[Satam]

It's why AI-generated movie shots would make a lot of sense. Hollywood spends billions of dollars, builds and blows up elaborate sets, and hires 100,000s of thousands of people... just to be able to have pixels move in a pleasing way. How much of that will be cut out when we just go straight to generating pixels? CGI goes in that general direction but it's still very labor intensive.

[iAMkenough]

This is a surface-level argument that could be applied to literally every industry if you trivialize the product produced.

For example: NASA spends billions on research and development just to be able to push a rocket upwards into space? How much of that will be cut out when we just go straight to AI-generated plans and schematics?

It only makes “a lot of sense” if you’re willing to compromise your standards and eliminate labor no matter the consequences.

[Satam]

I thought about this as well but I think research activities and such might be qualitatively different, at least for now. Movies are merely looking to please our senses, on the other hand, researchers look for truths and facts about the world. It's okay to have movie visuals not based on reality, but it's usually not okay to have non-factual research.

Also, no one is going to force actors and movie studios to go full AI and those who wish can stay with the old paradigm. It will be up to customers to decide where their money goes. However, if AI allows for the same or higher quality and more creative freedom at lower costs, I'm pretty sure the old ways will get outcompeted.

[iAMkenough]

I agree. If AI can reduce labor costs at NASA, I'm pretty sure the old ways will get outcompeted.

[aldanor]

... and taking it one step further, humans spend millions of hours watching those shows and movies, just to be able to consume movements of some pixels and parse it into some storylines.

What an inefficient way. How much time will be saved when we go straight to computers watching that content for us and summarising it in 140 characters.

[JCharante]

I’ve actually gotten hooked on watching movie recaps on youtube. Even boring mid tier movies are interesting when they’re condensed to ten minutes. It also exposes me to Spanish and Russian movies, because the narrator recaps everything in English, and I don’t have to pay for any subscriptions anymore.

[chii]

The explosion is even more vivid in one's own imagination!

[Rovoska]

Only on hn would you have someone miss the point of art this hard. That's not art anymore, that's not creative.

[Satam]

Would it be wrong and not art if one wouldn't need a $100 million budget to fully execute their vision?

And art is a term that's quite ambiguous and often means different things to different people. I think you would agree that a lot of people consume movies simply as entertainment. From that perspective, it matters less where the data about pixels came from. This is coming from a person who loves movies, artsy, not artsy, and everything in between.

[shortrounddev2]

What a sad world that would be

[mplewis]

No.

[sph]

Calm down, Satam.

Unless that's satire. But I'm not sure it is.

[Satam]

Rereading what I wrote... It does sound like satire - but no, I'm serious haha. If the tech is able to deliver without compromises in quality, I think the transition would be inevitable.

[dag11]

Inevitable sure, but sad.