[valar_m]

I'm fascinated by some of the comments in here, that the videos are "awful," "far from good," "embarrassing," etc.

This is technology that was unthinkable before just a couple of years ago. Photorealistic video generated by typing out a description of what you want to see is something from a sci-fi movie. I must be dreaming, this can't be real.

I took a screenshot in the middle of a video, and it's indistinguishable from a photograph: https://imgur.com/a/TyNbd7E

I don't know, maybe I'm just old. I remember hacking the hidden iframe trick to make ajax-style file uploads work in IE7. The advancements I've watched unfold in the past couple of years are still hard to wrap my head around.

[krapp]

No one is criticizing the photorealistic video generation. Yes, AI has gotten very good at that, I don't think anyone is disputing that.

At some point you have to move past your astonishment at the technical achievement alone and judge the result for what it is, on its own merits, as if a human had made it. Especially when the goal of using generative AI is to remove as many human creators and as much human effort from the creative process as possible, and to have as much "art" be as fully AI generated as possible.

People are criticizing these videos because they aren't good. As "art." Which is a problem if this is what all art is supposed to be become.

[throw310822]

> judge the result for what it is, on its own merits, as if a human had made it.

I don't think anyone was proposing this as an actual professional music video, right? It's a tech demo that used all of $25 of budget. So why are you judging it "on its own merits, as if a human had made it"?

[krapp]

Most of the "professional" AI generated content I've seen isn't much better than this. It all lacks in the same dimensions, it's all the same sort of mediocre and uncanny. Claiming "it's a tech demo, actually quality doesn't matter" isn't going to cut it when this technology is already replacing actual human professional work.

Besides, several people in this thread have already decided that these tech demos are better than human created music videos. In fact, many AI "artists" already claim generative AI has surpassed humans in every relevant metric and they judge it on the same merits as I do just coming to the opposite conclusion. They certainly aren't waiting until it's "good" to call it art.

So it's entirely valid to point out that this technology is actually bad at doing the thing it's supposed to do.

[sandspar]

Louis CK:

>I was on an airplane and there was high speed internet on the airplane… it’s fast, I’m watching YouTube clips, I’m on an airplane. It breaks down, they apologize, and the guy next to me is like “This is bullshit..."

>Like how quickly the world owes him something he knew existed only 10 seconds ago?

>Flying is the worst one, people come back from flights, they tell you their story and it’s a horror story. They act like their flight was like a cattle car in the 40s in Germany.

>"It was the worst day of my life! First of all we didn’t board for 20 minutes. And then we got on the plane and they made us sit there on the runway for 40 minutes. We had to sit there."

>Oh really, what happened next, did you fly through the air incredibly, like a bird? Did you partake in the miracle of human flight, you non-contributing zero?

>You’re flying! It’s amazing! Everybody on every plane should be constantly going ‘oh my God, wow!’

>You’re sitting in a chair in the sky

>….Here’s the thing, people say there are delays on flights. Delays, really? New York to California in 5 hours. That used to take 30 years. And a bunch of you would die on the way there. And have a baby. You’d be a whole different group of people by the time you got there. Now you watch a movie and you take a shit and you’re home.

https://youtu.be/nUBtKNzoKZ4?si=yaCJhTLiXkPyksbg - his delivery starts at around 2:00 but he starts with additional jokes.