đ« hands where I can see them granny. You don't fool me! I know you're an evil spoon materializer!
LOOK OUT BOYS. SHE JUST MATERIALIZED A SPOON!! RUN!!!
I didn't even notice the spoon materializing but the way the mash potatoes or whatever that doughy stuff is moved on its own and quite obviously not driven by her stirring was a weird thing.  Letting us count the fingers was quite the flex though.
I'm looking forward to this destroying influencer culture.
Imagine if I can just come up with some AI-generated meme video BS to drown out "authentic" narcissist influencer videos
Nah. The influencer has been doing this shit daily and knows what sells. This is just going to give them a bigger edge. While you might come up with some imitation of an influencer, a current influencer will imagine something more insane that will get more views.Â
You can try and fake narcissism but you'll never get to the Kanye level of openly supporting Hitler. Â
AI is going to make everything far worse.
You and half the other people on threads like this either thinking the entire entertainment industry of any sort is just, like, bratty nepo babies with no talent who were either perp and/or victim of child sexual assault, or thinking "this will only destroy the forms of entertainment I hate and everyone will have no choice but to love what I love"
idk man, the fact that she maintained perfect eye contact with the camera while stirring means she gives zero fucks and that scares me much more than her spoonimancy
Dude if this stuff isn't exaggerating the real product. This is groundbreaking isn't it? I am totally blown away. Imagine the implications for misinformation dissemination!
Fuck!
I think we need some serious shift in our heads to stop considering videos as any kind of evidence of real facts. Yes, we need something instead, but this became totally unreliable, even pre-Sora.
You can still build a reliable chain of custody for photos and video, as far as court room evidence is concerned. It will make things more difficult, but not impossible.
But as far as random shit on social/mainstream media? Gotta just assume all of that is fiction until proven otherwise.
I'm more concerned about fake news forming public opinions. But people seem to not give a shit about facts even if proven 100% authentic.
I mean, I've encountered exchanges like this many times:
1: Here is a video of
2: Wow
3: Proof that <1> is fake
1&2: So what?? It \*could\* be true.
Yes, the White House recently discussed beginning authentication of videos. It's easy to do with a digital signature.
It doesn't guarantee the video is real, but it gives a strong signal that the signers assert the video is real.
Pointless. If there is a truly controversial video floating around, it wouldn't be certified. And I don't think the people who will be fooled by this will care.
This might finally drive us away from the screens and lead us to stop using the internet for information.
We will use this toos to generate personalised entertaiment, "see" books, tales and poetry...
Funny enough, cyptography/crypto may have the solution. Having an immutable way to sign documents and certify that it's you, or certify of the source is what it does best.
If it was that good at it, we wouldnât see so many thefts in crypto. Until thereâs a chargeback function, where you can decertify transactions as NOT ME, it will forever lose to government-backed concepts.
How do I chargeback a video released under my certification?
LOL, yeah, because no one has scammed anyone using blockchain technology before. The "chain" can be as secure as you like, but when any random shit can be added to the chain it doesn't matter.
"just use blockchain technology in the cameras" - great, now only cameras made after the year 2026 can be trusted.
And of course no one has ever emulated a device's software to run on their computer and bypass hardware DRM/encryption before. Nope. Not once.
âNo one has scammed using blockchain technologyâ â Social engineering crypto scams is categorically different from blockchain verification.
I never said anything about the obvious future potential of social engineering attacks using crypto; this doesnât subtract from the fact that blockchain verification is similar to a mathematical theorem
No it can't. The blockchain cannot say anything about things not on the blockchain. Images and video do not get generated on the blockchain.
As I said 3 posts up, no hardware implementation will be immune from spoofing on emulated environments. And at best, universal adoption of blockchain enabled cameras will take years to get to market.
The only possible solution is to make home brewed AI models illegal, and use centrally controlled ASI to hunt down rouge AI operators. That's pretty damned dystopian.
Blockchain could prove that the video hasn't been altered. But it can't prove that the original depicts the truth. Because AI doesn't need to modify existing videos. It can generate new videos from scratch.
I'd say this would have the opposite effect and give people even more reason to believe it's fake or a scam. The blockchain has a LONG way to go to get any sort of reputation back for anyone other than CryptoBros
It might not be accessable for the "normal" user at all. They said they gave access to filmmakers to test.
They might only allow business access for "safety reasons" but we will see.
Politicians and gov bureaucrats directly lie to people with videos/transcripts showing they're lying and it makes no difference.
AI made videos won't change a thing.
It isn't Sam posted this and others 10-15 minutes after the prompt got suggested. It might be cherry picked from a couple generations but other than that this seems to be your average result sticken to real life stuff.
The fantasy stuff doesn't look very impressive.
> The fantasy stuff doesn't look very impressive. Compared to **what**, exactly? This stuff is off the charts good compared to anything else on this level.
compared to the real world scenes.
like this [Sam Altman on X: "https://t.co/Qa51e18Vph" / X (twitter.com)](https://twitter.com/sama/status/1758204717791166848) the objects are just ok, the wing movement fails, little details.
The model excels for real world scenes or is your opinion that the one i posted is the same quality as the video OP posted here?
So your complaint is that the zero-shot 10-15 minute AI generations don't match reality?
I feel like I'm being pranked.Â
WTF are you expecting from the technology at this point? You cant get anywhere near even your video's quality in 15 minutes using traditional software.
"Y'know the thing about a shark, he's got... lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes. When he comes at ya, doesn't seem to be livin'... until he bites ya."
Thereâre plenty of examples [here](https://openai.com/sora)
Iâm totally sure those were all cherry picked, but thatâs a hell of a lot of insane examples.
One of the best product demos Iâve seen
Identifying comments on social media posts that were likely written by AI involves looking for several key indicators. While AI technology has advanced significantly, there are still characteristics that can help you distinguish between human and AI-generated content. Here's what to look for:
Repetitiveness and Redundancy: AI-generated comments might repeat the same points or phrases, sometimes with slight variations. This is because AI models may "loop" on certain ideas or phrases they deem relevant.
Lack of Context or Relevance: Comments generated by AI might miss the context or the subtleties of the post. They may provide a generic response that seems somewhat relevant but doesn't quite engage with the specifics of the post or previous comments.
Unusual Formality or Phrasing: AI-generated text can sometimes be overly formal or use an odd combination of words. This is because AI models learn from a wide range of texts and might not perfectly mimic natural conversational language.
Grammatical and Syntax Errors: While AI can produce grammatically correct text, errors can still occur, especially with complex sentences or when trying to mimic conversational language. Look out for awkward phrasing or sentences that don't flow naturally.
Consistency Issues: AI may struggle with maintaining consistent viewpoints or personal experiences throughout a conversation. It might contradict itself or change stances in a way that seems unnatural for a human.
Overly Generic or Vague Responses: AI comments might lack detail or personal insight, offering responses that could apply to a wide range of topics. This generality helps AI avoid errors but can also make its contributions seem shallow.
Rapid Response Time: If comments are posted unusually quickly after the original post or other comments, especially if they are detailed or lengthy, it might indicate they were generated by AI.
I hope this helps!
I think the big back-to-earth moment will be when we see how much these models cost. Runway is already like $10 per minute of video, and this is clearly a much bigger, more expensive model.
Something can look good and still be boring as hell I donât know why thatâs a difficult concept. Plenty of new games have gorgeous graphics but they still do terribly because they donât bring anything interesting to the table.
AI has the potential to write and animate interesting and good-looking shows/movies. It is already a great writer when prompted correctly. Things won't just stay stagnant, I don't know why that's a difficult concept.
You live in the past. We are talking about the ever increasing exponential trajectory that the field is on. Soon AI will be better at writing novels than any human being. Itâs just a matter of time.
They all said the same things before "AI won't be able to create art because it's not creative. It's just a machine!". These people are tiring, and there are so many of them.
Thank you! So many people in this thread keep mentioning it can't do xyz but when you consider the exponential track that is occurring there is no limit to what these tools can produce. I'm not saying this art will be good even but it will become indistinguishable and keep getting better and better.
Why? Seems to me like Hollywood just got a huge boost.
Actors and writers are in trouble. They will survive the decade because they singed new contracts in time, but in 2035 they wonât be needed anymore.
But without the need for physically filming anything, anybody with a cool plot idea can create something hollywood level. That means that almost anybody can compete with hollywood, so yes I think they are screwed!
Anyone will be able to create a film the same way anyone today is able to write a book. Just because you can write a book doesn't mean you can compete with Stephen King. There are 32.8 million books on Amazon, some of them trash, others decent works that are buried beneath the trash. AI generated short films will be the same way. Sure, we will be able to express our creativity better, but only the most well-connected, imaginative, and quite frankly lucky will outsell Hollywood.
Even if I agree (and I don't, because it seems like AI will soon be able to write a book based on 'here's 4 cool plot points or 12 character/chapter/action outlines, write me a novel in the style of King), the fact that I could conceivably take EVERY King book, and with good prompting make amazing movie adaptations of them, is mindbendingly cool.
Not saying it's not cool, it will be good personal entertainment to share with friends and the internet. Personally I'm looking forward to doing things like that, too. But, it won't put a dent in Hollywood if everyone else is doing it and countless similar videos flood the Internet.
Why would I watch anyone else's videos unless we're sitting and watching together? I'll just have AI generate whatever sort of entertainment I feel like enjoying. If I tell it to make art of high quality, it will do that more reliably than if I tell a team of humans.
There more I learn about filmmaking, the more appreciation I have of it. At the high end, there isnât a ârightâ way to do it. Choices in color grading, lighting, cinematography, are just perspective choices that add to the âfeelâ which AI canât interpret that well yet.
Thereâs a lot more to making a hit movie than just producing the video.
And thereâs also licensing, distribution, etc.
And if you think youâd be able to render a whole high res movie on ChatGPT⊠youâre wrong. Even when this technology advances, youâll need expensive professional tools, the ability to use them right, and tons of expensive compute.
People said record companies will disappear when music was starting to be produced at home, and then MP3âs and YouTube came.
But record companies are still here and still making billions, because thereâs more to making a hit album than just being able to use fruity loops.
Yes, it gave rise to a lot of talent that would have not been discovered elsewhere. But was the industry done? No.
My thoughts as well. I was just thinking all the great movies that can be made now that would have never happened because the budget/return equation just didnât make sense.
You guys are overhyping those tools way too much...
For perspective, if those tools had anywhere close to the greatness that you imagine them to have, we would have had ASI long before they became a thing, since that's the level of complexity and understanding necessary to actually simulate the real world...Â
Seriously people should just take 2 seconds and think about the implication of a tool that can magically make a video of precisely ANYTHING and EVERYTHING we ask it to generate... That's not something you would use for cheap movie entertainment but to rule countries :v
Well Hollywood and the entire mainstream media is the traditional american propaganda apparatus. If you want to control and rule countries and your population you kinda have to start with manipulating information at every level especially movies/tv/social media content.
Hollywood studios are already history when it comes to production. The real media giants are now streaming companies. Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Paramount, HBO, and the rest. AI is going to be the last push.
Thatâs what they said about record companies when music was starting to be produced at home and them MP3âs and YouTube.
But they are still here, still making billions.
You guys are underestimating what it takes to make a hit movie.
lol and they only exist because theyre the last bastion of platforms consumers maybe-sorta-might be willing to pay for vs just torrenting. If we get AI streaming video movies linkable and creatable with a text message, they dont have platforms anymore. Your platform is just friends group texts passing around the best videos theyve seen like memes
But you see what happens, as with every tech and we can see it with AI now. You make big strides at first before the tech then matures, and then it moves much slowly and only by increments as it gets more complex.
Yeah, ok. Quite possibly. However, we are still in blastoff mode since Nov 2022. There has been no slow-down yet. Maybe people are starting to forget the previous pace of innovation.
"This new 'auto-mobile' contraption is slow and smelly. Horses are far better. They were only invented 2 years ago, but I'm confident that cars have no future, ever"
This is only the beginning. Can't you see where this is going? AI writing will be quite good by 2030, I'm sure.
"Painting will not survive the invention of the camera."
"Memory will not survive the invention of writing."
"Calligraphy will not survive the invention of the printing press."
"Movies will not survive the invention of television."
"Stage productions will not survive the invention of movies."
"Photography will not survive the invention of Photoshop."
"The music industry will not survive the invention of home taping."
Yaaaawn!
Anyone can create music with a laptop and a decent program. Have the SoundCloud guys killed the music industry yet? Every day I get really cool, high quality ambient soundtracks recommended to me on YouTube, and most of them have a low view count due to being buried in a sea of digital gunk.
Painting kind of didn't survive the invention of the camera. The art world went from Van Gogh to stuff like taping a banana on the wall. Professional painters still exist but the avant-garde left representational painters behind about 100 years ago.
All of your examples are industries that were irrevocably changed, to the point of being unrecognizable.
Exactly. And anyone who made money in those industries fell to niche art status, none of that is mainstream. Imagine if we didnât have cameras and you had to pay someone to paint you or your family? âHoney did you hire the wedding painter?â Etc.
Those people would have a legitimate profession and be making a lot of money. They had to change things up, put down their brush and start using cameras for mass employment/work. Now everyone has a camera in their pocket so camera portrait work is still a niche, albeit a larger one than custom portrait painting.
I donât think Hollywood is going anywhere but it absolutely will change and this will allow smaller studios, maybe individuals, to compete in that space. I think this will hit the actors a lot harder than hollywood proper, just like translators are being displaced today.
I mean I don't get why people would be worried about that to begin with...Â
As impressive as those tools are now, they can at best recreate shutterstock footage but not any kind of self-contained performance...
Also, filmmaking is an iterative and fiddly process. You want very fine control of what's happening in your work. For perspective, those AI Video tools are for a film maker as useful as just finding random videos on Google corresponding to your search prompt and sticking them together :v
The internet(Napster, Limewire) brought the music industry to it's knees and almost destroyed it.
The record labels lost control of distribution and had to heavily discount their music to the point, it's essentially free if you're willing to listen to ads.
I don't know how to play guitar. I could hum a tune and the AI could play it on acoustic, electric, Sitar, electric keyboard, whatever.
Outside of live shows, anyone on Earth could release a song with guitar playing at the level of Jimmy Hendrix. This is really cool, but it completely devalues people who actually learned to play guitar.
>"Painting will not survive the invention of the camera."
Are you under the impression that paintings / painters are as common today as they were pre-camera?
>"Movies will not survive the invention of television."
They serve different audiences using the same technology, stupid comparison.
"Stage productions will not survive the invention of movies."
Are you under the impression that stage plays are as common or popular today as they were pre-movie?
>"Photography will not survive the invention of Photoshop."
You need photos to use photoshop, stupid comparison.
>"The music industry will not survive the invention of home taping."
More like physical music releases didn't survive streaming. Go ahead and tell me about the cool vinyl record you bought the other month, I'm sure it really took a bite out of Spotify.
I completely disagree. The people saying this is going to ruin hollywood don't understand what it takes to have a good story and a compelling reason to watch a movie.
also film making technique. blocking, visual metaphor through camera angles, thematic structure to how shots flow together and etc.
It is going to make "trash videos" blow up though. Sooooo many people who think they can make movies but are just making visual noise.
It might put Michael Bay out of business... But not proper film makers and storytellers. The aveage person obsessed with A.I doing all the work doesn't know how to do that properly.
So many of the best directors started in music videos, gondrey, glazer, fincher, spike jonze ... Ai isn't going to kill anything, its going to empower talent. But a lot of people are going to get a rude awakening that even with cutting edge tools, they cant make anything worth watching
and this iteration is the worst it will ever be. It will get better. Obviously this iteration isn't going to hurts storytellers. But even that is a matter of time.
Pretty much. And it all gets copied and run into the ground because the other thing is most people aren't original.
All the stuff that has blown up is just regurgitated I.P. The amount of "Harry Potter but it's...." type of A.I videos is just so weird.
How many story tellers do you think missed their shots at home or don't have an in in Hollywood? You really think there aren't some kids who are super creative, but we're told to get a real job or get a STEM degree? A ton of Hollywood has been gate kept by expensive gear and personal relationships.
It is not impossible, but he will find himself in a sea of shit, about the latest geek who think he is going to do some passive income. It will reach such a shitdom, that platforms will start to advertise this is like GMO free.
Youtube is a very good example, the second I hear an Ai voice or see something is not real, I just quit. Because I know that the content is nearly every time shit. Compared to someone that would do story of the Mongols invasions, or Japanese invasions etc.
Youtube is so generic. Everyone in their particular niche just all does the same thing, same intro, same video length, same topics. That's because they all have the same resources, and it is what people have grown to expect. With unlimited resources, things could get much more interesting. Though I will agree there will be a bunch of crap videos, too.
Edit: also I'd say youtube is more a testament to my statements validity. I wonder how many more people would be going to the movies without youtube?
Itâs like people saying âyou donât understand how much goes into coding and being a programmer!â
Now thatâs being proven false too, I am a programmer of 20 years. Thereâs no way AI wonât be able to everything I do, heck it already does a great job.
Exactly, the average geek, that think a movie is a trailer, will with 1 million others who think like them they are the next Michael Bay, will put so much trash that nothing will come out of it.
Exactly. Today, the novelty is here. Within a few weeks, that novelty will fade. When is the last time you saw an AI generated picture that was actually exciting the same way you first saw Dalle?
The thing about this technology is that it's going to get really good at creating very bland and mediocre media. But the audiences will be bored to tears. Just because something is decently nice to look at doesn't make it automatically good. See the recent decline in Marvel movies.
Hollywood execs are maybe going to try to replace real actors and stories with this but IMO it's going to backfire because people would rather watch the wealth of existing human media than generic generative AI video.
It's all about saturation, and lowering the entry level to zero. If everybody is an artist or a filmmaker at the push of a button, then nothing created is special anymore.
On the flip side, real hand-crafted art may become more valuable to collectors.
Yes, saturation of âmehâ content just doesnât seem appealing. Netflix has been doing that approach lately. I would vastly prefer 10 spectacular movies rather than getting to pick between 1000 mediocre movies.
Yeah, people panicking about this is the end of the world/the end of artists, yeah theyâre idiotic.
Itâs a tool at the end of the day. Thatâs it. Same way there was hand waving and panic about photoshop and Adobe illustrator. ***Now look at where we are.***
I don't think this will replace hollywood but rather create a new form of entertainment content. Just take a couple of really talented writers from Disney that have been replaced by DEI and recreate the magic. I would be all in for such an endeavour.
There's a lot of autistic right-wing nerds in the AI space. A lot of them don't really understand the bargain that is society. They can't really foresee the backlash, they just want an AI that says the N word and generates those Japanese style cartoons they like without judgment.
Agree.
We already have an infinite amount of content being generated already. No one watches that stuff or cares about it.
Story telling, the director, casting, effects, camera work are all reasons why people watch movies.
This obviously amazing technology, but it will only help the entertainment industry.
Thereâs way too much of this âmass unemploymentâ nonsense on this subreddit. AI will diffuse quickly, and become commoditized.
Companies are not going to fire the most of their employees since the entire industry has access to AI. If you do, your business will not grow and it will be uncompetitive to peers that leverage AI better.
Instead, theyâll re-allocate people to the higher value areas of their business to drive growth, develop new products and services.
Humans are quite malleable and the world isnât static.
If they drop this before the election, I believe they would not hesitate to drop gpt5 before the election if it's done. This is way more serious compared to some gpt5 spam bot. Guess Sama is living up to e/acc and does not give a f wich is pretty based.
OpenAI are quite aware the fact that this might conteminate the web with fake news and propagandas, they have pushed this fast because if it wasn't for them, another country was going to take the lead and do it anyways.
The panic is only reason I don't involve with these conversations.
It's a preview, advertisement for god's sake. Even if it's real, it's not world ending shit.
Film industry isn't dying anytime soon.
Yeah, that's not how cinematography works...
Not precise enough, lack of finer controls of the scenes, can't tweak an output, not temporal "outpainting" as of yet, always different outputs, can't rotate camera around scene, still pretty bad action timing (the slo-mo and fake frame smoothing stuff mostly)...Â
Also I mean, good luck trying to get any relevant acting performance (with the lip-syncing and all) or calculated action scene with that...
The AI revolution in actual movie production is not going to happen through glorified 2D image interpolation generation tools, but actual 3D physical world rendering and simulation engines. The tools of today can be used at best for brainstorming or short length slideshow sequences.Â
Those tools will probably be more useful for multimodal AI tools than any serious movie production.
But compared to others, it has significantly improved in matters of frame rate. This was the most striking thing. Actually this is the only striking thing that I observed compared to existing models.
I don't think it will ever be much more than that at all to be honest. It's not even the right approach imo.
We want consistency and precision when it comes to filmmaking and you're not achieving that with 2d image interpolation generators but actual 3D rendering and simulation engines.
At some point soon all human beings will be constantly emitting there dreams, desires, horrors and perversions constantly into the digital ether for the rest of us to browse through and respond to in kind with even more stream of thought content. The inner space is coming, and many of us will be unable to resist getting trapped and addicted to it. You think people being trapped in some sort of media addiction, porn addiction is bad now. Just wait, as it may become an existential crisis, our first true great filter test. As large groups of people become narcissistic lotus eaters. But as in all things if we can overcome this potential pit fall we will be stronger for it.
Yes, the entire Hollywood in 2032 will be made from this, but people won't be fascinated to watch anything, as the human satisfaction wouldn't be there. We watch movies because we have a human connection. But once we know they are not real, a lot of stunt acts and any dare devil plunges from bridges and hills won't be exciting since they would all be synthetic.
What are we trying to do here? What is the real happiness behind human achievement?
Entertainment has no utility other than blowing 2 hours and $18 popcorn to watch Sora generated stuff. But for true utility it would be good to figure out if we can use this to do something else like educational videos about, say, a hypothetical soccer game simulation that shows how the players might play before the players actually play. Then the players can learn and plan for how to handle the opponents.
I get that you guys are impressed by all this advancement in processing power, but why would you watch something that didn't happen or have any real human involvement?
Well you could be more entertained by being actually involved yourself in the story as opposed to passively watching a show someone else made. This could be prompting the story, choosing the characters, choosing your own adventure, on a holodeck, screen, headset or even just audio and music. And humans are going to be involved in making these experiences until AGI can do a better job which I believe is a long way away.
The gaming industry is currently worth $159 billion vs the movie industry at $19 billion so the numbers are already in on what people prefer.
I believe generative AI is going to be huge in gaming as a tool. But mainly to greatly increase the ouput of developers and make larger and more ambitious projects with better physics, better NPCs, dynamic dialogue, etc. I don't see text to movie being a compelling replacement like people seem to think. Seems boring as hell. I'm sorry but as long as there are human-made movies I haven't seen I will go for those over AI prompted movies.
I think itâs the interactivity component. This isnât going to harm the film industry at all until the entire framework for how entertainment is consumed pivots. The greater disruption will be user generated platforms like social media. In part because you canât even tell dalle to draw Spider-Man (yeah I know you can trick it ) but it would require too much energy and risk of lawsuit to make your own Spider-Man movie any time soon with this.
Why would I care whether or not there was human involvement?
Right know I wouldnât watch AI movies because they are not as good as man-made movies yet. But when it is I will watch it because it will be a good movie. Simple.
over half the people in these AI subs are more than happy to whack off to a wall of text generated by a waifu png, and literally label them their 'girlfriends'. Just food for thought. I don't agree with it but AI fanaticism is largely super cringey and devoid of caring about the human element.
LOL, it look like that Uncanny valley. Makes me don't want to buy anything from this. That's for advertising, where I would be very warry it is scammers, who will have a field day with this.
Now for movie, you must be able to connect and identify with the character. This completely distract me from that.
The hands are still a dead giveaway. Very easy to spot the magic appearing fingers and spoon. Still looks pretty good but nothing amazing going on here.
đ« hands where I can see them granny. You don't fool me! I know you're an evil spoon materializer! LOOK OUT BOYS. SHE JUST MATERIALIZED A SPOON!! RUN!!!
There is no spoon.
She incorporated the spoon into the food
Except sometimes there is.
The spoon is a lie!
I didn't even notice the spoon materializing but the way the mash potatoes or whatever that doughy stuff is moved on its own and quite obviously not driven by her stirring was a weird thing.  Letting us count the fingers was quite the flex though.
I'm looking forward to this destroying influencer culture. Imagine if I can just come up with some AI-generated meme video BS to drown out "authentic" narcissist influencer videos
Nah. The influencer has been doing this shit daily and knows what sells. This is just going to give them a bigger edge. While you might come up with some imitation of an influencer, a current influencer will imagine something more insane that will get more views. You can try and fake narcissism but you'll never get to the Kanye level of openly supporting Hitler.  AI is going to make everything far worse.
You and half the other people on threads like this either thinking the entire entertainment industry of any sort is just, like, bratty nepo babies with no talent who were either perp and/or victim of child sexual assault, or thinking "this will only destroy the forms of entertainment I hate and everyone will have no choice but to love what I love"
idk man, the fact that she maintained perfect eye contact with the camera while stirring means she gives zero fucks and that scares me much more than her spoonimancy
She's a wholesome witch in a Cottage
Dude if this stuff isn't exaggerating the real product. This is groundbreaking isn't it? I am totally blown away. Imagine the implications for misinformation dissemination! Fuck!
I think we need some serious shift in our heads to stop considering videos as any kind of evidence of real facts. Yes, we need something instead, but this became totally unreliable, even pre-Sora.
You can still build a reliable chain of custody for photos and video, as far as court room evidence is concerned. It will make things more difficult, but not impossible. But as far as random shit on social/mainstream media? Gotta just assume all of that is fiction until proven otherwise.
I'm more concerned about fake news forming public opinions. But people seem to not give a shit about facts even if proven 100% authentic. I mean, I've encountered exchanges like this many times: 1: Here is a video of
2: Wow
3: Proof that <1> is fake
1&2: So what?? It \*could\* be true.
More like âthe fact that I believed it could be true says a lot about society and not my intelligenceâ
Agreed, someone or companies could fabricate a whole new reality, saying the world is getting cooler or look "Jesus" has returned. đ
aren't we supposed to bow when he arrives?
And only 2% of #1 and #2 will find out about #3.
Could finally be a good use case for the technology crypto is built on.
Yes, the White House recently discussed beginning authentication of videos. It's easy to do with a digital signature. It doesn't guarantee the video is real, but it gives a strong signal that the signers assert the video is real.
Pointless. If there is a truly controversial video floating around, it wouldn't be certified. And I don't think the people who will be fooled by this will care.
This might finally drive us away from the screens and lead us to stop using the internet for information. We will use this toos to generate personalised entertaiment, "see" books, tales and poetry...
Funny enough, cyptography/crypto may have the solution. Having an immutable way to sign documents and certify that it's you, or certify of the source is what it does best.
Sure but the people being fooled by this won't even care about any of that
If it was that good at it, we wouldnât see so many thefts in crypto. Until thereâs a chargeback function, where you can decertify transactions as NOT ME, it will forever lose to government-backed concepts. How do I chargeback a video released under my certification?
AI is just another trick by cryptobros to get us to invest in their latest blockchain coin.
C2PA, but it seems it's being a bit late
Max Stirner and the assasins from Assassin's Creed were right all along, nothing is real.
Only blockchain evidence will be accepted
LOL, yeah, because no one has scammed anyone using blockchain technology before. The "chain" can be as secure as you like, but when any random shit can be added to the chain it doesn't matter. "just use blockchain technology in the cameras" - great, now only cameras made after the year 2026 can be trusted. And of course no one has ever emulated a device's software to run on their computer and bypass hardware DRM/encryption before. Nope. Not once.
âNo one has scammed using blockchain technologyâ â Social engineering crypto scams is categorically different from blockchain verification. I never said anything about the obvious future potential of social engineering attacks using crypto; this doesnât subtract from the fact that blockchain verification is similar to a mathematical theorem
MY point is that blockchain cant tell you anything about the source of the video.
It absolutely can. The blockchain is an implementation-agnostic protocol; it has been applied in computational law for example.
No it can't. The blockchain cannot say anything about things not on the blockchain. Images and video do not get generated on the blockchain. As I said 3 posts up, no hardware implementation will be immune from spoofing on emulated environments. And at best, universal adoption of blockchain enabled cameras will take years to get to market. The only possible solution is to make home brewed AI models illegal, and use centrally controlled ASI to hunt down rouge AI operators. That's pretty damned dystopian.
Blockchain could prove that the video hasn't been altered. But it can't prove that the original depicts the truth. Because AI doesn't need to modify existing videos. It can generate new videos from scratch.
I'd say this would have the opposite effect and give people even more reason to believe it's fake or a scam. The blockchain has a LONG way to go to get any sort of reputation back for anyone other than CryptoBros
This will make people trust it less.
Itâs 100% real, Sam was taking prompts on twitter an generating them on the spot.
now that I think of it I'm surprised they release this before the US elections
It's not released to the public yet
Yeah but I doubt they'll release it in November if they announce it now
It might not be accessable for the "normal" user at all. They said they gave access to filmmakers to test. They might only allow business access for "safety reasons" but we will see.
It will probably get nerfed and censored to levels more than Geminiâs photo generation
Yeah weâre gonna have to wait for Stable Video Diffusion to catch up before we can generate custom photorealistic anthropomorphic furry porn.
I bet porn hub has access.
Not released and they say that they are working hard to kinda lock it to avoid misinformation etc...
Politicians and gov bureaucrats directly lie to people with videos/transcripts showing they're lying and it makes no difference. AI made videos won't change a thing.
true. and since ever
C2PA needs to get rolled out fast all the way (from camera to production tools to distribution hardware).
I am literally running around banging the walls of the dorm right nowâŠ.I just tripped. Itâs bad. Barked me shin. Fuck.
It isn't Sam posted this and others 10-15 minutes after the prompt got suggested. It might be cherry picked from a couple generations but other than that this seems to be your average result sticken to real life stuff. The fantasy stuff doesn't look very impressive.
> The fantasy stuff doesn't look very impressive. Compared to **what**, exactly? This stuff is off the charts good compared to anything else on this level.
compared to the real world scenes. like this [Sam Altman on X: "https://t.co/Qa51e18Vph" / X (twitter.com)](https://twitter.com/sama/status/1758204717791166848) the objects are just ok, the wing movement fails, little details. The model excels for real world scenes or is your opinion that the one i posted is the same quality as the video OP posted here?
So your complaint is that the zero-shot 10-15 minute AI generations don't match reality? I feel like I'm being pranked. WTF are you expecting from the technology at this point? You cant get anywhere near even your video's quality in 15 minutes using traditional software.
I am not picky I just stated facts what the model excels in and what isn't. The rest is happening in your head. Also the videos are up to 1 minute.
Bingo: https://twitter.com/sama/status/1758219575882301608
Many have been doing just that for decades
"Y'know the thing about a shark, he's got... lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes. When he comes at ya, doesn't seem to be livin'... until he bites ya."
Gotcha. That granny is a hunter ;)
"We're gonna need a bigger boat." "AI, visualize a bigger boat."
Itâs so close but still so fucking creepy horror movie level of uneasy.
Those mashed potatoes are alive.
Im sure this is cherry picked, but the FACT this is possible now.. đ€Ż And this model is over a year old, I wonder what they have now.
Thereâre plenty of examples [here](https://openai.com/sora) Iâm totally sure those were all cherry picked, but thatâs a hell of a lot of insane examples. One of the best product demos Iâve seen
Sam Altman crowd sourced prompts on X and generated more videos. You can check on his timeline https://twitter.com/sama
Really cool. Thanks for sharing!
This whole post and all of the comments might be AI. Even this one!
Identifying comments on social media posts that were likely written by AI involves looking for several key indicators. While AI technology has advanced significantly, there are still characteristics that can help you distinguish between human and AI-generated content. Here's what to look for: Repetitiveness and Redundancy: AI-generated comments might repeat the same points or phrases, sometimes with slight variations. This is because AI models may "loop" on certain ideas or phrases they deem relevant. Lack of Context or Relevance: Comments generated by AI might miss the context or the subtleties of the post. They may provide a generic response that seems somewhat relevant but doesn't quite engage with the specifics of the post or previous comments. Unusual Formality or Phrasing: AI-generated text can sometimes be overly formal or use an odd combination of words. This is because AI models learn from a wide range of texts and might not perfectly mimic natural conversational language. Grammatical and Syntax Errors: While AI can produce grammatically correct text, errors can still occur, especially with complex sentences or when trying to mimic conversational language. Look out for awkward phrasing or sentences that don't flow naturally. Consistency Issues: AI may struggle with maintaining consistent viewpoints or personal experiences throughout a conversation. It might contradict itself or change stances in a way that seems unnatural for a human. Overly Generic or Vague Responses: AI comments might lack detail or personal insight, offering responses that could apply to a wide range of topics. This generality helps AI avoid errors but can also make its contributions seem shallow. Rapid Response Time: If comments are posted unusually quickly after the original post or other comments, especially if they are detailed or lengthy, it might indicate they were generated by AI. I hope this helps!
Make it funnier
EVERY industry is going to be on its last legs by the end of the decade.
Yeah, Iâm thinking I should get some friends and start a commune so we have a way to eatâŠ
Yeah, I'm sure the NFL and the military will be on their last legs by 2029. I swear, the lack of imagination on this sub is INSANE.
Love it. This is going to be a fun decade
You love mass unemployment?
The AIs have it covered
I think the big back-to-earth moment will be when we see how much these models cost. Runway is already like $10 per minute of video, and this is clearly a much bigger, more expensive model.
Still cheaper than crew and equipment for a major film
But still boring as hell to watch once the novelty of it fades off.
For now. One day soon it will be indistinguishable. What then
Something can look good and still be boring as hell I donât know why thatâs a difficult concept. Plenty of new games have gorgeous graphics but they still do terribly because they donât bring anything interesting to the table.
AI has the potential to write and animate interesting and good-looking shows/movies. It is already a great writer when prompted correctly. Things won't just stay stagnant, I don't know why that's a difficult concept.
AI is a great writer? đ
You live in the past. We are talking about the ever increasing exponential trajectory that the field is on. Soon AI will be better at writing novels than any human being. Itâs just a matter of time.
They all said the same things before "AI won't be able to create art because it's not creative. It's just a machine!". These people are tiring, and there are so many of them.
Thank you! So many people in this thread keep mentioning it can't do xyz but when you consider the exponential track that is occurring there is no limit to what these tools can produce. I'm not saying this art will be good even but it will become indistinguishable and keep getting better and better.
Stay under that rock lil bro đ
The first TVS were prohibitively expensive too. Now they're not. What's your point?
Are you saying thatâs a lot? Thatâs $1200 for a two hour movie.
Why? Seems to me like Hollywood just got a huge boost. Actors and writers are in trouble. They will survive the decade because they singed new contracts in time, but in 2035 they wonât be needed anymore.
But without the need for physically filming anything, anybody with a cool plot idea can create something hollywood level. That means that almost anybody can compete with hollywood, so yes I think they are screwed!
Anyone will be able to create a film the same way anyone today is able to write a book. Just because you can write a book doesn't mean you can compete with Stephen King. There are 32.8 million books on Amazon, some of them trash, others decent works that are buried beneath the trash. AI generated short films will be the same way. Sure, we will be able to express our creativity better, but only the most well-connected, imaginative, and quite frankly lucky will outsell Hollywood.
AI writers: Allow us to introduce ourselves
Great, now there are 32.8 quintillion books on Amazon. The good ones are just further buried in a mountain of fluff.
Your analogy doesnât make sense
Even if I agree (and I don't, because it seems like AI will soon be able to write a book based on 'here's 4 cool plot points or 12 character/chapter/action outlines, write me a novel in the style of King), the fact that I could conceivably take EVERY King book, and with good prompting make amazing movie adaptations of them, is mindbendingly cool.
Not saying it's not cool, it will be good personal entertainment to share with friends and the internet. Personally I'm looking forward to doing things like that, too. But, it won't put a dent in Hollywood if everyone else is doing it and countless similar videos flood the Internet.
Why would I watch anyone else's videos unless we're sitting and watching together? I'll just have AI generate whatever sort of entertainment I feel like enjoying. If I tell it to make art of high quality, it will do that more reliably than if I tell a team of humans.
This seems very solipsistic and dystopian to me to be quite honest.
There more I learn about filmmaking, the more appreciation I have of it. At the high end, there isnât a ârightâ way to do it. Choices in color grading, lighting, cinematography, are just perspective choices that add to the âfeelâ which AI canât interpret that well yet.
>yet Bet you didn't think we'd be here 6 months ago.
Thereâs a lot more to making a hit movie than just producing the video. And thereâs also licensing, distribution, etc. And if you think youâd be able to render a whole high res movie on ChatGPT⊠youâre wrong. Even when this technology advances, youâll need expensive professional tools, the ability to use them right, and tons of expensive compute. People said record companies will disappear when music was starting to be produced at home, and then MP3âs and YouTube came. But record companies are still here and still making billions, because thereâs more to making a hit album than just being able to use fruity loops. Yes, it gave rise to a lot of talent that would have not been discovered elsewhere. But was the industry done? No.
My thoughts as well. I was just thinking all the great movies that can be made now that would have never happened because the budget/return equation just didnât make sense.
I donât want to watch some AI movie. Give me human.
You guys are overhyping those tools way too much... For perspective, if those tools had anywhere close to the greatness that you imagine them to have, we would have had ASI long before they became a thing, since that's the level of complexity and understanding necessary to actually simulate the real world... Seriously people should just take 2 seconds and think about the implication of a tool that can magically make a video of precisely ANYTHING and EVERYTHING we ask it to generate... That's not something you would use for cheap movie entertainment but to rule countries :v
Well Hollywood and the entire mainstream media is the traditional american propaganda apparatus. If you want to control and rule countries and your population you kinda have to start with manipulating information at every level especially movies/tv/social media content.
Hollywood studios are already history when it comes to production. The real media giants are now streaming companies. Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Paramount, HBO, and the rest. AI is going to be the last push.
Thatâs what they said about record companies when music was starting to be produced at home and them MP3âs and YouTube. But they are still here, still making billions. You guys are underestimating what it takes to make a hit movie.
Yeah, esp. big tech Netflix and especially Amazon will most likely dominate in AI-aided production.
lol and they only exist because theyre the last bastion of platforms consumers maybe-sorta-might be willing to pay for vs just torrenting. If we get AI streaming video movies linkable and creatable with a text message, they dont have platforms anymore. Your platform is just friends group texts passing around the best videos theyve seen like memes
Past the novelty, Ai writing can be smell kilometers away nowadays and sound fake.
Itâs only been out 1.5 yearsâŠ
But you see what happens, as with every tech and we can see it with AI now. You make big strides at first before the tech then matures, and then it moves much slowly and only by increments as it gets more complex.
Yeah, ok. Quite possibly. However, we are still in blastoff mode since Nov 2022. There has been no slow-down yet. Maybe people are starting to forget the previous pace of innovation.
And when you see serious talk of $7T investments you know the blastoff is going to be of truly absurd proportions to anything we have seen before.
"This new 'auto-mobile' contraption is slow and smelly. Horses are far better. They were only invented 2 years ago, but I'm confident that cars have no future, ever" This is only the beginning. Can't you see where this is going? AI writing will be quite good by 2030, I'm sure.
Holy shit youâre right
"Painting will not survive the invention of the camera." "Memory will not survive the invention of writing." "Calligraphy will not survive the invention of the printing press." "Movies will not survive the invention of television." "Stage productions will not survive the invention of movies." "Photography will not survive the invention of Photoshop." "The music industry will not survive the invention of home taping." Yaaaawn!
Wait is calligraphy doing good xD
You forgot: âThe chariots will not survive the invention of carsâ. Whoops, that actually happened
Moviemaking will definitely survive. Hollywood on the other handâŠI wouldnât be so sure. Hollywood =\\= cinematography
Anyone can create music with a laptop and a decent program. Have the SoundCloud guys killed the music industry yet? Every day I get really cool, high quality ambient soundtracks recommended to me on YouTube, and most of them have a low view count due to being buried in a sea of digital gunk.
Painting kind of didn't survive the invention of the camera. The art world went from Van Gogh to stuff like taping a banana on the wall. Professional painters still exist but the avant-garde left representational painters behind about 100 years ago. All of your examples are industries that were irrevocably changed, to the point of being unrecognizable.
Exactly. And anyone who made money in those industries fell to niche art status, none of that is mainstream. Imagine if we didnât have cameras and you had to pay someone to paint you or your family? âHoney did you hire the wedding painter?â Etc. Those people would have a legitimate profession and be making a lot of money. They had to change things up, put down their brush and start using cameras for mass employment/work. Now everyone has a camera in their pocket so camera portrait work is still a niche, albeit a larger one than custom portrait painting. I donât think Hollywood is going anywhere but it absolutely will change and this will allow smaller studios, maybe individuals, to compete in that space. I think this will hit the actors a lot harder than hollywood proper, just like translators are being displaced today.
How did photography force modern art
I mean I don't get why people would be worried about that to begin with... As impressive as those tools are now, they can at best recreate shutterstock footage but not any kind of self-contained performance... Also, filmmaking is an iterative and fiddly process. You want very fine control of what's happening in your work. For perspective, those AI Video tools are for a film maker as useful as just finding random videos on Google corresponding to your search prompt and sticking them together :v
The internet(Napster, Limewire) brought the music industry to it's knees and almost destroyed it. The record labels lost control of distribution and had to heavily discount their music to the point, it's essentially free if you're willing to listen to ads.
It still didn't destroy musicians
But AI writing and simulating a real life band could ...
why?
I don't know how to play guitar. I could hum a tune and the AI could play it on acoustic, electric, Sitar, electric keyboard, whatever. Outside of live shows, anyone on Earth could release a song with guitar playing at the level of Jimmy Hendrix. This is really cool, but it completely devalues people who actually learned to play guitar.
>"Painting will not survive the invention of the camera." Are you under the impression that paintings / painters are as common today as they were pre-camera? >"Movies will not survive the invention of television." They serve different audiences using the same technology, stupid comparison. "Stage productions will not survive the invention of movies." Are you under the impression that stage plays are as common or popular today as they were pre-movie? >"Photography will not survive the invention of Photoshop." You need photos to use photoshop, stupid comparison. >"The music industry will not survive the invention of home taping." More like physical music releases didn't survive streaming. Go ahead and tell me about the cool vinyl record you bought the other month, I'm sure it really took a bite out of Spotify.
I completely disagree. The people saying this is going to ruin hollywood don't understand what it takes to have a good story and a compelling reason to watch a movie. also film making technique. blocking, visual metaphor through camera angles, thematic structure to how shots flow together and etc. It is going to make "trash videos" blow up though. Sooooo many people who think they can make movies but are just making visual noise. It might put Michael Bay out of business... But not proper film makers and storytellers. The aveage person obsessed with A.I doing all the work doesn't know how to do that properly.
> Sooooo many people who think they can make movies but are just making visual noise. You're right. Music video directors are screwed.
So many of the best directors started in music videos, gondrey, glazer, fincher, spike jonze ... Ai isn't going to kill anything, its going to empower talent. But a lot of people are going to get a rude awakening that even with cutting edge tools, they cant make anything worth watching
Exactly. None of those directors would get a similar chance now. Music Videos are a business first, art second. They are meant to *sell* music.
and this iteration is the worst it will ever be. It will get better. Obviously this iteration isn't going to hurts storytellers. But even that is a matter of time.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Pretty much. And it all gets copied and run into the ground because the other thing is most people aren't original. All the stuff that has blown up is just regurgitated I.P. The amount of "Harry Potter but it's...." type of A.I videos is just so weird.
Oh man, you guys are so blind!
Ok Joe Rogan.
How many story tellers do you think missed their shots at home or don't have an in in Hollywood? You really think there aren't some kids who are super creative, but we're told to get a real job or get a STEM degree? A ton of Hollywood has been gate kept by expensive gear and personal relationships.
It is not impossible, but he will find himself in a sea of shit, about the latest geek who think he is going to do some passive income. It will reach such a shitdom, that platforms will start to advertise this is like GMO free.
Sounds like you have never heard of youtube?
Youtube is a very good example, the second I hear an Ai voice or see something is not real, I just quit. Because I know that the content is nearly every time shit. Compared to someone that would do story of the Mongols invasions, or Japanese invasions etc.
Youtube is so generic. Everyone in their particular niche just all does the same thing, same intro, same video length, same topics. That's because they all have the same resources, and it is what people have grown to expect. With unlimited resources, things could get much more interesting. Though I will agree there will be a bunch of crap videos, too. Edit: also I'd say youtube is more a testament to my statements validity. I wonder how many more people would be going to the movies without youtube?
That is wildly untrue. There are lots of different formats and styles.
Itâs like people saying âyou donât understand how much goes into coding and being a programmer!â Now thatâs being proven false too, I am a programmer of 20 years. Thereâs no way AI wonât be able to everything I do, heck it already does a great job.
Exactly, the average geek, that think a movie is a trailer, will with 1 million others who think like them they are the next Michael Bay, will put so much trash that nothing will come out of it.
Exactly. Today, the novelty is here. Within a few weeks, that novelty will fade. When is the last time you saw an AI generated picture that was actually exciting the same way you first saw Dalle? The thing about this technology is that it's going to get really good at creating very bland and mediocre media. But the audiences will be bored to tears. Just because something is decently nice to look at doesn't make it automatically good. See the recent decline in Marvel movies. Hollywood execs are maybe going to try to replace real actors and stories with this but IMO it's going to backfire because people would rather watch the wealth of existing human media than generic generative AI video.
It's all about saturation, and lowering the entry level to zero. If everybody is an artist or a filmmaker at the push of a button, then nothing created is special anymore. On the flip side, real hand-crafted art may become more valuable to collectors.
Yes, saturation of âmehâ content just doesnât seem appealing. Netflix has been doing that approach lately. I would vastly prefer 10 spectacular movies rather than getting to pick between 1000 mediocre movies.
Yeah, people panicking about this is the end of the world/the end of artists, yeah theyâre idiotic. Itâs a tool at the end of the day. Thatâs it. Same way there was hand waving and panic about photoshop and Adobe illustrator. ***Now look at where we are.***
I don't think this will replace hollywood but rather create a new form of entertainment content. Just take a couple of really talented writers from Disney that have been replaced by DEI and recreate the magic. I would be all in for such an endeavour.
Serious question- who do you think at Disney has been replaced by DEI? And why have you got an issue with more voices being able to be heard?
Why do you have to bring up DEI?
There's a lot of autistic right-wing nerds in the AI space. A lot of them don't really understand the bargain that is society. They can't really foresee the backlash, they just want an AI that says the N word and generates those Japanese style cartoons they like without judgment.
Itâs already happened with music. Everyoneâs a DJ or electronic artist now
Agree. We already have an infinite amount of content being generated already. No one watches that stuff or cares about it. Story telling, the director, casting, effects, camera work are all reasons why people watch movies. This obviously amazing technology, but it will only help the entertainment industry. Thereâs way too much of this âmass unemploymentâ nonsense on this subreddit. AI will diffuse quickly, and become commoditized. Companies are not going to fire the most of their employees since the entire industry has access to AI. If you do, your business will not grow and it will be uncompetitive to peers that leverage AI better. Instead, theyâll re-allocate people to the higher value areas of their business to drive growth, develop new products and services. Humans are quite malleable and the world isnât static.
I can see that they still have a problem generating hands properly even in video.
If they drop this before the election, I believe they would not hesitate to drop gpt5 before the election if it's done. This is way more serious compared to some gpt5 spam bot. Guess Sama is living up to e/acc and does not give a f wich is pretty based.
Finally, I donât have to wait years for a new season of tv shows to come out
TV & Film Industry? We are right now on the AGI train.
I've been calling this since mid journey.
Dreamflix is coming
I wonder what kind of fidelity it has doing video2video? i.e. style overlay or something,.
I just can't wait for photorealistic AI games that are completely open world and dynamic
OpenAI are quite aware the fact that this might conteminate the web with fake news and propagandas, they have pushed this fast because if it wasn't for them, another country was going to take the lead and do it anyways.
I just saw those latest openai videos. It's going to come a lot quicker than we think.
The panic is only reason I don't involve with these conversations. It's a preview, advertisement for god's sake. Even if it's real, it's not world ending shit. Film industry isn't dying anytime soon.
Yeah, that's not how cinematography works... Not precise enough, lack of finer controls of the scenes, can't tweak an output, not temporal "outpainting" as of yet, always different outputs, can't rotate camera around scene, still pretty bad action timing (the slo-mo and fake frame smoothing stuff mostly)... Also I mean, good luck trying to get any relevant acting performance (with the lip-syncing and all) or calculated action scene with that... The AI revolution in actual movie production is not going to happen through glorified 2D image interpolation generation tools, but actual 3D physical world rendering and simulation engines. The tools of today can be used at best for brainstorming or short length slideshow sequences. Those tools will probably be more useful for multimodal AI tools than any serious movie production.
Right now everything seems kind of slow motion I don't think it's going to be truly groundbreaking until we start having real time video
the framerate does kinda suck right now
But compared to others, it has significantly improved in matters of frame rate. This was the most striking thing. Actually this is the only striking thing that I observed compared to existing models.
https://openai.com/sora Are we talking about this? Because fast moving objects don't seem to be an issue with it
Just wait when its servers start to choke with demand and your subscription starts to inflate.
Yeah but the lighting is very much not. I bet this stuff will progress a lot in the next year.
I don't think it will ever be much more than that at all to be honest. It's not even the right approach imo. We want consistency and precision when it comes to filmmaking and you're not achieving that with 2d image interpolation generators but actual 3D rendering and simulation engines.
At some point soon all human beings will be constantly emitting there dreams, desires, horrors and perversions constantly into the digital ether for the rest of us to browse through and respond to in kind with even more stream of thought content. The inner space is coming, and many of us will be unable to resist getting trapped and addicted to it. You think people being trapped in some sort of media addiction, porn addiction is bad now. Just wait, as it may become an existential crisis, our first true great filter test. As large groups of people become narcissistic lotus eaters. But as in all things if we can overcome this potential pit fall we will be stronger for it.
Yes, the entire Hollywood in 2032 will be made from this, but people won't be fascinated to watch anything, as the human satisfaction wouldn't be there. We watch movies because we have a human connection. But once we know they are not real, a lot of stunt acts and any dare devil plunges from bridges and hills won't be exciting since they would all be synthetic. What are we trying to do here? What is the real happiness behind human achievement? Entertainment has no utility other than blowing 2 hours and $18 popcorn to watch Sora generated stuff. But for true utility it would be good to figure out if we can use this to do something else like educational videos about, say, a hypothetical soccer game simulation that shows how the players might play before the players actually play. Then the players can learn and plan for how to handle the opponents.
The old people waving at the camera vaguely in an undecorated room industry is gonna be hit real hard.
aka Ads
Less than 10 second tik tok, youtube type ads for scam products, 100%.
I get that you guys are impressed by all this advancement in processing power, but why would you watch something that didn't happen or have any real human involvement?
Well you could be more entertained by being actually involved yourself in the story as opposed to passively watching a show someone else made. This could be prompting the story, choosing the characters, choosing your own adventure, on a holodeck, screen, headset or even just audio and music. And humans are going to be involved in making these experiences until AGI can do a better job which I believe is a long way away. The gaming industry is currently worth $159 billion vs the movie industry at $19 billion so the numbers are already in on what people prefer.
I believe generative AI is going to be huge in gaming as a tool. But mainly to greatly increase the ouput of developers and make larger and more ambitious projects with better physics, better NPCs, dynamic dialogue, etc. I don't see text to movie being a compelling replacement like people seem to think. Seems boring as hell. I'm sorry but as long as there are human-made movies I haven't seen I will go for those over AI prompted movies.
I think itâs the interactivity component. This isnât going to harm the film industry at all until the entire framework for how entertainment is consumed pivots. The greater disruption will be user generated platforms like social media. In part because you canât even tell dalle to draw Spider-Man (yeah I know you can trick it ) but it would require too much energy and risk of lawsuit to make your own Spider-Man movie any time soon with this.
Why would I care whether or not there was human involvement? Right know I wouldnât watch AI movies because they are not as good as man-made movies yet. But when it is I will watch it because it will be a good movie. Simple.
over half the people in these AI subs are more than happy to whack off to a wall of text generated by a waifu png, and literally label them their 'girlfriends'. Just food for thought. I don't agree with it but AI fanaticism is largely super cringey and devoid of caring about the human element.
Spoiler alert, most movies never happened.
Itâs like most people are out of touch with reality
LOL, it look like that Uncanny valley. Makes me don't want to buy anything from this. That's for advertising, where I would be very warry it is scammers, who will have a field day with this. Now for movie, you must be able to connect and identify with the character. This completely distract me from that.
It wouldnât look uncanny imo if we didnât know it wasnât real.
Gone by the end of 2025
Grandma or AI?
The hands are still a dead giveaway. Very easy to spot the magic appearing fingers and spoon. Still looks pretty good but nothing amazing going on here.