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

Veo 2: Our video generation model

deepmind.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 342 posts

Re: Veo 2: Our video generation model

#221

Post by WickyNilliams »

dtquad wrote: post #211
0xcb0 wrote: post #206

Imho is stunning, yet what is happening there is super dangerous. These videos will and may be too realistic. Our society is not prepared for this kind of reality "bending" media. These hyperrealistic videos will be the reason for hate and murder. Evil actors will use it to influence elections on a global scale. Create cults around virtual characters. Deny the rules of physics and human reason. And yet, there is no w…

Instead of calling for regulations, the big tech companies should run big campaigns educating the public, especially boomers, that they no longer can trust images, videos, and audio on the Internet. Put paid articles and ads about this in local newspapers around the world so even the least online people gets educated about this.

Do we really want a world where we can't trust anything we see, hear, or read? Where people need to be educated to not trust their senses, the things we use to interpret reality and the world around us.

I feel this kind of hypervigilance will be mentally exhausting, and not being able to trust your primary senses will have untold psychological effects

Re: Veo 2: Our video generation model

#222

Post by bottled_poe »

jillyboel wrote: post #215
simonw wrote: post #131

I got access to the preview, here's what it gave me for "A pelican riding a bicycle along a coastal path overlooking a harbor" - this video has all four versions shown: https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2024/pelicans-on-bic... Of the four two were a pelican riding a bicycle. One was a pelican just running along the road, one was a pelican perched on a stationary bicycle, and one had the pelican wearing a weird…

This tech is cute but the only viable outcomes are going to be porn and mass produced slop that'll be uninteresting before it's even created. Why even bother?

Comments like this one are so predictable and incredulous. As if the current state of the art is the final form of this technology. This is just getting started. Big facepalm.

Re: Veo 2: Our video generation model

#223

Post by unglaublich »

WickyNilliams wrote: post #221
dtquad wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of calling for regulations, the big tech companies should run big campaigns educating the public, especially boomers, that they no longer can trust images, videos, and audio on the Internet. Put paid articles and ads about this in local newspapers around the world so even the least online people gets educated about this.

Do we really want a world where we can't trust anything we see, hear, or read? Where people need to be educated to not trust their senses, the things we use to interpret reality and the world around us. I feel this kind of hypervigilance will be mentally exhausting, and not being able to trust your primary senses will have untold psychological effects

You can trust what you see and hear around you. You might be able to trust information from a party you trust. You certainly shouldn't trust digital information from unknown entities with unknown agendas.

We're already in a world where "fake news" and "alt-facts" influence our daily lives and political outcomes.

Re: Veo 2: Our video generation model

#224

Post by soco »

rob74 wrote: post #205
simonw wrote: post #131

I got access to the preview, here's what it gave me for "A pelican riding a bicycle along a coastal path overlooking a harbor" - this video has all four versions shown: https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2024/pelicans-on-bic... Of the four two were a pelican riding a bicycle. One was a pelican just running along the road, one was a pelican perched on a stationary bicycle, and one had the pelican wearing a weird…

Well yeah, if you look closely at the example videos on the site, one of them is not quite right either: > Prompt: The sun rises slowly behind a perfectly plated breakfast scene. Thick, golden maple syrup pours in slow motion over a stack of fluffy pancakes, each one releasing a soft, warm steam cloud. A close-up of crispy bacon sizzles, sending tiny embers of golden grease into the air. [...] In the video, the bacon…

Technically speaking I'd say your expectation is definitely not laid out in the prompt, so anything goes. Believe me I've had such requirements from users and me as a mere human programmer am never quite sure what they actually want. So I take guesses just like the AI (because simply asking doesn't bring you very far, you must always show something) and take it from there. In other words, if AI works like me, I can pack my stuff already.

Re: Veo 2: Our video generation model

#225

Post by ferguu_ »

bottled_poe wrote: post #222
jillyboel wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This tech is cute but the only viable outcomes are going to be porn and mass produced slop that'll be uninteresting before it's even created. Why even bother?

Comments like this one are so predictable and incredulous. As if the current state of the art is the final form of this technology. This is just getting started. Big facepalm.

I hope they're right. If the technology improves to such a degree that meaningful content can be produced then it could spell global disaster for a number of reasons.

Also I just don't want to live in a world where the things we watch just aren't real. I want to be able to trust what I see, and see the human-ness in it. I'm aware that these things can co-exist, but I'm also becoming increasingly aware that as long as this technology is available and in development, it will be used for deception.

Re: Veo 2: Our video generation model

#226

Post by grumbel »

simonw wrote: post #131

I got access to the preview, here's what it gave me for "A pelican riding a bicycle along a coastal path overlooking a harbor" - this video has all four versions shown: https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2024/pelicans-on-bic... Of the four two were a pelican riding a bicycle. One was a pelican just running along the road, one was a pelican perched on a stationary bicycle, and one had the pelican wearing a weird…

I am surprised that the top/right one still shows a cut and switch to a difference scene. I would assume that that's something that could be trivially filtered out of the training data, as those discontinuities don't seem to be useful for either these short 6sec video segments or for getting an understanding of the real world.

Re: Veo 2: Our video generation model

#227

Post by WickyNilliams »

unglaublich wrote: post #223
WickyNilliams wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we really want a world where we can't trust anything we see, hear, or read? Where people need to be educated to not trust their senses, the things we use to interpret reality and the world around us. I feel this kind of hypervigilance will be mentally exhausting, and not being able to trust your primary senses will have untold psychological effects

You can trust what you see and hear around you. You might be able to trust information from a party you trust. You certainly shouldn't trust digital information from unknown entities with unknown agendas. We're already in a world where "fake news" and "alt-facts" influence our daily lives and political outcomes.

What I see and hear around me is a miniscule fraction of the outside world. To have a shared understanding of reality, of what is happening in my town, my city, my state, my country, my continent, the world, requires much more than what is available in your immediate environment.

In the grand scheme of understanding the world at large, our immediate senses are not particularly valuable. So we _have_ to rely on other streams of information. And the trend is towards more of those streams being digital.

The existence of "fake news" and "alt facts", doesn't mean we should accept a further and dramatic worsening of our ability to have a shared reality. To accept that as an inevitability is defeatist and a kind of learned helplessness.

Have you seen the Adam Curtis documentary "Hypernormalisation"? It deals with some similar themes, but on a much smaller scale (at least it is smaller in the context of current and near future tech)

Re: Veo 2: Our video generation model

#228

Post by sofixa »

forgingahead wrote: post #165
throw4321 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What officials actually say doesn't make a difference anymore. People do not get bamboozled because of lack of facts. People who get bamboozled are past facts.

Off topic from the video AI thread, but to elaborate on your point: people believe what they want, based on what they have been primed to believe from mass media. This is mainly the normal TV and paper news, filtered through institutions like government proclamations, schools, and now supercharged by social media. This is why the "narrative" exists, and news media does the consensus messaging of what you should belie…

If anything I'd say the opposite. Look at the last US elections, a lot of the criticisms against the side that lost were things people "thought" and "felt" they were for/against, without them actually coming out and saying anything of the like. It was people criticising them for stuff that wasn't actually real on X, traditional TV, and the like that made voters "feel" like that stuff is real.

And X is really egregious, where the owner shitposts frequently and often things of dubious factuality.

Re: Veo 2: Our video generation model

#230

Post by Retr0id »

ddalex wrote: post #220
Retr0id wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have constructed a society where market forces feel inevitable, but it doesn't have to be that way.

Of course; but this is the current society, and attempts to reform it, e.g. communism, failed abjectly, so by evolution pressure, the capitalist society dominated by market forces is the best that we have

Right, but there are plenty of middle grounds between true communism and just letting markets freewheel.
Post reply on HN