[majormajor]

We've known for a long time that computers can do calculations far, far, far faster than us.

We continue to figure out new ways to make those calculations do more complicated things faster than humans.

What is intelligence beyond calculation is an ancient question, but not the one I'm most interested in at the moment, re: today's tools.

I'm curious right now about if there's meaning to other people in human creation vs automation creation. E.g. is there a meaningful difference between an algorithm curating a feed of human-made TikTok videos and an algorithm both curating and creating a feed of human-made TikTok videos.

Both qualitatively in terms of "would people engage with it to the same level" and quantitatively in terms of "how many new trends would emerge, how would they vary, how does that machine ecosystem of content generation behave compared to a human one" if you remove any human curation/training/feedback/nudging/etc from the flow beyond just "how many views/likes did you get?"

[iliane5]

I think as soon as text2video gets really good (like midjourney level), there’s gonna be so much AI generated content that unless it’s all extremely good, human made content will be something people search specifically for.

As for curation, I think the success of TikTok proves that you don’t need that much data to pretty preceding pinpoint what someone wants to watch (or what will get them to spend the most time on the app at least).

[majormajor]

Do you mean with humans generating the prompts or with some sort of no-human-in-the-loop "generate the text prompt to generate the video" automation?

I think a super accessible animation tool would get a lot of use and result in a lot of cool stuff, but it's the latter that I'm really curious about in terms of how people interact with it.