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

YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

blog.youtube

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 881 posts

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#561

Post by latexr »

galkk wrote: post #550
1718627440 wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Formulaic Also formulaic art isn't necessarily bad, because human appreciation does follow some patterns.

Agree. I didn’t say bad. I said that the adjectives that people use to describe ai slop are as applicable to human creations as to ai. There could be lazy, uninspired but technically competent as ai art (my pet peeve is many “instrumental guitar albums” that are just pentatonic scale and standard licks in all shapes and forms) and ai art can be good. I will say even more. I’m sure that soon we will get new albums fro…

> Agree. I didn’t say bad.

In fairness, you did say “even worse”. That’s not an expression one tends to use unless calling something bad. I can’t imagine someone saying “this is the best album ever, and even worse this is the second best”.

> There could be lazy, uninspired but technically competent as ai art

There’s no technique involved to typing words in a box. Even the people who used to wax lyrically about “prompt engineering” have mostly subsided. AI pictures (not necessarily “art”, I don’t think that term should apply to any random image, even from humans) created with prompting can look technically competent (e.g. faking an oil painting) but not be technically competent.

> and ai art can be good.

What is “good” here? Aesthetically pleasing? Then sure, that’s a subjective matter of opinion. Even the yuckiest of gore can be aesthetically pleasing to the right person. Cronenberg has a cult following for a reason.

> I’m sure that soon we will get new albums from old stars (like let’s say) that will be great.

Again, what is “great” here? Does it mean you like it? Then sure, can’t argue there. Personally I believe “greatness” has to stand the test of time at least for a few decades, so we may never know for sure. I do highly doubt your scenario, though. Why would an old star be interested in generating a simulacrum of their old music without doing it themselves? Apart from a shameless cash grab, that is.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#562

Post by RugnirViking »

nemomarx wrote: post #2

> Under YouTube’s guidelines, creators will still be required to manually disclose when they use realistic AI. But starting this week, it also will roll out a new internal system to help identify AI-generated content. “If a creator doesn’t specify whether or not they used AI, but our systems detect significant photorealistic AI use, we will now automatically apply a label,” YouTube said. detect how? synthid is the on…

what makes you think that isnt just synthid? didnt anthropic and openai adopt it?

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#563

Post by sevenzero »

kolektiv wrote: post #556
sevenzero wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>we need to stop filming people As live music enjoyer and person that was commonly around safe spaces in the techno scene I cant agree more. Fuck filming people.

It's not even just music anymore. I love motor racing, but at the last meeting I went to, sat in the stands at an iconic first corner, tense with anticipation as the race started... Everyone around me sat there holding their phones up, filming it. I couldn't even see properly because of the forest of arms. People don't just... experience... something now. What's even more ridiculous is that this wasn't a small race -…

Its mostly about sharing it with friends and social media. I dont know why these people feel the need to do this either. The healthiest thing I did last year was quitting all (common) social media platforms like Instagram, reddit and stuff like that. Life is much slower and I dont feel the need to check my phone every few minutes anymore (I barely posted anything anyway).

I guess people are addicted to new notifications. They are lonely and drawn to human interactions and attention through social media because they are incapable of getting it through real life.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#565

Post by avadodin »

I can appreciate the talent and effort involved in developing new styles of music by scribbling on paper while being partially deaf, or dropping photographic painting skills for a weird style mimicking the anime of the era, but let's not pretend that average–human–level Turing-test–passing AGArtist has not yet been reached.

At this point, I bet the next human genius is going to be labeled as AI —by an AI.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#566

Post by ben_w »

kuerbel wrote: post #506
codeflo wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If AI music allows someone with less formal musical skills to feel like they are joining in and making something, then maybe it has its value. An emphatic no. What we need to do is to stop comparing every hobby performance, whether it's music or dancing, with the top 10 artists in their field. We need people to learn, and try, and feel safe to be visible and thus vulnerable in group situations without fear of being…

I can't play like Lang Lang. Only Lang Lang can play like Lang Lang. Just because some mfing AI can produce something that sounds like Lang Lang does not make it equal: resemblance is not identity. If I see a performance from Lang Lang, I don't just perceive the sound, it is the expression of memory, discipline and attention. Learning an instrument is more than attaining the skill of producing the correct notes in th…

Sure, but because this argument works just as well whether "effortless simulation" means "GenAI" or "a recording", I don't know if you're objecting to one or the other or both.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#568

Post by vasco »

thelucent wrote: post #552
vasco wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My listener wont be able to relate with me personally because they don’t know me What a perfect illustration that while you typed on a keyboard you're so far away from making art. PS: how many pieces of art that moved you were made by artists you knew or met?

I might misunderstood you or you might misunderstood me. I was moved by a lot of songs made by artists I never met. But I was moved because of the song, not because of the reason why the artist wrote it. If I can truly understand the emotional state of the artist when they wrote it, I might be able to empathize with them. But that's me empathizing with the person that made the art as a human. Nothing stopping me from…

Well, I was being overly cynical for no reason. Do what makes you happy man, if that's AI songs who am I to judge. You clearly care a lot about it and it brings you something.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#569

Post by jstummbillig »

injidup wrote: post #474

Last weekend a group of friends and I sat by the lake. One had a guitar, and we were all singing off-key to old classics and dancing to salsa and reggaeton. We were doing it together, and it was great. Much more fun than listening alone or caring about the authenticity of the music or not. It was the participation, not the product, that was the key. Something went wrong with music and culture in recent times. Partici…

> Something went wrong with music and culture in recent times. Participation became consumption.

I think closer to truth is: Participation became production.

More people are doing more things (including with instruments) but often times in a digital setting, sometimes more isolated and sometimes much more public (think: Twitch streams where chat is part of the whole social experience in a way that was never true for TV or other live events of that scale). More participatory online and more individualized as consumption, while some older forms of face-to-face amateur participation have become less socially normal or less visible.

This says not so much about music or culture really; it seems fairly aligned with where our lives and how we connect have moved more broadly.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#570

Post by galkk »

latexr wrote: post #561
galkk wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. I didn’t say bad. I said that the adjectives that people use to describe ai slop are as applicable to human creations as to ai. There could be lazy, uninspired but technically competent as ai art (my pet peeve is many “instrumental guitar albums” that are just pentatonic scale and standard licks in all shapes and forms) and ai art can be good. I will say even more. I’m sure that soon we will get new albums fro…

> Agree. I didn’t say bad. In fairness, you did say “even worse”. That’s not an expression one tends to use unless calling something bad. I can’t imagine someone saying “this is the best album ever, and even worse this is the second best”. > There could be lazy, uninspired but technically competent as ai art There’s no technique involved to typing words in a box. Even the people who used to wax lyrically about “promp…

Language barrier, sorry.

For “even worse” - I meant different, and I think your analogy is unfair.

One can say something like “this is not your best job. It is solid product of a carpenter. Even worse, I know you could do much better, like a woodworker”. And nothing here says that the job is _bad_.

But again, my native language is not English and the way I say things may surely sound unnatural.

——

How going back to your argument. You already subtly move goalposts and give humans mich more benefit of the doubt and leeway than you give to ai.

> There’s no technique involved to typing words in a box.

There sure is. And that’s what separates results. Most of the things that I enjoy are clearly have good deal of thought in inventing lyrics (again, I watch lore channels and the way the lyrics are made is clear that there is a good amount of thought, prompt and maybe even manual tinkering), in doing montage of videos. I’m skeptical about prompt engineering but your criticism here is as same as painters criticizing photographers: “they just press the button”.

> created with prompting can look technically competent (e.g. faking an oil painting) but not be technically competent.

I used to thing along this line too, but later I realized that this is not an argument in any favor. Look at like any professional reviewing let’s say old movies. Thousands of errors - costumes of wrong epoch, or made wrong way, or worn wrong way. Wrong guns, wrong ammo etc etc etc. I saw some pro criticising ai generated picture of a woman on a horse, and it was about same - the things used to steer the horse are like upside down, some other things don’t make sense. And then it clicked to me - it doesn’t matter. It isn’t unique to ai. Humans did same stuff forever. As long as result is enjoyable, it’s fine.

> and ai art can be good. What is “good” here? Aesthetically pleasing? Then sure, that’s a subjective matter of opinion. Even the yuckiest of gore can be aesthetically pleasing to the right person. Cronenberg has a cult following for a reason.

This is strawman and arguing in bad faith by subtly associating my position with liking gore etc. On first albums of Metallica you almost can hear how they are learning and getting better (except drummer). Yes, if it’s pleasing enough people and bringing joy to their life then it’s ok. It doesn’t matter is it ai or human. Again, there are many cases in music when apparently the solos weren’t played by artists but by uncredited session musicians. Is it slop? Musician acted as tool here.

> Again, what is “great” here? Does it mean you like it?

Fans like it. Not only me. It brings new fans or even casuals may enjoy it

> Personally I believe “greatness” has to stand the test of time at least for a few decades, so we may never know for sure.

You do you. It’s fine.

> I do highly doubt your scenario, though. Why would an old star be interested in generating a simulacrum of their old music without doing it themselves? Apart from a shameless cash grab, that is.

Why Metallica does new albums? They already have enough super hits, that stood test of time even By your definition (decades) to not care. Why other bands do the same?

—-

In very short. To me it feels that there is an attempt to steer into public conscience that

    Ai = slop
And I disagree with that wholeheartedly. To me

    Human Slop = Ai slop = slop
No matter who produces it. Yes, unfortunately ai enables slop generation significantly easier. I hate searching for reviews or even analysis now, but it isn’t unique. Netflix documentary was a meme like 5-10 years ago already, if not more. And many of them are are exactly what ai slop is today, made by humans though.
Post reply on HN