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

Hollywood Is Already Using AI (and Hiding It)

vulture.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: Hollywood Is Already Using AI (and Hiding It)

#31

Post by throw_m239339 »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #8

I would absolutely love being able to create the movies I’ve always wanted to be made and them be plausibly good. I wonder who is making the oss version of these tools? So you can specify all the hundreds of parts needed to just compose a decent framework

IMHO, before the end of the decade you will absolutely be able to generate entire long form movies just by writing a paragraph in a prompt. And people will not be able to tell the difference.

Hollywood might save money on the short run but they are doomed to irrelevance on the long run, because you'll have access to the exact same tools as they do.

Is it good or bad? I don't know, it just is...

Re: Hollywood Is Already Using AI (and Hiding It)

#32

Post by antithesizer »

est31 wrote: post #27

Tech companies love to show off that they are using AI, how they are embracing it, etc. Among engineers, there is also a growing community of folks who embrace tools like Cursor, Chat GPT, Gemini, v0, etc. When it comes to artists, I have less insight but what I see is that they are extremely critical of it and don't like it at all. It's interesting to see that gap in reactions to AI between artists and tech companie…

Or between artists in private and artists in public

Re: Hollywood Is Already Using AI (and Hiding It)

#34

Post by taylorius »

est31 wrote: post #27

Tech companies love to show off that they are using AI, how they are embracing it, etc. Among engineers, there is also a growing community of folks who embrace tools like Cursor, Chat GPT, Gemini, v0, etc. When it comes to artists, I have less insight but what I see is that they are extremely critical of it and don't like it at all. It's interesting to see that gap in reactions to AI between artists and tech companie…

Tech people like it because it isn't good enough to completely replace them yet. The sophisticated, coherent architecture of a well designed system is (for now) still beyond the LLMs, so for tech people, it's still just a wonderful tool. But give it another year, and the worm will turn.

Re: Hollywood Is Already Using AI (and Hiding It)

#35

Post by ordinaryradical »

est31 wrote: post #27

Tech companies love to show off that they are using AI, how they are embracing it, etc. Among engineers, there is also a growing community of folks who embrace tools like Cursor, Chat GPT, Gemini, v0, etc. When it comes to artists, I have less insight but what I see is that they are extremely critical of it and don't like it at all. It's interesting to see that gap in reactions to AI between artists and tech companie…

I’m an artist and also work in tech. Enjoy using AI for work, no interest in using it for my art.

Using AI for art is an idiotic proposition for me. If I was going to use AI to write my novel, I would literally be robbing myself of the pleasure of making it myself. If you don’t enjoy perfecting the sentence, maybe don’t be a writer?

That’s why there’s a disconnect. I make art for personal fulfillment and the joy of the creative act. To offload that to something that helps me do it “faster” has exactly zero appeal.

Re: Hollywood Is Already Using AI (and Hiding It)

#37

Post by jplusequalt »

throw_m239339 wrote: post #31
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #8

I would absolutely love being able to create the movies I’ve always wanted to be made and them be plausibly good. I wonder who is making the oss version of these tools? So you can specify all the hundreds of parts needed to just compose a decent framework

IMHO, before the end of the decade you will absolutely be able to generate entire long form movies just by writing a paragraph in a prompt. And people will not be able to tell the difference. Hollywood might save money on the short run but they are doomed to irrelevance on the long run, because you'll have access to the exact same tools as they do. Is it good or bad? I don't know, it just is...

>Is it good or bad?

It's bad. Look at what social media and cellphones have done to society and human attention spans.

There will be a lot of bad shit that will come out of this that won't truly be appreciated until it's already too late to reverse course.

Re: Hollywood Is Already Using AI (and Hiding It)

#38

Post by righthand »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #11
101008 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not AI per se (which are only a mix of algorithms). The problem is that this new wave of AI is trained in propietary content, and the owners/creators didn't allow it in the first place. If this AI worked without training, no one would say anything.

People would still be griping about how it devalues the hard work artists have put in, "isn't real art" and all the other things. The only difference is the public at large would be telling them to put a sock in it, rather than having some sympathy because of deceptive articles about how big tech is stealing from hardworking artists.

Yes they're two different issues from AI:

- LLMs were trained on copy protected content and devaluing the input a worker puts into creating original work

- LLMs are a tool for generating statistical variations and refinements of work, this doesn't devalue the input but makes generating output easier

Form vs Function issues. So it would be preferable to give people a legal pathway to continue making money and own their work instead of allowing their work to be vacuumed up by the people at corporations looking to automate them away. The functional issue still exists but doesn't put your personal work at risk of theft/abuse outside of it's economic intent. Then the social stigma doesn't really matter because "an LLM is just a tool" is now a solid argument not causing abuse or deterioration of existing legal protections.

Re: Hollywood Is Already Using AI (and Hiding It)

#40

Post by leptons »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #13
leptons wrote: post #3

It's a race to the (AI-slop) bottom. But most of the inhabitants of the world will barely notice. I have to wonder if movies will improve or not with AI, because some really stupid franchises have seen stupid amounts of money, while most people barely watch the actually good creative stuff. We're already swamped with unwatchable schlock, but I'm not sure it will improve if we automate it. It's the same people spendin…

AI will make professional level movies cheaper and easier to make, which will the medium more accessible. The AAA movies probably won't look any better, but indie stuff that previously would have been suggestive and bare due to budgetary constraints can now be more direct and lavish. In many cases that's going to be the difference an indie project being a viable film and not.

>AI will make professional level movies cheaper and easier to make

If you're talking about the kind of movies with big-budget explosions and violence, then no thanks. That isn't what I'm talking about at all. Sure, AI will make that schlock cheaper. A lot of the "indie" stuff is garbage, too.

Post reply on HN