Most people like what AI is bringing to the world.

Where is your proof of this?

but anything that looks fake is more commonly a technical failure than a stylistic choice.

Your lack of media literacy is wild, film is entirely a honest fabrication of obvious fakes, that is the basis of cinema, the fundamental concept of the movie screen being itself simply a fake window that is honest to you about the speculative nature of the world revealed beyond.

Movies don’t convey impossible things by actually creating them, they present destabilized artifice from perspectives that invite us to see the mundane everywhere as a facade disguising something quivering underneath.

So yes, you can tell people the tin can is a spaceship… but they’d rather be shown. The preference for showing over telling is so ingrained that it’s cliche. Nobody needs to announce ‘we lay our scene in fair Verona’ when you can put the mediterranean coastline onscreen, and then cut to a cobblestone village where people have pointy shoes. Folks will get it. They’ll get it on a level deeper than narration, or an overlay reading “Verona, Italy, 15° E, 40° N, June 17th 1435, 0700 hours.” They’ll get it even if the aerial shot of the coastline was bought as stock footage. Or rendered, in one way or another.

You almost make a coherent point here but then you topple your entire logic.

The first lesson you learn as a writer is to show not tell and the first lesson you learn as an artist working with video is that to tell is actually something that is desperately hard to avoid doing with a video camera because at the heart of it that is all moving images can do moment to moment, unlike words untethered from direct sensation.

Thus the true skill of an artist working with photographs or video is how they continously subvert the tendency of images to exhaustingly tell instead of show.

This is kind of a basic aspect to an exploration of movies as art…?

Whether it be documentaries having to grapple with the inherent paradox of the production of the documentary affecting and telling upon what it is attempting only to honestly show a picture of, or movies about fictional things having to constantly avoid the catastrophe of the audience only attending to the literal quality of the thing presented to them scene to scene, it is all the same existential question.

They often fuck up in horrifying ways. But they’re usually about what you asked for. Especially if you asked for very little. That’s quite useful where small changes are wildly complex, like ‘make this guy look like another guy.’ The robot won’t do it as good as a team of human professionals, but I don’t have a million dollars to hire a team of human professionals, and I’m betting you don’t either. You can still consider projects that involve making one guy look like another.

I am an artist so I understand when I have the shallow desire to make something into a copy of another thing and my artistic capability fails me, or my lack of resources confines me from reaching my initial vision, that this is the true beginning of my artistic journey and all of that stuff before was just a way of backing myself into wanting something new or changed when I couldn’t get the perfect thing I wanted that was in my head. AI is more than anything else an attempt to seduce human beings into pushing this artistic genesis point of humility, listening and growth further and further away, which is in a way another way of explaining why AI so often leads people into Psychosis.

I have also done lots of community theater so I understand the foolishness of thinking that the important part of making one thing look like another is aesthetic mimcry and not capturing the minimal potent essence of something so it can be received as far more intense of an experience for the audience than a perfect copy could. Theater is a memory not a photograph and you are pointing to how amazingly AI can fabricate high quality fascimiles of photographs as if that doesn’t insult the complexity of how the human brain approaches something it is invited to interpret.

The human brain was designed to see a vivid memory of a hunt through a couple of paint marks on a cave wall, the whole approach of AI and AI cultists deeply insults that magical relationship the human brain has with the most mundane, minimal arrangements of sensation.

Do you think for all these years everybody watching Shakespeare plays where two actors played characters supposed to be easily mistaken for one other as a key part of the plot, that audiences of these shows were getting a suboptimal experience because the two actors didn’t look perfectly alike?

Do you care that in Hamnet that two siblings that are supposed to look so alike that they are frequently mistook for one another, even by death itself, don’t actually look that similar? No, they are child actors who did an amazing job, to care about that in the context of the achievement of Hamnet is shallow and misses the point. You could presumably use AI to “fix” this part about Hamnet (and see Hamnet as Death experienced it and how AI would undoubtedly portray it) and everybody would hate you for it if you did…

My point is that even when AI is good at particular things, often the whole approach is hollow to the Why? with AI. This is something artists could have explained easily to techbros if they ever listened, because the Why? is the whole point.

How it was made is addressable, by the way. It’s fixable. There will be vegan models made from bespoke, licensed, and public-domain data.

Stop referencing promises about the future to prove your point, you sound like a door-to-door salesperson.

Nope, this is a bullshitters tool for people with no talent who want to pretend there is a shortcut to making good art.

The tool you are obsessed with is just a way of convincing yourself you made something when it was stolen from other human artists.

Everybody else can see that but people who have drunk the Kool Aid of AI too hard to admit it to themselves.

The rest of us just acknowledge the reality that AI is now an everyday tool to use, and it’s revolutionising the world at a break-neck pace.

Except it isn’t? Most of us who don’t worship techbros like you don’t think highly of the quality of output of AI, it has become common parlance for people to describe fake and hollow feeling things as “like AI” and I agree with the aesthetic label, y’all are just too blind to see it while you try to force it down our throats. We are in amid a massive economic bubble with AI that is about to burst given that almost no AI companies are profitable and they consume an incredible amount of energy.

You are fantasizing about a religion, great, you can believe in whatever you want but stop making a clown out of yourself by pretending what you are espousing isn’t a set of religious beliefs with no hard evidence to support the magical thinking they demand.

You clumsily believe in AI like somewhere between a religion and a scam you are trying to get me in on when the reality is this is a tool for bullshitters and nobody really likes bullshit art.

Even if AI wasn’t primarily bullshit, which it is, your conception that AI making movie production “cheaper” and more disposable in nature will SAVE Hollywood from making uninspiring movies is laughably absurd.

What the hell are you smoking? That makes no sense, movies are going to become massively more derivative, that is how capitalism works, it is a race to the bottom.

If AI makes what you tell it to, as you say, than AI will make crushingly derivative and boring movies for massive companies that have extinguished all the other studios making movies that aren’t AI slop.

Jesus thinks the borders of nations are real things we must mutilate one another for transgressing in the pursuit of a better life right?

The whole point of the story of Jesus is migrants are bad and must never be empowered right?

If we can compress the entirety of human art, music, literature made by billions of people into the size of a 4-10 GB model, at around 1 person per byte, then we must have not been very creative in the first place.

What an awful, cynical way to look at reality.

The less you ask for, the more it can do.

Which is the entire ideology of the cult around AI.

Y’all want a world that gives you nothing you ask for while we are powerless to do anything about it.

You are wrong, or at least you are wrong to identify your beliefs as in the realm of rationality or science, what you are espousing are a set of religious beliefs in the power of AI that there is zero evidence AI will ever fulfill and damn if it isn’t a lame and depressingly cynical religion.

It is clear when dealing with folks from your cult that proving AI is shit and that it has fundamental problems and limitations is irrelevant to the world view of the cult as it just proves to whatever particular cultist you are talking to that whatever particular subbranch of the cult they are on is the True Sect unlike the other subbranches stuck on the old teachings that aren’t really magical… and that the REAL AGI is just around the corner and this is a distraction.

It is the same nonsense problem you get when you start proclaiming dates for the end of the world in your religion and they keep inconveniently passing by without the world ending. To maintain your delusion you must divide up the religion and say “oh it was that Sect over there that was wrong, we have the true knowledge!”. Rinse Repeat.

I am fine with you having different spiritual beliefs then me just don’t waste everyones’ time by trying to force people into thinking your religion is reality.

No one cares who isn’t already part of your cult.

Sora shut down because this tech has moved on to local models running near real-time.

No, Sora shut down because AI is a bullshit business model that doesn’t produce anything consistently of useful value other than the obsfucation of theft or responsibility while it consumes a vast amount of resources to accomplish what a moderate amount of humans with food, water, shelter and love could make far more efficiently and with far more soul.

I regularly hear normal people describe shitty, fake things that come off hollow as “like AI”, you can see how much of a false future AI is in how little people like what it makes almost as a rule. The reason normal people hate AI is because it is so suffocatingly often a boring black box that spits out sloppy unoriginal crap chopped up from stolen human labor, something most normal people are used to identifying in the hollow structures of society around them.

Never let people in your country forget that there is nothing special about their nationalism and their particular flavor of rightwing xenophobia. It is all the same product just with a slightly different shitty label plastered on depending on where in the world you are.

Rightwing ideologies that traffic in dehumanizing groups of people are all violent, they ALL lead to the same place the US is rocketing towards.

I think one of the best ways to fight violent rightwing ideologies obsessed with exclusion, austerity and seeing everything through a zero sum framing no matter what, is to loudly point out to everybody around the periphery of these ideologies that they haven’t stumbled on a new idea, the words they are saying are the same broken record playing in the US and elsewhere.

Call toxic rightwing violent men who pride themselves in projecting whatever identity they identify as The Original or The Superior shitty cheap knockoffs of US rightwing culture. Other them from their own context by pointing out there isn’t any actually unique localized identity to their beliefs beyond a superficial crust. Even if this doesn’t get under their skin, that isn’t the point, the point is to undermine their call towards reducing your societies horizons by pointing out to everybody the horizons those people want are themselves foreign, imposed and twisted in specific ways that don’t take into account your local context at all.

Point to the US and emphasize that person is arguing for the same ideology that is tearing the US down into poverty, misery and war. Use people’s natural desire to shit on the US as stupid from outside the US to open the door to them seeing their local homegrown version is literally the same stupid shit just without the megaphone the US has.

A specific example, invite people into laughing at how stupid some aspect of the US with a joke or comment, then point out that the conservatives in your area look up to the rightwing people that made those choices here in the US and look them in the eyes with a smile.

The difference between a human artist working with digital media vs analog media is a difference in materials.

The difference between art and AI is AI is a lossy compression algorithm used to steal human art in a legally defensible way.

You can use anything to make art, AI techbros didnt prove that, my point is AI is a shitty self-defeating tool that hides the theft of our public commons of shared art made by humans behind a bunch of bullshit technobabble.

edit Also yeah CGI did make movies a lot lamer in some ways…? Do you know nothing about movies? Have you not lamented with others how you miss the prevalence of Live Action films and Practical Effects because now film makers almost always take the easy boring route out with CGI that misses the point of film in the first place?

You know this is desperately grasping for straws here given the massive economic AI bubble we are in right?

Outline for me why that wouldn’t be a waste of time versus going straight to the tutorial videos and materials the AI stole the content from?

No, blame the ideology of people who cannot see any future other than the fantasy one they magically promise is possible that also in the meantime dehumanizes people.

Where in my comments have I said I don’t have to know anything about AI to hate it?

Where have I claimed maximally that no information exists beyond my beliefs?

You are Strawmanning me and it is blatant.

How am I coming off like a cultist?

You are deflecting from my points by appealing to a list of specific references to tooling when that doesn’t address my actual point.

These are all lossy data compression algorithms trained on sets of human curated data created by humans. Sure you can make some use of them, but they are massively inefficient from almost every angle versus humans creating tutorials, humans creating project templates and easy to understand user interfaces, humans making teaching materials for other humans, humans answering questions on forums, humans just doing HUMAN things…

ANYTHING you argue as a pro for AI is just a poorly extracted benefit from a curated set of human data that could have been better leveraged by humans helping humans create new things directly.

You can hate AI all you want, but you sound uneducated af.

You sound like you are in a cult.

Make the prompt original and it will be original.

Make the prompt original

Make

You don’t understand AI beyond your scifi slop fantasy of what it is rather then the reality that it is possibly one of the worst lossy data compression algorithms ever designed.

Without a constant influx of high quality human training data curated by humans AI is capable of nothing novel. It is a highly lossy data compression algorithm that is somehow so processing inefficient it has become an existential environmental problem because of the electricity use required to sustain this bullshit.

No, the difference is it is actually possible though unlikely for an original movie to come out of a big studio.

AI because of the fundamental design of it, will never ever make anything original.