AI art and creative content creation
- Thread starter overscan (PaulMM)
- Start date
- Status
Indeed.
AI is looking better and better...
Sigh. That's all you've got? Show the few bad actors? These aren't the guys we're dealing with.
Not that you know of. Yet...
Hollywood has *always* been a wretched hive of scum and villainy, from thieves to pervs to commies (but then I repeat myself).
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 2,100
Huh, Epstein was a Hollywood executive? Reputable source with a list of concrete projects he was attached to over time please.Indeed.
AI is looking better and better...
Last edited:
Never said he was. His *clients,* though...
So, you think the AI version of Hollywood will be as pure as the driven snow? Clean and tidy, with >no< bad actors?
And where did I say that?
Do you think that is the question.
It is now. Where did I say what you said I think?
Sigh. Never mind. Enjoy non-intelligent AI whatever...
Billions will. Hell, millions *are* already.
Cheap thrills. Hopefully, OpenAI and Microsoft lose the New York Times lawsuit.
Like Hollywood. Just *cheaper,* with the potential to be vastly more widespread.
Hollywood types also liked to talk smack about video games. But games have the potential for income of a scale to dwarf the greatest Hollywood blockbusters. AI creations will likely take movies and make them interactive (as interactive as the "viewer" might want) in ways akin t video games. Straighforward movies will likely end up the province of low budget artsy types who make the movies just because they want to, not because they think there's a megamillions market for them.
"Fortnite" has made twenty BILLION dollars. That's money that could have gone to movies and TV shows... but didn't. Those are ears and eyeballs that could have spent those hours devoted to non-interactive broadcast entertainment product, but didn't.
Attachments
Last edited:
"talk smack" Yeah. Well, the ToTaLly fake democraticization/Communistization of everything will make The Three Stooges the high point of intellectual achievement for all Centuries. Give the Proletariat the tools of production... Like ebooks, people with no skill get to make movies. Oh boy. And like ebooks, those who think the publishing industry is out to exclude them will feel the same as those who sent their script attempts to Hollywood studios. Brain-dead AI has no idea of where to put anything or light anything. It will just spit out what the program has in its stored memory. So, when Bob tries to make a movie and tells AI "No, no! I want the cat to chase the dog!" the AI does what? Thinks on its own? Ha, ha. No, it can't.
Last edited:
southwestforests
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 28 June 2012
- Messages
- 435
- Reaction score
- 561
Something about that brings to mind a thing from way back in school, free commentary at no additional charge from the social studies teacher -
Quality is not created by the lowest common denominator.
Keep in mind that this does not suggest that I think no one should try their hand and, most importantly - improve. But that it requires a lot more than guesswork. My joke where I work is I hand a random passerby a football and tell him that he will play at a professional game that night. He would survive about one microsecond...
Man, it must suck to be a "cultural elite" and find that the masses have been given the tools to do what you do, and don't need you anymore.
Was a time when being a "scribe" was a position of great importance, and then they let *anybody* learn to read and write. Tragic!
And yet random people play football a *lot* and have a blast doing it. Even if they suck at something, there is enjoyment in doing it yourself.
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 2,100
I think there is a very sharp division/dichotomy between typical virtual gamers on one side and movie/tv/passive online entertainment consumers on the other (and I am proudly displaying my late boomer view of the universe here). PC/online games clearly demonstrate that there is a huge market for (caucasian millenial basement dwelling unshaven overweight bespectacled male?) persons that are into *creating* and *exploring* unique *universes* of their own and investing considerable intellectual efforts into those *efforts* (aka dorks/geeks/nerds [which in the old *pre-digital* world order I probably would have fallen into, before having been overcome by the march of modernity, a.k.a the sign of the times]). On the other hand, there is a plethora of just simply tired/stressed out/frustrated/disappointed/scared/angry/living on the ragged edge of existence humans that after a grueling potentially two job work day and having to tend to their families to the best of their efforts but still feeling doing an inadequate job just want to veg out to some more or less entertaining and escapist but always scripted streaming content where they do not have to invest any more intellectual effort. I have the distinct impression that the latter group is the silent minority in the USA at this point.
Last edited:
Sure. But AI can presumably hook *both.* Even the most passive viewer isn't *entirely* passive; they choose what they watch. An AI could watch someone for a span of *years* and figure out what that someone likes to watch. heck, a sufficiently advanced system doesn't just watch what the viewer watches, but watches the viewer. A decent cel phone camera could pick up pupil dilations, blink rate, heart rate (detectable via pulsing in the infra-red), *where* the eyes are pointed, etc., and determine just what the viewer likes... and then begin to alter the program to more closely reflect the viewers preferences. Over some period of time the TV could become as addictive as crack. Ever see old folks in a casino, robotically pushing buttons and pulling levels, driven on by the dopamine hits created by the blinking lights and bells and whatnot? Imagine that adjusted second by second to *precisely* ensnare.
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 2,100
Physical exercise is definitely a beneficial thing, just as long as you don't get CTE from it. Might I suggest starting to play soccer instead?
To get rid of the garbage, you can do three things: concentrate it all in one place, throw it over the fence in your neighbor's garden, or spread it in all directions by means of a large fan. Civilized societies use the first solution, anti-establishment use the second, and governments that are about to lose an election use the third. Hollywood has become a master at using all three procedures. Executives or executables?
Attachments
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 2,100
Fine, just as long as I can change the channel without having to push any buttons with lighting like reflexes
. And of course I know, you'll respond that eventually all channels will succumb to that business model, but I'm fairly confident that at least for my remaining lifespan there will still be some purely passive old school nostalgic geezer channels that will cater to my ornery ilk - and mirrored shades can be your friend .
Last edited:
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 2,100
Please define Hollywood garbage. While for example microplastics affect the global ecosystem, no matter what your political/ideological persuasion might be, I truly couldn't care less what pseudo entertainment crap (The Sound of Music comes readily to mind, as long as they keep the volume down) any of my neighbors watch (ok - slasher/snuff movies might raise my personal threat level). However you personally feel, there simply is no information landfill/dump for terminally burying intellectual filth like that - it will always seep to the surface again.
Last edited:
Trash is what no one wants, no matter how many times you try to get rid of it, there's always an organization that takes it back and shoves it back through your back door.
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 2,100
Sure, if you leave your back door open and don't lock it - although I'm aware that may be a customary thing in Mediterranean countries... But I'm honestly getting tired of speaking in pseudo-mystical metaphors...
Kat Tsun
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 16 June 2013
- Messages
- 1,126
- Reaction score
- 1,259
Scribes are actually quite common in the medical field. Speaking of...
You'd agree that engineers and doctors don't require gatekeeping, then, too? If one industry appeals to the lowest common, they all do, eventually. Doctors already get passed through medical school without firm grasps of fundamentals and basic medical sign knowledge. Plenty of engineers at Tesla can't seem to make very good cars, either, and have managed to fall behind SLS at every turn with their Moon rocket.
You could easily replace them with an advanced AI, which I'm sure you agree would be good, regardless of the social consequences? You can't sue an AI, after all, which is surely a good thing.
It's fairly pedestrian a statement to claim that opening things which require skills, whether photographic, painterly, mathematical, or medical, should be done with caution at best. Unless your goal is to see humans return to a broadly menial labor focused society with extremely small numbers of specialists and wealthy landed aristocrats, I guess, but I suppose that is the goal of people like Peter Thiel and Elon Musk.
One thing that is certainly difficult for AI is interaction with the tangible, real world. We'll always need berry pickers, assembly line workers, and ditch diggers. Engineers, artisans, and historians rather less, though surgeons and barbers will likely be safe, but their help may become AI. So yes, it is certainly lamentable that human talent and basic investments in learning are being so watered down that even rocket engineers and historians may eventually be forced to become strawberry pickers or supermarket greeters.
That's not exactly a system that people are going to support, for one thing.
Last edited:
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 2,100
I, for one, welcome the first fully crowd sourced interplanetary reusable crewed spacecraft! Because, you know, the wisdom of the masses...
For the countries of the Mediterranean (north coast), political correctness forbids them to close the back door.
Attachments
There's an important difference between the arts and STEM: if you make bad art, few people get hurt.
This seems to be by design in many cases.
SpaceX hasn't spent *near* as many taxpayer billions as SLS, nor as many thousands of man-years..
Me too. Of course, it'll be the manufacturing that'll be the problem. A thousand people could have fully-formed complete designs of practical, successful interplanetary spacecraft on their PCs, but getting them built is the challenge. Bring on the industrial replicators!
Kat Tsun
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 16 June 2013
- Messages
- 1,126
- Reaction score
- 1,259
The rather sordid, bloody history of propaganda, libel, and populist revolutions would disagree, perhaps most especially in France, but I digress. Naturally, capacities for harm by incompetent people using tools they don't understand, working in positions they don't belong, didn't stop people from lowering standards for engineers or doctors, either.
Which is weird that you're celebrating it in one case and despairing in the other.
If you truly believe in the power of "the masses" you should be welcoming the coming era of DIY engineering, medicine, and mission planning as much as you're welcoming the coming era of low quality pulps, homogeneous artworks, and incomprehensible storytelling. If a committee of a thousand people (at most) can get a rocket ship to the Moon in a mere 11 years on the first go, imagine how much faster and better and more democratic a committee of a million or ten million might be capable of, after all.
AI will enable even the most innumerate, least knowledgeable persons to meaningfully contribute to the Mars mission of the future. Of course, whether those contributions are good or bad, smart or silly, who can say. But as a firm believer in "the masses" I'm sure you fall on the side of it being only beneficial.
At least, that would be consistent with what you're applying to human artists, anyway.
Moonshots aren't measured by their cost effectiveness.
Last edited:
A poorly made movie will not explode. A poorly made jetliner may well fall out of the sky. That's the difference.
Example: I fully support the DIY gunsmiths who are spreading the gospel of home-made (often 3D printed) firearms. I would love to see this spread around the world, especially to uncivilized regions where firearms are illegal. Incorporating AI into that will result in better, stronger, safer and more reliable 3D printed firearms that anyone can make at home. Who doesn't want that? Tyrants and villains, that's who.
AI have already done a lot of work in cranking out bajillions of new theoretical chemical compounds such as nerve agents. That's not so great... but sufficiently advanced and powerful AI will be able to ponder the concept of cures for cancer and reversing aging and the like. A million AI's pondering the subject and then comparing notes should do magnificent work.
Of course some jackass will have his AI pondering some 100% fatal airborne pathogen, but hopefully even more AI will be working on cures and antidotes.
Indeed! Now, instead of a million people trying to design a ship, imagine a million AI doing it.
I don't see how. AI will do the contributing.
Once there are a number of them, they will be. Trans-Atlantic flights are more incomprehensible to Columbus than moonshots are to us, and jetliners are very definitely measured by cost effectiveness.
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 2,100
So humans = trash? El caudillo taught you well, young padawan - now let me know how you feel about applying the term "vermin" to people...
Last edited:
That's why pro football players get paid big money and people take the time to watch them. In case you missed it, that's why they're called P R O. Got it? You have this total disdain for professionals. Especially professional creatives. You also >appear< to think that a large number of idiots can solve a problem - a sort of magical 'critical mass.' Trust me, if a room full of people doesn't get it, twice that many will still not get it.
So you - as a self-taught social engineer - will just tell all the P R O people in all fields to go home. The masses can fix electrical problems and do other tasks that require a lot of S K I L L. Giving them a truckload of "tools" will not give them a clue about how to use any of it...
Not my point and you know it. Those people playing for fun are not paid the big bucks P R O athletes get. P R O. Get used to it.
Modernity? You call this modern? A bunch of people getting very little exercise in exchange for giving computer game makers their money? I totally get that there are >>> some <<< circumstances where vegging out is needed, but not everybody is so undisciplined that they'll just forget about taking care of themselves. The wife is not going to be happy if you neglect your housework because you're online playing some game at some odd hour.
Dilandu
I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Woo hoo ! The CIA wants to talk to you buddy...
CTE? No lo comprende.
- Status
