80% of what you see in arts and crafts fairs, pieces in IKEA - is created w…
"they want their to be appreciated, so they expect pieces to be sold" is a clever trick but one is not related to the other. One could want their art to be appreciated and never sell it, but virtually no one would see this art for a variety of reasons including the fact that marketability increases visibility and that there is very, very little amateur art that is worth looking at, much less promoting to a larger audience.
It seems you agree that in fact art (that anyone sees) is overwhelmingly made to be sold.
I didn't say anything about their "main motivation" and neither you nor I (nor even the artist, frankly) could say much about what someone's main motivation is.
What we can say is that nearly all of the art anyone sees was in fact made to be sold, which is the specific claim that I made.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, you have to register yourself with a video where you're required to say a unique code. So unless you've posted a video of yourself online saying every number from 1 to 99 they won't be able to copy your likeness
This seems... pretty easy to get around? There are already open weight models which can take any photo and audio and make a video out of it with the character speaking/singing/whatever, and it runs on normal consumer hardware.
But at that point you might as well just use WAN 2.2 Animate and forget about Sora.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My person in deity that future has been here for a while now. Not only do they consider it art, they call what you and I consider art "humanslop" and consider it inferior to AI.
This sounds a lot like boomers complaining about kitty litter instead of bathrooms in elementary school It's easy to get too chronically online and focus on some tiny weird thing you saw when in fact it's just a tiny weird thing
> In particular, we'd like to acknowledge the remarkable creative output of Japan--we are struck by how deep the connection between users and Japanese content is! Translation from snake speech bs: We've been threatened by Japanese artists via their lawyers that unless we remove the "Ghibli" feature that earned us so much money, and others like it, we're going to get absolutely destroyed in court.
My hunch is that openai used ghibli as the example in their earlier dall-e blog posts strategically because anime was earlier said by the PM not to be protected by copyright in training. OpenAI is always sneakier than most people give them credit for.
There's usually more useful information in what Sam Altman specifically doesn't say than what he does.