The reveal came as SAG-AFTRA actors confirmed they were going on strike.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
65 points

But it’s not that easy. If this rando dev’s creation never catches the public’s attention how can they love it, hate it, forgive it and love it again. So this positive-quality-creature can’t be a star.

And how about acting? You don’t think that acting is an art. That actors actually create a character, that’s either boring for the audience or catching it’s empathy. If there’s no actor creating this character, than the rando dev has to create them.

And to make a movie they have to create a lot of different characters and some will turn out to be better in creating characters than others. So they will be famous for doing it great. The public will admire them and they will have their moments on the red carpet and get the chance to make a racist remark or slap someone in the face.

You know, Mark Twain was such a rando dev. And he got a lot of fame. And now the fame will be coming back to the authors…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

You know those AI programs making AI art… the content made is by definition art. It’s in the name.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

True, anyone can call anything art if they want and the name can stick, just like anyone calling you a dumbass. ;)

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

True you can call someone a dumbass, but unless they’re actually a dumbass, like you, then you’re wrong.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

Look at animated movies. They’re giant collaborations of hundreds of mostly anonymous people, basically large software development projects. They hire stars to do the voices, not because they’re all that great as voice actors (trained voice actors can often be had cheaper), but to be the face of the film in public and promote it.

That is, the skill of a Hollywood star is not really anything to do with the product, but simply being famous, recognizable, and likeable. They are a brand, like Mickey Mouse or Colonel Sanders (once an actual person!).

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That is, the skill of a Hollywood star is not really anything to do with the product, but simply being famous, recognizable, and likeable.

I bet studio execs and agents hate having to deal with their stars’ erratic behavior off screen and their personal projects. AI stars voiced by unseen voice actors are much more easier to deal with and they can pay voice actors less. This is IT driven enshittification of the entertainment industry.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Once it’s been trained on the data of every movie ever made, won’t the AI be able to figure out what exactly makes a performance nuanced and captivating? We’re at the very start of this AI journey and it’s often indistinguishable from real life already.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Yeah I’m not sure why people think art is only creatable by humans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Because we like to think we’re special.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Because an AI is created by humans. If an AI can create art, that art is ultimately created by humans

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

I don’t think the question is art vs not art. “Art” is an abstraction bestowed upon something by the viewer.

I think a lot of people are still struggling with this, but popular “art” is already largely devoid of humanity, and reduced to formulaic focus group fluff, and has been for a long, long time now. AI just streamlines the processes we already have.

Any additional debate on this will reduce to linguistics. You can - “I know it when I see it” - all you want, but that’s a cop out. The reality is that media which produces a specific neurochemical response in humans doesn’t, and never has required human input. A breathtaking landscape. A feeling of tranquility during snowfall. A kinship with an animal. An AI generated image. These are all the same process.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Really well said. The definition of art could be argued ad infinitum, and nobody will be any closer to an answer. What is a fact, is that at it’s core art requires a recipe, and each element can be interchangeable, whether it is colors, perspective, medium, tools, pressure, speed, shapes, etc etc, & with A.I., it is just a streamlined process like you said, of taking these elements and mixing them in novel ways. The argument that A.I. could never match human art is such bullocks since as we all know, there is nothing wholly new. It is all recycled content at this point, with variations and arguably, A.I., will be able to add and subtract for those variations a lot faster than humans ever could.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.ml

Create post

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

Community stats

  • 2.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 2.7K

    Posts

  • 41K

    Comments

Community moderators