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

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#901

Post by jowea »

arcastroe wrote: post #704
valval wrote: post #654

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I see it, it won’t take long before human eyes won’t be able to distinguish AI generated content from original. The only regret I have about that is losing video as a form of evidence. CCTV footage and the like are a valuable tool for solving crimes. That’s going to be out the window soon.

It's sad that almost AS SOON as we acquired the ability to record real-life moments (with the promise of being able to share undeniable evidence of events with one another), we also acquired the ability to doctor it, negating that promise.

I'm not sure we should have been trusting images for the previous decades either. Photoshop has been a thing for a long time already. I mean, there's those famous photos that Stalin had people removed from.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#902

Post by jkolio »

NibblesMeKibble wrote: post #881
lurking_swe wrote: post #849

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is it easy? i’m not a photographer but i enjoy taking pictures as a hobby. Your opinion baffles me haha. People always wonder why their iphone can’t shoot photos that look as good as the iphone camera reviews. https://www.austinmann.com/trek/iphone-16-pro-camera-review-... Understanding why your camera performs well in certain conditions and how to tweak the camera, is a mini-science all of its own. Also i think the…

> Knowing where to choose the right words, and at what moment, can make video gen turn out magical. The AI is processing millions of tokens a second, but a prompter often finds just ONE perfect prompt to capture some scenes. Some people appreciate the “art” in that. :) I do. It can take hours to make the vision in your head be replicated by the AI. Sure you can spit out generic scenes, but the game changes when the g…

I dislike the term "prompt engineer," particularly if you're not setting up systems on a technical level. And it's still artistic, without necessarily making prompters artists. Because the process is one closer to curation rather than creation, I like to think of prompters as "curators". You're reaching into latent space (a collective visual history), pulling out a collapsed possibility, and deciding if it fits your needs or not.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#903

Post by KolmogorovComp »

thawab wrote: post #14
msp26 wrote: post #4

Any chance of this being released open weights? Or is the risk of bad PR too high (especially near a US election)? It being 30B gives me hope.

Meta text to image model cm3leon[0], was announced july 2023. It wasn't released yet, I think this one might take a while. [0] https://ai.meta.com/blog/generative-ai-text-images-cm3leon/

I don't think they will ever release it considering it's likely much worse than flux.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#904

Post by jkolio »

deng wrote: post #154

These are not movies, these are clips. The stock photo/clip industry is surely worried about this, and probably will sue because 100% these models were trained on their work. If this technology ever makes movies, it'll be exactly like all the texts, images and music these models create: an average of everything ever created, so incredibly mediocre.

There have been several AI short film festivals, as well as several AI music videos that have been produced. The caveats are that quality varies, the best ones simply employ solid production in general (good editing, strong directorial vision, etc), and I don't know that anything feature length is out or even in the works.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#905

Post by acdha »

jowea wrote: post #901
arcastroe wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sad that almost AS SOON as we acquired the ability to record real-life moments (with the promise of being able to share undeniable evidence of events with one another), we also acquired the ability to doctor it, negating that promise.

I'm not sure we should have been trusting images for the previous decades either. Photoshop has been a thing for a long time already. I mean, there's those famous photos that Stalin had people removed from.

Your mention of Stalin is I think stronger as an argument that there’s been a significant change. Those fakes took lots of time by skilled humans and were notoriously obvious - what made them effective was the crushing political power preventing them from receiving critical analysis in public.

Similarly, while Photoshop made it easier it happened at a time where technical advances made the problem harder because everyone’s standards for photos went up dramatically, and so producing a realistic fake was still a slow process for a skilled worker.

Now, it’s increasingly available to everyone and that means that we’re going to see a lot more scams and hoaxes as people without artistic talent or willingness to invest time can make realistic fakes even for minor things. That availability is transformative enough to merit the concern we’ve been seeing here.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#906

Post by kredd »

tivert wrote: post #662
kredd wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much anyone that I’ve talked to that somewhat works in AI industry, the attitude is “let it rip right now, and deal with the consequences as it’s going to happen one way or another”. I’m not sure where I stand on this issue, but the reality is, it’s inevitable whether we want it or not.

> but the reality is, it’s inevitable whether we want it or not. The "inevitability" of it is mostly a function of the (self-serving) belief that it is inevitable. Basically, you just cited a bunch of moral cop-outs.

What sort of actions do you think we can take where the dangerous side effects (like creating deepfake pornography) won’t be as easily accessible as illegal streaming of TV shows? Only let big private companies to train models? Make open sourcing of weights illegal? Make usage of LLM tools generally illegal? All those are as enforceable as torrenting around the world.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#907

Post by acjohnson55 »

baby wrote: post #757
reneberlin wrote: post #736

We humans are so excessively dependent on vision input and with entertaining through visuals, too. But more and more all those visuals become meaningless to me and it all just feels like fast-food-junk to me. As any pre-schooler will be able to produce anything (watch out parents) imaginable in seconds doesn't make it better to me or is of any real value. Ok, i needed to edit it again to add: maybe this IS the value…

Yeah I agree, I never understood the appeal of photography, it's so easy, you don't need to paint for hours to produce something original, you just need to buy a camera and click on a button. That's it. And people pay for that, I don't get it.

I honestly thought that, too, until I got my first digital camera and started trying to take photos that I liked as much as other ones I saw. Then I realized how much of a craft it is and I gained a much deeper appreciation.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#908

Post by jowea »

acdha wrote: post #905
jowea wrote: post #901

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure we should have been trusting images for the previous decades either. Photoshop has been a thing for a long time already. I mean, there's those famous photos that Stalin had people removed from.

Your mention of Stalin is I think stronger as an argument that there’s been a significant change. Those fakes took lots of time by skilled humans and were notoriously obvious - what made them effective was the crushing political power preventing them from receiving critical analysis in public. Similarly, while Photoshop made it easier it happened at a time where technical advances made the problem harder because ever…

The glass half-full in me feels that the advantage to this is that in a few years the average person will know better than to trust anything that could be faked like that, instead of the old situation where someone who was willing to put in that effort could actually trick a lot of people.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#909

Post by solardev »

heurist wrote: post #273

I've been saying for years that generated content is an impending tsunami that's going to drown out all real human voices online. The internet may become effectively unusable as a result for anything other than entertainment.

Maybe that's a good thing. The internet never reached its potential as being the connective fabric of humanity. Mostly it's just marketing and spam. If the internet died and we all went back to smaller communities, that really wouldn't be the worst thing IMO. We're not really evolved for global communications at scale anyway.

Re: Meta Movie Gen

#910

Post by asveikau »

paul7986 wrote: post #573
jetrink wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend who lives in North Carolina sent me a video of the raging floodwaters in his state- at least that's what the superimposed text claimed it was. When I looked closer, it was clearly an Indian city filled with Indian people and Indian cars. He hadn't noticed anything except the flood water. It reminded me of that famous selective attention test video[1]. I won't ruin it for those who haven't seen it, but it's a…

Indeed watching Reels or Tiktok videos is an exercise in testing your bullshit meter and commenting accordingly to let the uninformed know hey this is most likely fake.

Facebook is mostly this now too. Long comment threads of boomers thanking AI images for their military service or congratulating it on a long marriage.
Post reply on HN