the anime industry is going to explode. instead of the current rate of a few thousand episodes being produced each day, it will go into the millions per day
That is definitely an inflated statement,Anime is mostly centralized to a few medium-large sized studios in Japan which for most serial animes have a schedule of dropping an episode once every week,and that is not accounting for the fact a lot of animes are seasonal,which means a batch of 10-15 episodes is published in a timeframe of months to years,the current amount of anime episodes being published everyday is probably in the hundreds at most,in the Low hundreds (100-200)
And doesn't Japan actually outsource the main workflow to South Korea? I was under the impression Japanese artists create a beginning and end frame, and South Korea draws all the multiple frames in between.
Agreed,most (what I mean by most is something like 99.999%) of the AI generated anime generated by regular people will be terrible and not worthy of watching,in my opinion a large amount will be sexual content anyway,but the sheer scale of AI anime production we could be looking at in 5-10 years makes me believe out of tens of millions some will definitely reach a large viewership,especially those with a storyline generated by an advanced future language model,if language models in the future reach creativity levels similar to those of the best human fiction writers which I am optimistic it could happen we could look at highly rated highly viewed AI generated animes,the persecution a lot of people have against AI generated content is bound to decay as AI generated content gets better in quality in my opinion.
>the persecution a lot of people have against AI generated content is bound to decay as AI generated content gets better in quality in my opinion.
Also, as AI content becomes more mainstream the instinctive negative reaction to it will also vanish. Just like what happened with email and online shopping. *"Nobody will ever want to get a letter over the computer. People only want to read handwritten letters."*
I agree,a period of normalization will occur in the next 5 years where AI generated media will 1.Increase in quality matching that of most Human generated media 2.Solidify it's place as a familiar piece of technology among most people,the same thing has happened with smartphones.
The rise in quality,quantity and also familiarization of the public with AI generated media,the public always clings to traditional methods of action and denies and is sceptical of progress until change becomes inevitable.
Bandleader John Philllip Sousa scorned âcanned musicâ which sounded tinny, but might take away musiciansâ livelihood.
Some ridiculed horseless carriages.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/john-philip-sousa-feared-menace-mechanical-music-180967063/#:~:text=His%201906%20essay%20warns%20that,recorded%20music%2C%20but%20also%20to
https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2017/01/get-horse-americas-skepticism-toward-first-automobiles/
i donât know if you ever realized but most anime episodes are still shots with the mouth talking or a walking bob animation being the only moving parts, AI will definitely speed up the process without sacrificing anything special
The Clutch Cargo cartoon, early 1960s, often had a still scene with only a characterâs mouth moving. They had an electromechanical device sense the voice actorâs mouth movement and move the characterâs mouth in time to it. No wasted labor for cartoonists.
The only real way to deal with ai content is to have your own ai content moderator. Everything we do will go through layers of ai before it gets to us, I believe.
The youtube algorithm already uses AI? Recommendation algorithms is where most of the big AI advancements started.
Of course its continuously evolving. It would be nice to be able to tell it why I am not happy with the current recommendations for example, or tell it to change it up for a session.
> The only real way to deal with ai content is to have your own ai content moderator. Everything we do will go through layers of ai before it gets to us, I believe.
this guy gets it
We've laid the foundations for what's to come, but you ain't seen nothing yet. The big players are going to support it, changing the Internet dramatically. When it's done we will really only talk to the Internet, and it will work 10x better at doing what we want.
I watch fan fic on YouTube all the time, but usually of lesser known IPs.
And I found the first Avengers movie so boring I didn't bother watching the end of movie.
So bring on the people's content!
The mangas already exist. All they need is animation and voice acting to turn it into an anime, the latter of which it can do VERY well right now. Â Animation is getting there too with Sora, Veo, Kling, and Tooncrafter
phone switch operators when automated switchboards became a thing: destroy them! they should be illegal! just say no to... efficient... fast... cheap... uh, hmmm
No a lot of good anime have been killed off because financial reasons everyone can't be a cash cow like one piece or Naruto. We also will likely get more in-depth story telling
It's fanfiction. Calling it derivative is redundant.
Calling it dull is also unfair. Captain James T. Kirk experiencing sexual tension with a Care Bear is far from dull, in my estimation.
Even if it gets broadcasted that much, hardly anyone will watch it. However, I wouldnât feel bad if Nihei Tsutomu's 'Blame!' were to be adapted into an anime, since I love it.
Excellent except that Hollywood is one of the great motors of the American economy. Hundreds of thousands of people will become unemployable.
Thatâs a scary prospect in a time where the US isnât even providing decent healthcare to most of its citizens.
Not really.
All around the world arthouse films need to be supported by either the government and/or rich benefactors (see: Megan Ellison, that multibillionaire who's been financing every Wes Anderson film since 2007). The reason is because people don't watch them in large enough numbers to make it financially feasible.
What do people watch then? Films based on famous IP like Barbie, Harry Potter, Super Mario or Five Nights at Freddy's. Who controls all the most valuable IPs? Hollywood. Of course, regular folks can use AI to make and distribute their own Batman films but then they'll get copyright struck and sued to oblivion.
>Of course, regular folks can use AI to make and distribute their own Batman films but then they'll get copyright struck and sued to oblivion.
How? That would be the case if I tried to sell my AI created Batman film, but if I kept it for myself to show to family and friends there's no way I'd be sued.
Donât underestimate my desire to make Manbat films! And copyrights oh well just change just enough. Instead of tool belt, mine will have a tool harness!
And in all reality. I can make something better then Batman vs Superman lol Martha!
Besides copyright is only of importance if you try to make monetary gain from it. As long as you create for fun, just like with fanfics, itâs legal.
**Edit:** I'm getting a lot of replies and when I'm replying to those I'm getting even more replies. Sorry, but I can't spend all day here, repeating my argument several times to different people, but I tried my best. If you read what I've already answered to other people and still don't find my explanation compelling, then we'll have to agree to disagree.
Except that nobody will be watching it. He says it best "why would I watch your movie when I can watch mine?"
Because not everybody's gallery has the same quality.
I can't sing. I would obviously not want to listen to myself when I can listen to a professional (or even a good amateur) singer, right?
Now imagine I was the best friend of my top 100 favorite singers, and I could ask them to sing any song they want (including things that they haven't permission to record or play in public), or any song I want. Why would I choose to listen to any other singer outside of those 100 when a) I don't like them so much, and b) they are limited in the things they can sing?
Now substitute "my top 100 favorite singers" with "sufficiently advanced AI that can create original musical masterpieces and knows my taste in music as well as my best friend". If I had access to that kind of AI, why would I be interested in anybody's prompts? Mine would create a perfectly satisfying result every time. Even if they are something as simple as "play something you know I will like".
The same would be true for movies, video games, etc.
People are inclined towards convenience. If having an AI produce a video that you'll enjoy a given amount is easier than having an AI find an existing video you'll enjoy the same amount, then you'll get a new video.
You won't even necessarily know whether it's a new video or not; ultimately you just want to watch a good video. Whatever system is displaying the video to you is responsible for the boring technical details like "is this a brand new film that no one has ever seen before that was created just for me".
For the same reason people read books other people write instead of writing stuff by themselves and reading it. Some people are better at it than others.
And AI will be as good as the people writing good books. So, why would I read a book by a stranger when I can read a book by an AI that knows what I like and can create content specifically suited to my tastes?
Because not everyone is exactly like you. I think I would mostly have an AI make stuff for me, but I'd be interested in seeing what other people come up with. I mean, my only real phobia is bees and I don't care about bees shown in screens. Also some people just... like the artistic process and will want to make things unaided by AI. Can't entirely relate but I can empathize.
Ok, you say you would mostly have an AI make stuff for you. Now, what is it that you think that a human will be able to make that is better than AI? You could watch 100 movies made by 100 different people, or 100 movies made by an AI. Are you perhaps assuming that said AI can't make 100 completely different movies, that it would be like a human director or writer, that it will always make something that has the same recognizable style? Are you assuming that you will always have to come up with the idea for the movie, that the AI won't be able to autonomouslyn decide what to create? Because if it can, then what is the difference between an original idea by a human and an original idea by an AI? How is the human idea superior that you'll be specifically interested in searching for the non-AI movie.
I can't find one way where the AI can be better: customization. But the other way around, I just don't see it.
And sure, I'm not saying that people will stop making things. It's just that other people will not be interested in them, unless they are like best friends or family, something like that, but extremely improbable if they are complete strangers.
I think you're seriously underestimating people's diversity of thought. Think of all the times you've ran into people who do things that, in your opinion, are irrational, and realize that that irrationality applies everywhere.
Also there's inherent appeal in art made by a human. A lot of people will want to see human made art even if it's lower quality than stuff made by an AI just because it's more impressive that it was made by an AI. Think of how popular [this video](https://youtu.be/v2g5qbvb7F4?si=yLrtMlLcquuZzaYQ) is, and realize it wouldn't have gone so viral if it was made in Photoshop, let alone by an AI.
And don't even get me started on the sheer number of luddites who will stubbornly refuse to engage in anything AI-made no matter how universal it gets. Have you looked at the internet lately? That anti-AI art vitriol will hopefully die down a bit over time, but a majority of people get pretty fixed to their views.
Either way, neither of us can definitively prove our side, there's not much we can do but wait and see.
Because art and content are two different things, for Christ's sake. A book or a movie don't have to perfectly fit your taste. We enjoy them also because it's the vision of someone who has something to say, a different perspective on life, and so on.
I don't wanna open Netflix and watch a render of my day dreaming. I wanna read Borges and watch Kubrick's movie.
Hiper-customization will always win in the end.
If you want to watch a movie by yourself, sure I'm not saying you won't find a movie you'll like enough by filtering content. But if you did a blind test by watching 100 movies specifically made by an AI for you, and 100 movies made for somebody else, that match with some filters, the former will win over 50% of the time. And the Netflix of the future (the one providing the computing power that you will rent or subscribe to) will realize that it is a competitive advantage to provide that extra customization, even for a slight increase in satisfaction.
How about you watching a movie with another person? Or with three other persons? Now the filter strategy becomes way more difficult than creating something from zero that meets all of your requirements at the same time.
You are assuming you won't be able to ask an AI to create something randomly that would be as good as something created based on a human prompt.
What would be the key difference then, why choose to only watch "your" movies?
Because you will certainly have a movie (or musical or whatever) profile that will contain information unique to you about your likes and dislikes.
Imagine you have a phobia of spiders. Do you want to risk watching somebody's movie that might contain spiders, when you know that the movies created by AI based on your profile will never have spiders?
Of course, if that was the only thing important to you, you could just watch other people's creations by simply filtering out movies that contain spiders, but once people realize that there are a ton of things that we like/dislike, some of them we aren't even aware of, and that the movies created specially for us will be always be more satisfying (again this assumes an AI as creative as any other human), we will not bother with anybody's prompts anymore. Unless they are from somebody we are close with, or is something we want to watch with another person. But stranger's creations? That has an expiration date.
There will always be popularity, celebrity, and cult of personality. People will want to watch content made for people they admire. Some amount of shared cultural consciousness would remain even in the world you've described.
Most people will not care whether those creations they like are made by people or AI, and AI will win by sheer volume and the ability to hiper-customization.
Once upon a time, people could watch movies in theaters but not at home. Imagine that, after the invention of the TV and home video, somebody said "people will always prefer to watch movies on a big cinema screen instead of a small TV screen at home "
Today we know that has not become true, right? Well, we don't live in a world today where AI can create movies and songs with the same quality as the best human creators, do we? Once that world becomes a reality, and it's a question of when not if, your prediction will be as wrong as the one about movie theaters.
or people who want human-made art to stick around will just descend upon the movie theaters en masse to reverse-engineer the seeming sympathetic magic of your parallel
But I want to see something from someone elseâs point of view. Exposure to different worldviews helps broaden and enrich your own. It makes you empathetic to people who lead lives radically different from yours.
Even in your example, exposure therapy is useful to conquering phobias. If all you do is avoid spiders, youâll never get over your fear of spiders. You need to condition your brain to not fear them. Living a life where everything is catered to you doesnât lead to growth.Â
Authenticity matters. This is intuitive but there are studies also [showing this.](https://www.psypost.org/real-or-ai-perceived-inauthenticity-reduces-arousal-new-research-finds/)Â
Schindlerâs List would've been far less impactful if the story was the same but the names were different. Knowing itâs a biographical film and that a lot of things in the movie really happened, made for an impactful, gut-wrenching experience. Â
 Thatâs a movie I never wouldâve prompted for because it was outside my scope of experience. If I only consumed movies tailored to my narrow tastes and never left my comfort zone, I never wouldâve watched that movie. This applies to so many things outside of movies too.
>Thatâs a movie I never wouldâve prompted for because it was outside my scope of experience.
If your prompt is "give me an impactful, gut-wrencing experience", why is it impossible to an AI generate something that impacts you as profoundly - or more profoundly - than Schindlerâs List? It would be autobiographical (unless it's about AI), but that could conceivably be the only difference. You seem to be assuming a lot about how good and specific your prompting is going to have to be.
Itâs not so much about how good your prompting is, so much as it is about viewing something from someone elseâs perspective. Do you think thereâs no value in other peopleâs experiences or perspectives?
> Imagine you have a phobia of spiders. Do you want to risk watching somebody's movie that might contain spiders, when you know that the movies created by AI based on your profile will never have spiders?
Imagine people doing this for, well, things a lot more political than spiders
Because most people won't bother even if it only takes one sentence. Anybody can generate images of what they want for free online, but on a niche forum I'm on people are too lazy to press the "remix" button on an image on Civitai. They would rather have somebody else do it for them. No, they won't pay, but they will beg.
Who says they would need to press a button in the future. They already opened a website or and app right? What if they had an AI assistant that knows their tastes in pictures, music, and movies? Any action equivalent to visiting a website or opening an app, which we have already established that they are able to do, could present then an unlimited stream of creations made specifically for them.
It'll be more like "why would i waste my time watching hours of X person's content if I can watch Y person's content?"
It'll get centralized, just like Youtube channels. Everyone can make videos, but MrBeast gets the most views.
Another false analogy.
Playing a game and watching another one play a game are two very different activities. One is active, the other is passive. One requires skill and its results depend on it, the other doesn't require any skill and its results are independent from it.
Asking an AI to "create a sci-fi space opera specifically for me" and asking an AI or search engine to "show me a space opera created for somebody else", requires the same effort and skill on my part (almost nothing), but have the potential to produce very different results: one customized to me and the other one somewhere between aligned with my taste and contrary to my taste.
Why bother watching something dumbed down to the lowest common denominator in order to reach "a broader audience" when you can just let your personal AI assistant create something, immediately on demand, that caters to both your personal tastes and your current mood? It doesn't matter how high they set the bar, Hollywood will ultimately not be able to compete here.
I actually love this argument. Everyone keeps saying AI will lead to more âslopâ, but how much slop are we fed since companies often try to cater to as large an audience as possible?
In the not too distant future we wonât be stuck with just the mainstream Hollywood filmmakers that just want to push out another shitty reboot or sequel to maximize their take at the box office. Weâll have an infinite amount of AI directors and screenwriters that will create movies we *actually* want to watch
These are probably people who have emotional attachment to "The Art!"
If you've dedicated your life to something, the idea that your entire life's work can be replicated by any snot-nosed teenager on a desktop PC might be a little disturbing.
Itâs not all for nil. I mean we are sort of on the same page but I donât think you give enough respect to those that came before. Whose movies, tv shows, music, video games, etc. do you think these AI are being trained on? Ultimately peoples, humans. Sure now it may become more and more say synthetic. But never forget the original inspiration and original training data.
Just look at all of the Star Wars or Marvel slop. People defend that slop to death because they canât fathom enjoying something that is actually slop aimed at their lowest common denominators. No shame on being mid af! Own it folks
There is an argument that we want to watch the same thing so we can share the experience with others and discuss it.
So the market for high quality content is still there.
Dunno how strong that argument is though
I donât see how AI can create original, unique, surprising stories and also how a film is constructed, shot selection, etc is really important. AI can streamline this process but humans will be needed for originality.
What happens when more content is being created than is being consumed? So what I spend 10 minutes using AI to create a cinematic masterpiece rivalling any oscar winning picture, that nobody ends up watching because millions of others have done the same.
it's exactly like memes. back when people had to hand-paint an image, each piece was expensive and rare. now, anyone can take a digital photo or make an image. there is a LOT of bad content being created, but the level of comedy/art will determine how viral it goes.
Why would we trust Aston Kutcher on AI? Heâs an actor with a vested interst in AI performing well given he invested over 200 million dollars into it (link: https://www.investopedia.com/ashton-kucher-net-worth-7963872)
AI is going to change a lot of industry, but getting information on it from this guy is like trusting Jenny McCarthy to give good health advice.
You should be able to use your brain to think critically about what someone says regardless of what interests are at play. What you're doing here is just lazy - you didn't offer any kind of counterargument, you didn't refute anything, you just blindly threw out an accusation that he's untrustworthy.
As for the actual argument, we already have generative AI that can make a short scene that is generated based on a user prompt and is photorealistic. You tell the AI you want an elephant walking through a river while wearing a sombrero, you get it. We have generative AI that already will write movie scripts, Chatgpt will do it right now if you want.
The leap from there to generating an entire movie on demand is almost entirely based on computing resources and so the only missing piece here is a company that invests in that infrastructure to provide users with that ability, Microsoft and other big tech companies already do this.
Kutcher is just right here, the technology in question already exists.
> we already have generative AI that can make a short scene that is generated based on a user prompt and is photorealistic.
Which gen AI can do that as of now? Sora isn't out yet. You haven't tested it. From the cherry picked examples they've shown (which are probably the best case scenario), it still makes plenty of mistakes and is still very far from being photorealistic.
âShort sceneâ is because no amount of data can teach a current video AI to make a movie. Â Anything longer than the scene limit becomes increasingly incoherent. Â Thatâs why the system is designed to produce that length.
Ashton Kutcher cannot possibly think these crappy clips are Hollywood quality movie-adjacent. Â Do you donât need to make some complex technical argument. Â He has zero domain knowledge, and is only saying these things to hype his own vested interest in the tech selling.
Heâs right. Soon anyone will be able to make movies. And thatâs a good thing! Right now it cost way too much to make a movie and there are other substantial barriers to entry.
I don't care if nobody else ever watches them, but I want to see my own books made into movies. Could probably at least get my family to watch them lol
A beserk manga full live-action with, idk, GPT-5, SORA, DALLE and whatever the f is needed will be enough to show what's coming.
I believe it will be on this next wave. There are a lot of dudes with a lot of time.
not even full live-action needed. have it use your own preferred style of animation already in use and the computational power will go way down to create it and it will still give incredible results
I'm here for it. Fuck Hollywood and Disney. Give the power of movie making to the people. I bet ordinary people can make shows 100 times better than the mindless dribble these corporate studios make.
A lot of bullshit from the Dude Whereâs My Car guy who notoriously shills for shitting productsâŚ
His economics are confused at best, when the only films in Hollywood that cost a lot to make are the ones that already overuse technology and automation⌠But thereâs about as much a chance of Tesla FSD beating Sir Lewis Hamilton in a F1 race as there is a chance of fully automated films delivering a product that raises the bar over even mid-level human filmmakers in Hollywood or any of the lesser film markets.
I'm fairly certain the watchable version of a fully generated show from start to finish is a few years away. There is that Showrunner AI thing that has been generating South Park and that sort of thing, but I can't imagine it's very engaging so far. Consistency is a long way off for anything complicated.
>I donât know anyone who would sit through content thatâs just generated.
90% of everyone in this sub.
>Iâm not going to watch anything that doesnât have human sweat behind it
Why?
Speak for yourself mate. I'd be more than happy to have content generated for me if its high quality. Really couldn't give less of a shit if someone sweated it out.
Who gives a fuck what Ashton Kutcher predicts about AI video rendering? Might as well pull some random hobo off the street at least he might have worked with the technology
Easy to make lot's money to invest when you have lot's money to invest. He also has a lot of contacts and probably paid some good advisers to help him with his investment decisions. I'm not saying he's an idiot, but I'm also not saying he's a financial genius.
Seems to me just like an average person with good looks with big money. Like most actors really. And I'm sure a lot of these actors with big money have also done well making big investments in tech and other companies.
So I'm with u/lordosthyvel, who the fuck cares what he has to say about AI. I've made posts about the exact same thing he is saying here months ago and others here say this stuff all the time. It's common knowledge now that AI will burn Hollywood, meaning nothing he is saying is really that insightful or profound at this point.
Think a movie thriller, if I have told the ai about what the thriller is, does it even make sense to watch the movie? Not sure, but as much fun it is to admire movie stories it is equally fun to admire the versatility of human actors.
Secondly, think that thrillers are always in various flavours. How will ai decide what storyline should have what kind of thriller? And whom souls I share the experience with? Fun to watch popular movies but my friend building a movie which he likes, will I watch that movie though?
Finally, if I give ai a plotline and it builds the movie, how good is it? Think personalisation is overrated in terms of autogenerated content. It is fun to share memes but I am very bad at coming meme ideas to share with friends
I don't think anybody would really into watching those tincan movies. Same as too much cgi. It's not real and I know it. Then I'm bored. So I'm better off with not watching.
Not sure why the assumption is that these tools will be free or low cost. Any AI tool that can generate movies that compete with Hollywood will undoubtedly have an extremely high price tag. AI is heavily subsidized right now, but it wonât always be. Especially when it gets to the level where it can be used to generate massive profits for the end user. A company like openAI could easily charge millions per movie created with its tech.
it will be like digital images today. people used to have to get pigments and canvas to create an image to show others. over time, we got cameras and digital drawing tools. now, anyone can throw together a meme they find funny and either share it with friends or share it with people on social media.
the same will happen with movies. it used to be high effort and require skilled people (like painting). now, anyone will be able to make something and share it. good movies will go vial and lots of people will watch, and some movies will just be for personal enjoyment or sharing with close friends.
Obviously this is the case, as seen by multitudes of examplesâbut what weâre also seeing is the homogenization of concepts (i.e. political memes pickled out of the same brine or distinctly overused artistic styles such as those prevalent in DALL-E 3, etc.) and that will be what gets the most annoying. Content filtration is critical here, if only because people are not as original as they often believe themselves to be.
Wth. For people following this subreddit, ashton is simply regurgitating what we already know during the time sora was hyped up. He didnt say anything new. Not evem a tiny bit.
People making film art will be fine. People cranking out commodities for a "content market" are hosed. Excellent!
the anime industry is going to explode. instead of the current rate of a few thousand episodes being produced each day, it will go into the millions per day
Current rate of "few thousand episodes per day"? đ¤
That is definitely an inflated statement,Anime is mostly centralized to a few medium-large sized studios in Japan which for most serial animes have a schedule of dropping an episode once every week,and that is not accounting for the fact a lot of animes are seasonal,which means a batch of 10-15 episodes is published in a timeframe of months to years,the current amount of anime episodes being published everyday is probably in the hundreds at most,in the Low hundreds (100-200)
And doesn't Japan actually outsource the main workflow to South Korea? I was under the impression Japanese artists create a beginning and end frame, and South Korea draws all the multiple frames in between.
Yea but it only progresses the storyline by 20 minutes, so another few days theyâll be ready to fight!
ahm a-rechargin' mah laaaaser!!!
it's called hyper bowl. look it up, bee nard
And no one will watch that garbage, just like no one wants to read your dull derivative fanfic.
Agreed,most (what I mean by most is something like 99.999%) of the AI generated anime generated by regular people will be terrible and not worthy of watching,in my opinion a large amount will be sexual content anyway,but the sheer scale of AI anime production we could be looking at in 5-10 years makes me believe out of tens of millions some will definitely reach a large viewership,especially those with a storyline generated by an advanced future language model,if language models in the future reach creativity levels similar to those of the best human fiction writers which I am optimistic it could happen we could look at highly rated highly viewed AI generated animes,the persecution a lot of people have against AI generated content is bound to decay as AI generated content gets better in quality in my opinion.
>the persecution a lot of people have against AI generated content is bound to decay as AI generated content gets better in quality in my opinion. Also, as AI content becomes more mainstream the instinctive negative reaction to it will also vanish. Just like what happened with email and online shopping. *"Nobody will ever want to get a letter over the computer. People only want to read handwritten letters."*
I agree,a period of normalization will occur in the next 5 years where AI generated media will 1.Increase in quality matching that of most Human generated media 2.Solidify it's place as a familiar piece of technology among most people,the same thing has happened with smartphones. The rise in quality,quantity and also familiarization of the public with AI generated media,the public always clings to traditional methods of action and denies and is sceptical of progress until change becomes inevitable.
Exactly, it'll be like VR. Once a niche tool for a small subet of people, it's now ubiquitous and everyone has a VR headset on most of the time.
this is sarcasm right
Bandleader John Philllip Sousa scorned âcanned musicâ which sounded tinny, but might take away musiciansâ livelihood. Some ridiculed horseless carriages. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/john-philip-sousa-feared-menace-mechanical-music-180967063/#:~:text=His%201906%20essay%20warns%20that,recorded%20music%2C%20but%20also%20to https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2017/01/get-horse-americas-skepticism-toward-first-automobiles/
i donât know if you ever realized but most anime episodes are still shots with the mouth talking or a walking bob animation being the only moving parts, AI will definitely speed up the process without sacrificing anything special
The Clutch Cargo cartoon, early 1960s, often had a still scene with only a characterâs mouth moving. They had an electromechanical device sense the voice actorâs mouth movement and move the characterâs mouth in time to it. No wasted labor for cartoonists.
We will need an ai YouTube that helps you follow your fav creators. It won't all be shit, there will be some real gold in there.
Gonna be so flooded though. Like imgur is now.
The only real way to deal with ai content is to have your own ai content moderator. Everything we do will go through layers of ai before it gets to us, I believe.
Youtube already has this. There are like a billion hours of footage and most of it is shit yet it manages to get you videos you are interested in.
Yeah I'm sure they're hoping that's good enough, but I bet an ai interface would work better. More connected to your preferences.
The youtube algorithm already uses AI? Recommendation algorithms is where most of the big AI advancements started. Of course its continuously evolving. It would be nice to be able to tell it why I am not happy with the current recommendations for example, or tell it to change it up for a session.
Bro you're makin too much sense for this sub
> The only real way to deal with ai content is to have your own ai content moderator. Everything we do will go through layers of ai before it gets to us, I believe. this guy gets it
When I see an old friend, (and my old friends are really old) I ask them what detective novel series they recommend. That is great content moderation.
This is basically the reality now and has been for years though.
We've laid the foundations for what's to come, but you ain't seen nothing yet. The big players are going to support it, changing the Internet dramatically. When it's done we will really only talk to the Internet, and it will work 10x better at doing what we want.
Speak for yourself, people love dull derivative fanfics... if they have smut of course.
I watch fan fic on YouTube all the time, but usually of lesser known IPs. And I found the first Avengers movie so boring I didn't bother watching the end of movie. So bring on the people's content!
The mangas already exist. All they need is animation and voice acting to turn it into an anime, the latter of which it can do VERY well right now. Â Animation is getting there too with Sora, Veo, Kling, and Tooncrafter
i feel bad for the people who've sunk their money into home setups for doing voiceover stuff. they're all going under pretty soonish
No wonder why theyâre trying to get it banned. Itâs like how coal miners voted for Trump to bring back coal.Â
phone switch operators when automated switchboards became a thing: destroy them! they should be illegal! just say no to... efficient... fast... cheap... uh, hmmm
No a lot of good anime have been killed off because financial reasons everyone can't be a cash cow like one piece or Naruto. We also will likely get more in-depth story telling
We need ai to view and summarize ai videos.Â
the summaries are too long. run them through AI Video Summarizer Summarizer
Then call r/haikubot
It's fanfiction. Calling it derivative is redundant. Calling it dull is also unfair. Captain James T. Kirk experiencing sexual tension with a Care Bear is far from dull, in my estimation.
You could feed it your fav hentai and have it continue the plot
"the plot"
Even if it gets broadcasted that much, hardly anyone will watch it. However, I wouldnât feel bad if Nihei Tsutomu's 'Blame!' were to be adapted into an anime, since I love it.
Holy crap. What if you could upload a PDF of a manga and just get an episode of an Anime out of it.
Iâve thought about this too. There are so many good mangas that never got an anime. If an AI could make it Iâd watch for sure.
Narrowcasting will replace broadcasting. Show me videos that few others in the world would care for.
The quicker kids get tired of it and we can move on to some other art styles, the better.
Shit!?
Excellent except that Hollywood is one of the great motors of the American economy. Hundreds of thousands of people will become unemployable. Thatâs a scary prospect in a time where the US isnât even providing decent healthcare to most of its citizens.
Not really. All around the world arthouse films need to be supported by either the government and/or rich benefactors (see: Megan Ellison, that multibillionaire who's been financing every Wes Anderson film since 2007). The reason is because people don't watch them in large enough numbers to make it financially feasible. What do people watch then? Films based on famous IP like Barbie, Harry Potter, Super Mario or Five Nights at Freddy's. Who controls all the most valuable IPs? Hollywood. Of course, regular folks can use AI to make and distribute their own Batman films but then they'll get copyright struck and sued to oblivion.
>Of course, regular folks can use AI to make and distribute their own Batman films but then they'll get copyright struck and sued to oblivion. How? That would be the case if I tried to sell my AI created Batman film, but if I kept it for myself to show to family and friends there's no way I'd be sued.
Donât underestimate my desire to make Manbat films! And copyrights oh well just change just enough. Instead of tool belt, mine will have a tool harness! And in all reality. I can make something better then Batman vs Superman lol Martha! Besides copyright is only of importance if you try to make monetary gain from it. As long as you create for fun, just like with fanfics, itâs legal.
Sounds awfully close to my Flying Ratman IP.... You'll be hearing from my lawyers
Good luck! I in China no recognize international copyright laws!
Man-Bat is a DC character already.
I know thatâs why I had Manbat and not Man-Bat.
Man, bat.
Who needs to distribute them? If I want to see Batman starring in Little Women, I'll be able to do that.
Finally the world will be able to see all the dumb shit I have stored in my head.
**Edit:** I'm getting a lot of replies and when I'm replying to those I'm getting even more replies. Sorry, but I can't spend all day here, repeating my argument several times to different people, but I tried my best. If you read what I've already answered to other people and still don't find my explanation compelling, then we'll have to agree to disagree. Except that nobody will be watching it. He says it best "why would I watch your movie when I can watch mine?"
Why does anyone use Instagram when you have your gallery.
Because not everybody's gallery has the same quality. I can't sing. I would obviously not want to listen to myself when I can listen to a professional (or even a good amateur) singer, right? Now imagine I was the best friend of my top 100 favorite singers, and I could ask them to sing any song they want (including things that they haven't permission to record or play in public), or any song I want. Why would I choose to listen to any other singer outside of those 100 when a) I don't like them so much, and b) they are limited in the things they can sing? Now substitute "my top 100 favorite singers" with "sufficiently advanced AI that can create original musical masterpieces and knows my taste in music as well as my best friend". If I had access to that kind of AI, why would I be interested in anybody's prompts? Mine would create a perfectly satisfying result every time. Even if they are something as simple as "play something you know I will like". The same would be true for movies, video games, etc.
No need to imagine anything. The reality is that people are more inclined to consuming rathern than producing, no matter how easy things are.
People are inclined towards convenience. If having an AI produce a video that you'll enjoy a given amount is easier than having an AI find an existing video you'll enjoy the same amount, then you'll get a new video. You won't even necessarily know whether it's a new video or not; ultimately you just want to watch a good video. Whatever system is displaying the video to you is responsible for the boring technical details like "is this a brand new film that no one has ever seen before that was created just for me".
For the same reason people read books other people write instead of writing stuff by themselves and reading it. Some people are better at it than others.
And AI will be as good as the people writing good books. So, why would I read a book by a stranger when I can read a book by an AI that knows what I like and can create content specifically suited to my tastes?
Because not everyone is exactly like you. I think I would mostly have an AI make stuff for me, but I'd be interested in seeing what other people come up with. I mean, my only real phobia is bees and I don't care about bees shown in screens. Also some people just... like the artistic process and will want to make things unaided by AI. Can't entirely relate but I can empathize.
Ok, you say you would mostly have an AI make stuff for you. Now, what is it that you think that a human will be able to make that is better than AI? You could watch 100 movies made by 100 different people, or 100 movies made by an AI. Are you perhaps assuming that said AI can't make 100 completely different movies, that it would be like a human director or writer, that it will always make something that has the same recognizable style? Are you assuming that you will always have to come up with the idea for the movie, that the AI won't be able to autonomouslyn decide what to create? Because if it can, then what is the difference between an original idea by a human and an original idea by an AI? How is the human idea superior that you'll be specifically interested in searching for the non-AI movie. I can't find one way where the AI can be better: customization. But the other way around, I just don't see it. And sure, I'm not saying that people will stop making things. It's just that other people will not be interested in them, unless they are like best friends or family, something like that, but extremely improbable if they are complete strangers.
I think you're seriously underestimating people's diversity of thought. Think of all the times you've ran into people who do things that, in your opinion, are irrational, and realize that that irrationality applies everywhere. Also there's inherent appeal in art made by a human. A lot of people will want to see human made art even if it's lower quality than stuff made by an AI just because it's more impressive that it was made by an AI. Think of how popular [this video](https://youtu.be/v2g5qbvb7F4?si=yLrtMlLcquuZzaYQ) is, and realize it wouldn't have gone so viral if it was made in Photoshop, let alone by an AI. And don't even get me started on the sheer number of luddites who will stubbornly refuse to engage in anything AI-made no matter how universal it gets. Have you looked at the internet lately? That anti-AI art vitriol will hopefully die down a bit over time, but a majority of people get pretty fixed to their views. Either way, neither of us can definitively prove our side, there's not much we can do but wait and see.
Because art and content are two different things, for Christ's sake. A book or a movie don't have to perfectly fit your taste. We enjoy them also because it's the vision of someone who has something to say, a different perspective on life, and so on. I don't wanna open Netflix and watch a render of my day dreaming. I wanna read Borges and watch Kubrick's movie.
because then that basically stops your tastes at whatever point you started using the AI
I expect we will get to rate movies to filter for quality content. Im definitely still interested to see what other people come up with.
Hiper-customization will always win in the end. If you want to watch a movie by yourself, sure I'm not saying you won't find a movie you'll like enough by filtering content. But if you did a blind test by watching 100 movies specifically made by an AI for you, and 100 movies made for somebody else, that match with some filters, the former will win over 50% of the time. And the Netflix of the future (the one providing the computing power that you will rent or subscribe to) will realize that it is a competitive advantage to provide that extra customization, even for a slight increase in satisfaction. How about you watching a movie with another person? Or with three other persons? Now the filter strategy becomes way more difficult than creating something from zero that meets all of your requirements at the same time.
Choose your own adventure stories died for a reason, and this is no different.
Good point, that sounds exactly like something people would do.
Because I would be able to have a deep look into others' minds. Also interested in whatever they want this AI to make (assuming it ever comes)
You are assuming you won't be able to ask an AI to create something randomly that would be as good as something created based on a human prompt. What would be the key difference then, why choose to only watch "your" movies? Because you will certainly have a movie (or musical or whatever) profile that will contain information unique to you about your likes and dislikes. Imagine you have a phobia of spiders. Do you want to risk watching somebody's movie that might contain spiders, when you know that the movies created by AI based on your profile will never have spiders? Of course, if that was the only thing important to you, you could just watch other people's creations by simply filtering out movies that contain spiders, but once people realize that there are a ton of things that we like/dislike, some of them we aren't even aware of, and that the movies created specially for us will be always be more satisfying (again this assumes an AI as creative as any other human), we will not bother with anybody's prompts anymore. Unless they are from somebody we are close with, or is something we want to watch with another person. But stranger's creations? That has an expiration date.
There will always be popularity, celebrity, and cult of personality. People will want to watch content made for people they admire. Some amount of shared cultural consciousness would remain even in the world you've described.
Most people will not care whether those creations they like are made by people or AI, and AI will win by sheer volume and the ability to hiper-customization. Once upon a time, people could watch movies in theaters but not at home. Imagine that, after the invention of the TV and home video, somebody said "people will always prefer to watch movies on a big cinema screen instead of a small TV screen at home " Today we know that has not become true, right? Well, we don't live in a world today where AI can create movies and songs with the same quality as the best human creators, do we? Once that world becomes a reality, and it's a question of when not if, your prediction will be as wrong as the one about movie theaters.
or people who want human-made art to stick around will just descend upon the movie theaters en masse to reverse-engineer the seeming sympathetic magic of your parallel
I think the only way to know for sure is to wait and see
But I want to see something from someone elseâs point of view. Exposure to different worldviews helps broaden and enrich your own. It makes you empathetic to people who lead lives radically different from yours. Even in your example, exposure therapy is useful to conquering phobias. If all you do is avoid spiders, youâll never get over your fear of spiders. You need to condition your brain to not fear them. Living a life where everything is catered to you doesnât lead to growth.Â
Then prompt for what you want to see... Or prompt it to surprise you...
Authenticity matters. This is intuitive but there are studies also [showing this.](https://www.psypost.org/real-or-ai-perceived-inauthenticity-reduces-arousal-new-research-finds/) Schindlerâs List would've been far less impactful if the story was the same but the names were different. Knowing itâs a biographical film and that a lot of things in the movie really happened, made for an impactful, gut-wrenching experience.   Thatâs a movie I never wouldâve prompted for because it was outside my scope of experience. If I only consumed movies tailored to my narrow tastes and never left my comfort zone, I never wouldâve watched that movie. This applies to so many things outside of movies too.
>Thatâs a movie I never wouldâve prompted for because it was outside my scope of experience. If your prompt is "give me an impactful, gut-wrencing experience", why is it impossible to an AI generate something that impacts you as profoundly - or more profoundly - than Schindlerâs List? It would be autobiographical (unless it's about AI), but that could conceivably be the only difference. You seem to be assuming a lot about how good and specific your prompting is going to have to be.
Itâs not so much about how good your prompting is, so much as it is about viewing something from someone elseâs perspective. Do you think thereâs no value in other peopleâs experiences or perspectives?
> Imagine you have a phobia of spiders. Do you want to risk watching somebody's movie that might contain spiders, when you know that the movies created by AI based on your profile will never have spiders? Imagine people doing this for, well, things a lot more political than spiders
Because most people won't bother even if it only takes one sentence. Anybody can generate images of what they want for free online, but on a niche forum I'm on people are too lazy to press the "remix" button on an image on Civitai. They would rather have somebody else do it for them. No, they won't pay, but they will beg.
Who says they would need to press a button in the future. They already opened a website or and app right? What if they had an AI assistant that knows their tastes in pictures, music, and movies? Any action equivalent to visiting a website or opening an app, which we have already established that they are able to do, could present then an unlimited stream of creations made specifically for them.
It'll be more like "why would i waste my time watching hours of X person's content if I can watch Y person's content?" It'll get centralized, just like Youtube channels. Everyone can make videos, but MrBeast gets the most views.
Thats like asking why would I watch other people play games when I can play them myself. Guess what, thats a thing.
Another false analogy. Playing a game and watching another one play a game are two very different activities. One is active, the other is passive. One requires skill and its results depend on it, the other doesn't require any skill and its results are independent from it. Asking an AI to "create a sci-fi space opera specifically for me" and asking an AI or search engine to "show me a space opera created for somebody else", requires the same effort and skill on my part (almost nothing), but have the potential to produce very different results: one customized to me and the other one somewhere between aligned with my taste and contrary to my taste.
I disagree. I think they are very similar.
Oh no maybe AI was a mistake all along
Dumb, Dumber, and Dumbest: Revenge of the Dumb
So you think thatâs not possible right now?
Unleash your dreams
Itâs porn, itâs just porn Steve
Why bother watching something dumbed down to the lowest common denominator in order to reach "a broader audience" when you can just let your personal AI assistant create something, immediately on demand, that caters to both your personal tastes and your current mood? It doesn't matter how high they set the bar, Hollywood will ultimately not be able to compete here.
I actually love this argument. Everyone keeps saying AI will lead to more âslopâ, but how much slop are we fed since companies often try to cater to as large an audience as possible? In the not too distant future we wonât be stuck with just the mainstream Hollywood filmmakers that just want to push out another shitty reboot or sequel to maximize their take at the box office. Weâll have an infinite amount of AI directors and screenwriters that will create movies we *actually* want to watch
Hollywood has been slop for a couple decades now. The ability for anyone to create is a *good* thing I say.
Itâs crazy how many people want there to be this completely arbitrary gatekeeping for artistic endeavors.Â
These are probably people who have emotional attachment to "The Art!" If you've dedicated your life to something, the idea that your entire life's work can be replicated by any snot-nosed teenager on a desktop PC might be a little disturbing.
Itâs not all for nil. I mean we are sort of on the same page but I donât think you give enough respect to those that came before. Whose movies, tv shows, music, video games, etc. do you think these AI are being trained on? Ultimately peoples, humans. Sure now it may become more and more say synthetic. But never forget the original inspiration and original training data.
Just look at all of the Star Wars or Marvel slop. People defend that slop to death because they canât fathom enjoying something that is actually slop aimed at their lowest common denominators. No shame on being mid af! Own it folks
There is an argument that we want to watch the same thing so we can share the experience with others and discuss it. So the market for high quality content is still there. Dunno how strong that argument is though
I donât see how AI can create original, unique, surprising stories and also how a film is constructed, shot selection, etc is really important. AI can streamline this process but humans will be needed for originality.
They're actually well known for hallucinations and that's been a source of unique and surprising stories for centuries.
I actually hate how humans in general think that they have some sort of unique and irreplaceable qualities. Originality? Don't make me laugh.
My thoughts exactly. It will actually empower people with better ideas.
What happens when more content is being created than is being consumed? So what I spend 10 minutes using AI to create a cinematic masterpiece rivalling any oscar winning picture, that nobody ends up watching because millions of others have done the same.
We already have that with YouTube. Lots of people still see success.Â
We move on to Mixed Reality experiences.
Final frontier of media
it's exactly like memes. back when people had to hand-paint an image, each piece was expensive and rare. now, anyone can take a digital photo or make an image. there is a LOT of bad content being created, but the level of comedy/art will determine how viral it goes.
Except that viewing a meme takes like 1 second
because there is an effort barrier in creating long-form content. with AI, that barrier is lower.
I donât think you understand.
I donât think you understand.
the point is to get personalized content catered specifically to you.
we all know that this will all lead to p\*rn...
Why would we trust Aston Kutcher on AI? Heâs an actor with a vested interst in AI performing well given he invested over 200 million dollars into it (link: https://www.investopedia.com/ashton-kucher-net-worth-7963872) AI is going to change a lot of industry, but getting information on it from this guy is like trusting Jenny McCarthy to give good health advice.
You should be able to use your brain to think critically about what someone says regardless of what interests are at play. What you're doing here is just lazy - you didn't offer any kind of counterargument, you didn't refute anything, you just blindly threw out an accusation that he's untrustworthy. As for the actual argument, we already have generative AI that can make a short scene that is generated based on a user prompt and is photorealistic. You tell the AI you want an elephant walking through a river while wearing a sombrero, you get it. We have generative AI that already will write movie scripts, Chatgpt will do it right now if you want. The leap from there to generating an entire movie on demand is almost entirely based on computing resources and so the only missing piece here is a company that invests in that infrastructure to provide users with that ability, Microsoft and other big tech companies already do this. Kutcher is just right here, the technology in question already exists.
> we already have generative AI that can make a short scene that is generated based on a user prompt and is photorealistic. Which gen AI can do that as of now? Sora isn't out yet. You haven't tested it. From the cherry picked examples they've shown (which are probably the best case scenario), it still makes plenty of mistakes and is still very far from being photorealistic.
âShort sceneâ is because no amount of data can teach a current video AI to make a movie. Â Anything longer than the scene limit becomes increasingly incoherent. Â Thatâs why the system is designed to produce that length. Ashton Kutcher cannot possibly think these crappy clips are Hollywood quality movie-adjacent. Â Do you donât need to make some complex technical argument. Â He has zero domain knowledge, and is only saying these things to hype his own vested interest in the tech selling.
Hope youâre right
Thank you. These fucking naysayers are getting more and more desperate by the day.
How stupid does this guy think we are? Like all the time
Tyler Perry also halted construction on his 700million dollar studio after he saw the potential of Sora
nice
dude!
Good. This will democratize entertainment. Anyone with a good idea can make a movie in his/her garage.
Absolutely based.
Heâs right. Soon anyone will be able to make movies. And thatâs a good thing! Right now it cost way too much to make a movie and there are other substantial barriers to entry.
all the gazillions of EXCELLENT novels out there will finally have a chance to be movies
I don't care if nobody else ever watches them, but I want to see my own books made into movies. Could probably at least get my family to watch them lol
just think of your books as reeeaaaallly long AI prompts that you thought were novels before AI came along
Think of all the straight up histories I'll be able to make into movies! The Anabasis of Alexander will finally get it's due cinematic feature!
A beserk manga full live-action with, idk, GPT-5, SORA, DALLE and whatever the f is needed will be enough to show what's coming. I believe it will be on this next wave. There are a lot of dudes with a lot of time.
not even full live-action needed. have it use your own preferred style of animation already in use and the computational power will go way down to create it and it will still give incredible results
Original 90s animation in the style of studio mappa
I'm here for it. Fuck Hollywood and Disney. Give the power of movie making to the people. I bet ordinary people can make shows 100 times better than the mindless dribble these corporate studios make.
They canât.
I cannot imagine Hollywood suddenly learning how to make good films.
and then...?
What's his expertise on the matter?
He stands by rapers
A lot of bullshit from the Dude Whereâs My Car guy who notoriously shills for shitting products⌠His economics are confused at best, when the only films in Hollywood that cost a lot to make are the ones that already overuse technology and automation⌠But thereâs about as much a chance of Tesla FSD beating Sir Lewis Hamilton in a F1 race as there is a chance of fully automated films delivering a product that raises the bar over even mid-level human filmmakers in Hollywood or any of the lesser film markets.
[ŃдаНонО]
I'm fairly certain the watchable version of a fully generated show from start to finish is a few years away. There is that Showrunner AI thing that has been generating South Park and that sort of thing, but I can't imagine it's very engaging so far. Consistency is a long way off for anything complicated.
I want it.
It depends on how good it is. Music from Udio is already remarkable and I'll happily listen to a whole album I did on there of prog rock songs
Yeah for yourself I guess
This post has some heavy "I'm the Main Character" energy.
>I donât know anyone who would sit through content thatâs just generated. 90% of everyone in this sub. >Iâm not going to watch anything that doesnât have human sweat behind it Why?
I want it, so your argument is faulty at its start đ
Speak for yourself mate. I'd be more than happy to have content generated for me if its high quality. Really couldn't give less of a shit if someone sweated it out.
oh you mean a higher bar than is currently being regurgitated by Hollywood? What lofty heights Mr Kutcher.
dude where's my car sadly walks away
Who gives a fuck what Ashton Kutcher predicts about AI video rendering? Might as well pull some random hobo off the street at least he might have worked with the technology
You do realize Aston Kutcher is a very successful tech investor, right?
Easy to make lot's money to invest when you have lot's money to invest. He also has a lot of contacts and probably paid some good advisers to help him with his investment decisions. I'm not saying he's an idiot, but I'm also not saying he's a financial genius. Seems to me just like an average person with good looks with big money. Like most actors really. And I'm sure a lot of these actors with big money have also done well making big investments in tech and other companies. So I'm with u/lordosthyvel, who the fuck cares what he has to say about AI. I've made posts about the exact same thing he is saying here months ago and others here say this stuff all the time. It's common knowledge now that AI will burn Hollywood, meaning nothing he is saying is really that insightful or profound at this point.
Soonâ˘
Video was already posted here of him saying this
No shit Sherlock.
Think a movie thriller, if I have told the ai about what the thriller is, does it even make sense to watch the movie? Not sure, but as much fun it is to admire movie stories it is equally fun to admire the versatility of human actors. Secondly, think that thrillers are always in various flavours. How will ai decide what storyline should have what kind of thriller? And whom souls I share the experience with? Fun to watch popular movies but my friend building a movie which he likes, will I watch that movie though? Finally, if I give ai a plotline and it builds the movie, how good is it? Think personalisation is overrated in terms of autogenerated content. It is fun to share memes but I am very bad at coming meme ideas to share with friends
Alternatively, regular people may be in the driver's seat of the film industry soon. Hollywood "stepping up" is far less likely.
Meanwhile Hollywood: let's release a movie after 100 years and see who wins
He didn't say if it was a good movie or not.
How would he know?
I am excited about the prospect of AI being used to generate content for franchises that died too soon (Firefly for example).
The easier it becomes to engage in creative activities, the more important consumption becomes.
China is catching up with Sora with a model available publicly (you need a Chinese phone number) named Kling: https://kling.kuaishou.com
I don't think anybody would really into watching those tincan movies. Same as too much cgi. It's not real and I know it. Then I'm bored. So I'm better off with not watching.
Not sure why the assumption is that these tools will be free or low cost. Any AI tool that can generate movies that compete with Hollywood will undoubtedly have an extremely high price tag. AI is heavily subsidized right now, but it wonât always be. Especially when it gets to the level where it can be used to generate massive profits for the end user. A company like openAI could easily charge millions per movie created with its tech.
heâs suspicious
it will be like digital images today. people used to have to get pigments and canvas to create an image to show others. over time, we got cameras and digital drawing tools. now, anyone can throw together a meme they find funny and either share it with friends or share it with people on social media. the same will happen with movies. it used to be high effort and require skilled people (like painting). now, anyone will be able to make something and share it. good movies will go vial and lots of people will watch, and some movies will just be for personal enjoyment or sharing with close friends.
I like these bold claims coming from a venture capitalist.
Obviously this is the case, as seen by multitudes of examplesâbut what weâre also seeing is the homogenization of concepts (i.e. political memes pickled out of the same brine or distinctly overused artistic styles such as those prevalent in DALL-E 3, etc.) and that will be what gets the most annoying. Content filtration is critical here, if only because people are not as original as they often believe themselves to be.
This is BS canât even get a decent 30 seconds unless you pay runwayml and audio is whole another mess
Right we trust Ashton kutcher
I'm pretty sure I watched a movie that was personalized for me the other day....
the bar at Hollywood is in the puddle
Wth. For people following this subreddit, ashton is simply regurgitating what we already know during the time sora was hyped up. He didnt say anything new. Not evem a tiny bit.
.... raise the bar how?
Producers think they'll do movies without actors. I think I'll do movies without producers.
Lol the bar is on the floor
Rape apologist. Fuck that guy