Soon
-
I unironically think nic cage would kill it in a parody of this idea. Randomly gets and loses a prosthetic finger between scenes. The background changes slightly randomly. And instead of a full script he's given the equivalent of a prompt for each scene and just has to "figure it out"
This has me wondering how often, if ever, Cage has ad-libbed a scene.
-
That's exactly how capitalism works. AI is cheaper than hiring people, and any company that doesn't take any and every opportunity to increase profits is failing at capitalism.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]so you don’t know how capitalism works
mcdonalds is cheap and largely made by automation, in fact if it was made by automation today most people probably wouldn’t realise … but restaurants and cafes still exist
if there is demand for organic movies with no ai then we’re going to build it
-
You can bet that pitches for movies/ TV series are already written with LLMs and first drafts of scripts probably too.
A bunch of first draft song lyrics, too. I know a lot of idea generation for songs has gone that way. Most songs in popular genres sit in the same basic scaffold so it's been easy for them to say "give me a (4, 6, or
line verse talking about such and such. Then give me a chorus that reinforces that idea. Ok, how do we move the second verse forward? Give me a couple of chorus variations. Big emotional high point bridge". Then they go through it with a scalpel to make it coherent and keep it flowing. Then they do another 10, varying the number of lines, the number of verses, or remove the bridge or whatever. -
This post did not contain any content.
Sounds like a Donald Trump speech
-
so you don’t know how capitalism works
mcdonalds is cheap and largely made by automation, in fact if it was made by automation today most people probably wouldn’t realise … but restaurants and cafes still exist
if there is demand for organic movies with no ai then we’re going to build it
So you don't know how much people don't care.
Sure, they'll exist. Just like how parts for old rifles are technically still being made today. But most people will never see one, nor do they care to see one. Most people don't care about the quality of films, hence the success of a lot of the Marvel films despite rapid decreases in quality, or the Star Wars sequels. I shouldn't need to explain why most people only seeing the shitty AI slop films is a bad thing.
-
So you don't know how much people don't care.
Sure, they'll exist. Just like how parts for old rifles are technically still being made today. But most people will never see one, nor do they care to see one. Most people don't care about the quality of films, hence the success of a lot of the Marvel films despite rapid decreases in quality, or the Star Wars sequels. I shouldn't need to explain why most people only seeing the shitty AI slop films is a bad thing.
But most people will never see one, nor do they care to see one
then who cares?
this is like being sad people don’t care for Marionette shows anymore
-
How is a complaint about script quality somehow disproven by Veo 3, a video generation AI?
Did you ask an AI to come up with a reply?
Do half of you realise you would get better quality discussion if you weren’t so cunty
-
Do half of you realise you would get better quality discussion if you weren’t so cunty
wrote on last edited by [email protected]That's a fair point in general, and a good reminder.
But a person using AI is telling me they don't value their own mind to the point they rather outsource it to a dumb prediction machine, so why exactly am I supposed to entertain their commentary?
-
That's a fair point in general, and a good reminder.
But a person using AI is telling me they don't value their own mind to the point they rather outsource it to a dumb prediction machine, so why exactly am I supposed to entertain their commentary?
a person using AI is telling me they don’t value their own mind to the point they rather outsource it to a dumb prediction machine
Why do you believe this is so?
Most creative work is taking what we think of (an idea or thought) and putting it into action, a movie is just a more elaborate version of a story which we have been telling each other since the beginning of time
If I tell Veo3 a story and it brings the story to life with visuals and audio where have I not valued my own mind?
This feels like elitism: I had to learn a whole craft (singing/song writing/instrument etc) to bring my idea to life, you didn't use a fancy camera with fancy video editing software, you just told a computer what you'd like to see or hear, how dare you!
The reason why the original hot take is bad is because it is simply referencing all the most obvious limitations of LLM's at the time (problems with fingers, over explaining answers)
This would be like in 1995 saying smartphones?? like tiny computers that fit in your pocket? Wow that'll be so shit! Oh great so now my wrist watch computer takes 5 minutes to boot up so I can check the time? and then it'll probably blue screen of death! I bet I'll get a virus then have to run a virus scan on it ughhhhhh
-
But most people will never see one, nor do they care to see one
then who cares?
this is like being sad people don’t care for Marionette shows anymore
Fucking hell. I... really gave you too much credit, huh? "Who cares that the only films average people will see are AI trash?" Like, if you don't get the problem here, I really don't think I can explain it.
-
This post did not contain any content.
God. They really are going to do this. And then scream and cry when people hate it.
-
Fucking hell. I... really gave you too much credit, huh? "Who cares that the only films average people will see are AI trash?" Like, if you don't get the problem here, I really don't think I can explain it.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Like, if you don’t get the problem here, I really don’t think I can explain it.
tbh I might need AI to explain it to me because to me you just said: people like trash
hence the success of a lot of the Marvel films despite rapid decreases in quality, or the Star Wars sequels.
The part I don't get is, what difference does it make (to you) if the trash is made by a guy using AI or made by a company?
The main thing is that quality movie cinema goers like yourself have an organic free range no ai involved movie experience, and so long as there is enough of you out there (and there should be) then you'll be able to enjoy your cinematography experiences while the rest of us watch slop (and ultimately isn't this what is currently happening anyway?)
Not only that but are you assuming that AI and computational power will never reach a point where we'll be able to create a wide variety of films and movies that are on par with or exceed today's movies?
Are we assuming there will never be a movie that's made using AI that is better than these:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_considered_the_worst
or the garbage that's on TV at 3 in the morning?
-
i mean it literally is, this hot take from 2023 is already out of date with veo3
and this is after 2 years, can’t even imagine how incredible it will be in 20 or 30 years
wrote on last edited by [email protected]The current models depend on massive investment into server farms. They aren't generating profit, and probably can't. When the companies involved realize it's not going to happen, they'll pull it all. That will generate a new AI winter, and in 20 or 30 years, maybe the pieces will be picked up and the field will go through another summer cycle. This sort of boom/bust cycle has happened before in AI.
And no, self-hosted models aren't going to make up for it. They aren't as powerful, and more importantly, they will never be able to drive mass market adaptation.
-
The current models depend on massive investment into server farms. They aren't generating profit, and probably can't. When the companies involved realize it's not going to happen, they'll pull it all. That will generate a new AI winter, and in 20 or 30 years, maybe the pieces will be picked up and the field will go through another summer cycle. This sort of boom/bust cycle has happened before in AI.
And no, self-hosted models aren't going to make up for it. They aren't as powerful, and more importantly, they will never be able to drive mass market adaptation.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]The current models depend on massive investment into server farms
I hate to tell you this but your knowledge of AI appears to be limited to 2023
You missed the entire Deepseek fiasco which basically put an end to the "just order more chips" strategy of AI
Chinese company DeepSeek made waves earlier this year when it revealed it had built models comparable to OpenAI’s flagship products for a tiny fraction of the training cost. Likewise, researchers from Seattle’s Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) and Stanford University claim to have trained a model for as little as US$50.
Or if you'd like to read an absolutely mega article on it: https://stratechery.com/2025/deepseek-faq/
And no, self-hosted models aren’t going to make up for it. They aren’t as powerful, and more importantly, they will never be able to drive mass market adaptation
Both Samsung and Apple have on device AI already, you've not seen the Apple ad? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL88A5F9V3k
They're only planning more and more features using it
They aren’t as powerful
We've had insane gains in locallama's since 2022, including but not limited to this from the other day https://lemmy.world/post/30442991
And every few weeks a newer and improved model comes out, I've never seen tech so amazing and progress so fast as I have AI
-
The current models depend on massive investment into server farms
I hate to tell you this but your knowledge of AI appears to be limited to 2023
You missed the entire Deepseek fiasco which basically put an end to the "just order more chips" strategy of AI
Chinese company DeepSeek made waves earlier this year when it revealed it had built models comparable to OpenAI’s flagship products for a tiny fraction of the training cost. Likewise, researchers from Seattle’s Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) and Stanford University claim to have trained a model for as little as US$50.
Or if you'd like to read an absolutely mega article on it: https://stratechery.com/2025/deepseek-faq/
And no, self-hosted models aren’t going to make up for it. They aren’t as powerful, and more importantly, they will never be able to drive mass market adaptation
Both Samsung and Apple have on device AI already, you've not seen the Apple ad? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL88A5F9V3k
They're only planning more and more features using it
They aren’t as powerful
We've had insane gains in locallama's since 2022, including but not limited to this from the other day https://lemmy.world/post/30442991
And every few weeks a newer and improved model comes out, I've never seen tech so amazing and progress so fast as I have AI
Deepseek is not the huge leap it appears. It's better, but not at all what was initially claimed.
Nor is smartphone AI going to do the things people what AI to do. It won't let the CEO take your job.
-
Deepseek is not the huge leap it appears. It's better, but not at all what was initially claimed.
Nor is smartphone AI going to do the things people what AI to do. It won't let the CEO take your job.
why are you linking me to articles i read ages ago?
Nor is smartphone AI going to do the things people what AI to do. It won’t let the CEO take your job.
You think AI is only useful if it’s taking someones job?
-
why are you linking me to articles i read ages ago?
Nor is smartphone AI going to do the things people what AI to do. It won’t let the CEO take your job.
You think AI is only useful if it’s taking someones job?
why are you linking me to articles i read ages ago?
Perhaps because you didn't understand what they said.
You think AI is only useful if it’s taking someones job?
It's why companies are dumping billions into it.
If the models were actually getting substantially more efficient, we wouldn't be talking about bringing new nuclear reactors online just to run it.
-
I feel like on image/video generation, I can agree that the recent months have shown a lot of progress.
I'm not so much feeling it on the text generation front, it's felt about the same to me for a while here, notably impressive, but still a bit... off...
Probably there is a lower ceiling in text generation to things that are considered "progress" by everyone. People can verbalize exactly what is wrong with pictures and video, but for text, if it is coherent and gets the point across what is progress beyond passing the Turing test?
-
why are you linking me to articles i read ages ago?
Perhaps because you didn't understand what they said.
You think AI is only useful if it’s taking someones job?
It's why companies are dumping billions into it.
If the models were actually getting substantially more efficient, we wouldn't be talking about bringing new nuclear reactors online just to run it.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Perhaps because you didn’t understand what they said.
they repeat what i said, did you read them? previously ai model training was entirely based on simply buying more chips as fast and as hard as possible, deepseek changed that
From your own article
Is it impressive that DeepSeek-V3 cost half as much as Sonnet or 4o to train? I guess so. But OpenAI and Anthropic are not incentivized to save five million dollars on a training run, they’re incentivized to squeeze every bit of model quality they can. DeepSeek are obviously incentivized to save money because they don’t have anywhere near as much.
https://www.seangoedecke.com/is-deepseek-fast/
The revelations regarding its cost structure, GPU utilization, and innovative capabilities position DeepSeek as a formidable player.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/research-exposes-deepseek-ai-training-165025904.html
^ fyi that article you linked to is an AI summary of a semianalysis.com article, maybe AI is useful after all
If the models were actually getting substantially more efficient, we wouldn’t be talking about bringing new nuclear reactors online just to run it.
Youtube uses a fuck ton of power but is an incredibly efficient video delivery service
The growth and popularity of AI and its uses is simply outpacing the efficiency gains
-
Perhaps because you didn’t understand what they said.
they repeat what i said, did you read them? previously ai model training was entirely based on simply buying more chips as fast and as hard as possible, deepseek changed that
From your own article
Is it impressive that DeepSeek-V3 cost half as much as Sonnet or 4o to train? I guess so. But OpenAI and Anthropic are not incentivized to save five million dollars on a training run, they’re incentivized to squeeze every bit of model quality they can. DeepSeek are obviously incentivized to save money because they don’t have anywhere near as much.
https://www.seangoedecke.com/is-deepseek-fast/
The revelations regarding its cost structure, GPU utilization, and innovative capabilities position DeepSeek as a formidable player.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/research-exposes-deepseek-ai-training-165025904.html
^ fyi that article you linked to is an AI summary of a semianalysis.com article, maybe AI is useful after all
If the models were actually getting substantially more efficient, we wouldn’t be talking about bringing new nuclear reactors online just to run it.
Youtube uses a fuck ton of power but is an incredibly efficient video delivery service
The growth and popularity of AI and its uses is simply outpacing the efficiency gains
they repeat what i said, did you read them? previously ai model training was entirely based on simply buying more chips as fast and as hard as possible, deepseek changed that
Yes, and it says exactly what I claimed. DeepSeek is an improvement, but not to the level initially reported. Not even close.
Youtube uses a fuck ton of power but is an incredibly efficient video delivery service
What a colossally stupid thing to say. We're not looking at starting up new nuclear reactors to run YouTube.
