[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.