91–100 of 152 posts
At first usage I'm not impressed. I've probably spent a couple grand on Seedance 2 to date, and I can't find anything google omni flash does better than Seedance from running a handful of samples through the system. You can find some of the videos I've made in my HN bio link.
In my day job I program rigid body behaviour in real time amongst other simulations. I think rigid body contact is hard to learn as it is inherently discontinuous.. something you discover when trying to code a solver. As such I always use this prompt as a test: "A video of a jenga brick tower falling over as a brick is removed. The physics of each brick must be realistic." It gave me a video of where bricks suddenly…
I wonder what's the training data that makes it generate the final "explosion"...
At first usage I'm not impressed. I've probably spent a couple grand on Seedance 2 to date, and I can't find anything google omni flash does better than Seedance from running a handful of samples through the system. You can find some of the videos I've made in my HN bio link.
Seedance 2 is amazing, compared with anything else American tech is producing. It does struggle with consistency like all other models. The other problem is Seedance is heavily censored because of copyright concerns.
> The other problem is Seedance is heavily censored because of copyright concerns.
In my day job I program rigid body behaviour in real time amongst other simulations. I think rigid body contact is hard to learn as it is inherently discontinuous.. something you discover when trying to code a solver. As such I always use this prompt as a test: "A video of a jenga brick tower falling over as a brick is removed. The physics of each brick must be realistic." It gave me a video of where bricks suddenly…
Totally unrelated, but what would you say the feasibility of writing simulation software for simulation of/replicating body movements during/in a martial arts technique would be? I’ve often thought it would be very handy to have a proper simulator for being able to simulate and identify inefficiencies in one’s technique, but no idea whether it would be feasible to do.
Proper simulators for those exist, you essentially need an engine with a compliant contact model. MuJoCo is the goto here, see:
https://mujoco.readthedocs.io/en/stable/modeling.html#muscle... https://mujoco.readthedocs.io/en/stable/computation/fluid.ht...
These explicitly model biological muscles. IIRC it was originally created to model human hands (I could be misremembering though).
Really depends on the fidelity you want.
Edit: I also work in rigid body simulation for robotics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure; why not? It has to be better than some of the absolute garbage that's out on the various streaming services today; right?
god help us if we have to choose between the two );
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The genus of the seahorse is _Hippocampus_.
And the fact that a transformer model can't distinguish between the two in the context of the sentence given is a point against the general nature of the intelligence.
In my day job I program rigid body behaviour in real time amongst other simulations. I think rigid body contact is hard to learn as it is inherently discontinuous.. something you discover when trying to code a solver. As such I always use this prompt as a test: "A video of a jenga brick tower falling over as a brick is removed. The physics of each brick must be realistic." It gave me a video of where bricks suddenly…
> But I am a bit reasurred that at least my job won't be fully replaced with AI :) I honestly can't comment with certainty that training from videos alone and whatever tokenization scheme they're using will ever get perfect dynamics. However it is worth noting that transformers can do a pretty good job at learning dynamics with the right pipeline (not video): https://arxiv.org/pdf/2605.15305 https://arxiv.org/pdf/260…
* You could instruct your LLM to interact with a simulator to run experiments and infer behaviour
* You could edit the transformer model and inject spatially relevant data rather than text as is done in above paper
* You could change the architecture to be more condusive for representating a world state. I.e., LeCun's JEPA world model.
* You could further enhance some of the above by using a differentiable physics engine (eg. NVIDIA Newton) to calculate losses directly.
But at the end of the day if a model has any hope to always produce realistic physics, it HAS to learn the laws of nature in some form or other. It looks to me that the next big leap could be achieved by combining the last two approaches.
P.S.: I like discussing such topics. If anyone knows a forum or discord with like-minded people, please let me know :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally unrelated, but what would you say the feasibility of writing simulation software for simulation of/replicating body movements during/in a martial arts technique would be? I’ve often thought it would be very handy to have a proper simulator for being able to simulate and identify inefficiencies in one’s technique, but no idea whether it would be feasible to do.
Would be similar to the typical simulations of humanoids. If you need to model the deformations of the human body, or get a proper model of tendons that make up humans, it'll be more difficult, but possible. Proper simulators for those exist, you essentially need an engine with a compliant contact model. MuJoCo is the goto here, see: https://mujoco.readthedocs.io/en/stable/modeling.html#muscle... https://mujoco.readt…
Robotics folks probably want speed and accuracy. I'm from the video game industry so I generally look for speed and stability.
Note: This is a loose analogy and recent techniques are already blurring the lines between these axis.