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

Meta Movie Gen

ai.meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#461

Post by 93po »

whiplash451 wrote: post #456
boogieknite wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is interesting and i see some of this now. Even here on HN and other forums i thought were mostly "human". Even one of my group chats i can tell one of my friends is using ai responses, but one of the other members cant tell and replies earnestly. I am grossed out by this. my instinct is to avoid ai slop. The interesting part to me is: What next? Where do we go? Will it be that "human" forums are pushed further…

Cryptography-secured/signed generated content / interactions?

worldcoin project solves a lot of this when combined with web of trust, however everyone's knee jerk reaction to worldcoin is pretty bad and so it's annoying to even mention it

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#462

Post by alex_suzuki »

echoangle wrote: post #421
nthdesign wrote: post #92

My kids both have creative hearts, and they are terrified that A.I. will prevent them from earning a living through creativity. Very recently, I've had an alternate thought. We've spent decades improving the technology of entertainment, spending billions (trillions?) of dollars in the process. When A.I. can generate any entertainment you can imagine, we might start finding this kind of entertainment boring. Maybe, at…

If I imagine a random person on the street, they certainly aren’t enjoying fine human arts because it’s made by a real person. They are scrolling TikTok and don’t care if it’s AI generated or not, if they even notice. The people actually caring about art because it is art are maybe 20% of the population.

I think 20% is being generous… more like 2%.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#463

Post by 93po »

adamc wrote: post #57
clvx wrote: post #51

Off topic but some day you could live off grid with your own solar fusion mini reactor powering your own hardware that enables creating your own stories, movies and tales. No more need of streaming services. Internet would be to obtain news, goods and buy greatest and latest (or not) data to update your models. Decentralization could be for once not as painful as it is now; however, I still believe every single hardw…

I'm not. The likelihood that such movies (for example) would have anything significant to say about being human seems very low. If one watches movies, reads books, etc. just to pass the time, maybe this would be some kind of boon. But for those of us looking for meaningful commentary on life, looking to connect with other human beings, this would be some circle of hell. It's some kind of solipsism.

95% of television and movies, to me, are completely uninteresting and not worth watching. the property of being human-made has a pretty low success rate for basically anyone

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#465

Post by elwell »

benabbott wrote: post #395

Things are about to get weird. We can't control this at any level: At the level of image/video synthesis: Some leading companies have suggested they put watermarks in the content they create. Nice thought, but open source will always be an option, and people will always be able to build un-watermarked tools. At the level of law: You could attempt to pass a law banning image/video generation entirely, or those without…

> IMPOSSIBLE to build an AI detector that works longterm

    return Math.random()
This should increase in accuracy over time.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#466

Post by surfingdino »

bbor wrote: post #55
surfingdino wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI in general.

…I mean, it was advancing slowly for linguistic tasks until late 2022, that’s fair. That’s why we’re in such a crazy unexpected rollercoaster of an era - we accidentally cracked intuitive computing while trying to build the best text autocomplete. AI in general is from 1950, or more generally from whenever the abacus was invented. This very website runs on AI, and always has. I would implore us to speak more exactly…

AI so far has given us ability to mass produce shit content of no use to anybody and the next iteration of customer support phone menu trees that sound more convincingly yet remain just as useless. That and another round of IP theft and mass surveillance in the name of progress.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#467

Post by DaemonAlchemist »

adamc wrote: post #245
parsimo2010 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't get "The Green Mile" from this, because it's a tool. You get "The Green Mile" with artistic vision. The tool has to be told what to do. But now a director can shoot a film with actors who don't match the physical description of a character in a story, and then correct their race/gender/figure/whatever with AI. That probably means they save money on casting. A director can shoot a scene inside a blank set an…

This is the best answer I've seen, but I think what was demonstrated is miles away from this. A lot would need to be able to be specified (and honored) from the prompts, far more than any examples have demonstrated. I'm not against tools for directors, but the thing is, directors tell actors things and get results. Directors hire cinematographers and work with them to get the shots they want. Etc. How does that happe…

The first real movies made 100 years ago looked like something someone today could put together in their garage on a shoestring budget. AI-generated movies have existed for just two years, and are only going to get better. This is bleeding edge research, and I haven't seen any sign yet of AI models hitting a quality ceiling.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#468

Post by corytheboyd »

changing1999 wrote: post #412
corytheboyd wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I personally think are amazing but nobody else really responds to. Welcome to making music lol. Since there is so much of it, you have to make the absolute best to even be considered. And then, because so many people make the absolute best, people only care about the persona making the music (as great as you are, you aren’t Taylor Swift, Kendrick Lamar, Damon Albarn). Your friends will never care about your music j…

> Also nobody cares about music without good lyrics Well, that's an exaggeration if I've ever seen one. Firstly, so much of current chart music has atrocious lyrics. And secondly, instrumental music is very popular.

You got me, I exaggerated on the internet. Sorry.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#469

Post by lytedev »

dinfinity wrote: post #442
benabbott wrote: post #395

Things are about to get weird. We can't control this at any level: At the level of image/video synthesis: Some leading companies have suggested they put watermarks in the content they create. Nice thought, but open source will always be an option, and people will always be able to build un-watermarked tools. At the level of law: You could attempt to pass a law banning image/video generation entirely, or those without…

The challenge is to determine what is real, not what is fake. I think cryptographic signing and the classic web of trust approaches are going to prove the most valuable tools in doing so, even if they're definitely not a panacea.

This comes up a lot. Because synthesis is so generally feasible plus the existence of very powerful editing tools for things like movies and whatnot, I'm guessing that it will simply become the norm to assume that any image, sound, movie, or whatever may be fake. I expect there won't be a way to verify something was synthesised or "real-synthesized" (since images and videos are ultimately synthesized themselves, just from reality instead of other synthesized content). Even with signing and web of trust we can only verify who is publishing something, but not the method of synthesis.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#470

Post by elwell »

layer8 wrote: post #459
nthdesign wrote: post #92

My kids both have creative hearts, and they are terrified that A.I. will prevent them from earning a living through creativity. Very recently, I've had an alternate thought. We've spent decades improving the technology of entertainment, spending billions (trillions?) of dollars in the process. When A.I. can generate any entertainment you can imagine, we might start finding this kind of entertainment boring. Maybe, at…

Creativity is about having original ideas. So far, AI isn’t that good at that, and neither at maintaining a consistent idea throughout a production. Will AI be able to come up with a compelling novel series, music album, video game, movie or TV series in ten years? Possibly, but there’s also a good chance that it won’t.

The same can be said about plain old I.
Post reply on HN