Right now, sure. But remember that 10 years ago, neural net generated images were putting eyes everywhere, and wouldn’t create anything close to a believable photo. I wouldn’t be surprised if 10 years from now, video’s will have made a similar leap.
On the other hand, I do hope that between now and then, some laws will have been put in place to only train on ethically sourced datasets - which will slow down progress, but is more fair to the creators.
On the other hand, I do hope that between now and then, some laws will have been put in place to only train on ethically sourced datasets - which will slow down progress, but is more fair to the creators.
I don’t care what published works a neural network gets trained on. How else are we supposed to make one? We tried all the clever ways and they don’t work.
Nothing as miserable as copyright should prevent the obviously transformative act of grinding the entire internet into a couple gigabytes of linear algebra. The more stuff goes in, the less any single piece matters. If the robot can reproduce more than a vague resemblance to particular inputs then that’s a failure called overfitting. A network that can spit out Man Of Steel frame-by-frame won’t be good at much else. We want it to know who Superman is and how capes work. You can’t get that by scanning the same DVD over and over.
Hard, because the countries are not going to agree and do not want to limit themselves with what could end up harming them in the future.
At least that the international copyright treaties are updated (a titanic task to be fulfilled), but it does not ensure that all countries, organizations, companies or individuals follow and respect the agreements made, especially in developing countries.
It’s definitely cool from that standpoint. Don’t get me wrong. But the output from image and video AI usually doesn’t impress me all that much. It’s technically impressive but the output doesn’t surpass what a competent human can do in terms of composition, creativity, and depth. And I know the fear is that eventually it will, but I adamantly believe it never will.
It will depend on how much investment they put into the development and research they do with AI. Because this is a race and for now nobody wants to step on the brakes until there is another winter for AI.
I think it will be missing whatever you want to call the human spirit for a long time. It’s missing in writing and it’s missing in pictures. The technical ability is advancing at an impressive pace, but at the end of the day I find things generated by AI to just feel empty and dull.
I still use them and enjoy them and want to see how far they can go, but I think there is an upper bound that is below human journeyman level until we create a vastly different sort of AI that might surpass sentience and perhaps even be considered sapient. And we’re currently far short of sentient.
Pictures have an easy fix because text is the worst possible input. It’s a demo gone feral. Image-to-image can fill content and apply style over anything, which is how you get those detailed medieval landscapes where you squint and it’s Rick Astley.
The near-future use of this tech is rendering blocky CGI (or even just finger-painting keyframes) and having the machine tweak that to hell and back.
Right now, sure. But remember that 10 years ago, neural net generated images were putting eyes everywhere, and wouldn’t create anything close to a believable photo. I wouldn’t be surprised if 10 years from now, video’s will have made a similar leap.
On the other hand, I do hope that between now and then, some laws will have been put in place to only train on ethically sourced datasets - which will slow down progress, but is more fair to the creators.
I don’t care what published works a neural network gets trained on. How else are we supposed to make one? We tried all the clever ways and they don’t work.
Nothing as miserable as copyright should prevent the obviously transformative act of grinding the entire internet into a couple gigabytes of linear algebra. The more stuff goes in, the less any single piece matters. If the robot can reproduce more than a vague resemblance to particular inputs then that’s a failure called overfitting. A network that can spit out Man Of Steel frame-by-frame won’t be good at much else. We want it to know who Superman is and how capes work. You can’t get that by scanning the same DVD over and over.
Hard, because the countries are not going to agree and do not want to limit themselves with what could end up harming them in the future.
At least that the international copyright treaties are updated (a titanic task to be fulfilled), but it does not ensure that all countries, organizations, companies or individuals follow and respect the agreements made, especially in developing countries.
It’s definitely cool from that standpoint. Don’t get me wrong. But the output from image and video AI usually doesn’t impress me all that much. It’s technically impressive but the output doesn’t surpass what a competent human can do in terms of composition, creativity, and depth. And I know the fear is that eventually it will, but I adamantly believe it never will.
It will depend on how much investment they put into the development and research they do with AI. Because this is a race and for now nobody wants to step on the brakes until there is another winter for AI.
I think it will be missing whatever you want to call the human spirit for a long time. It’s missing in writing and it’s missing in pictures. The technical ability is advancing at an impressive pace, but at the end of the day I find things generated by AI to just feel empty and dull.
I still use them and enjoy them and want to see how far they can go, but I think there is an upper bound that is below human journeyman level until we create a vastly different sort of AI that might surpass sentience and perhaps even be considered sapient. And we’re currently far short of sentient.
Pictures have an easy fix because text is the worst possible input. It’s a demo gone feral. Image-to-image can fill content and apply style over anything, which is how you get those detailed medieval landscapes where you squint and it’s Rick Astley.
The near-future use of this tech is rendering blocky CGI (or even just finger-painting keyframes) and having the machine tweak that to hell and back.
Also if you actually use AI image gens over a long period you’ll find that it creates the same thing over and over. Same poses, same angles.
It all gets very samey, which makes sense
Hope that goalpost is easy to carry.