Comment by robviren

Mainly just pulling from how my friends use it now, for the fun of it. We have sent each other silly generated videos of stuff we did or talked about. Kind of like how we used up compute, storage, and bandwidth to send memes and funny videos. If it were the 80s we would spent proportional cost to share a cat picture perhaps, but look at what we did with the bleeding edge even then. Turned the computers into game machines, shared things, wasted time. This is just an extension of that idea. Everything cutting edge ends up getting used for silly things.

I think they are talking about making their own series, not selling something, which will be valuable to exactly one person (or in this case a group chat). Which is awesome.

> AI doesn’t increase the value of content, it makes it meaningless by destroying scarcity.

Most art is in some way or form derivative of another work or a combination of somesorts. I enjoy derivative works. To me, AI already has value. I don't seek endless gratification through originality.

A whole series would involve writing thousands of prompts, not just a few seconds. But since you bring it up, one thing I think we can eventually expect is an avalanche of fan created continuations of cancelled shows, like an 8th season of Star Trek: The Next Generation, or a decent 8th season of Game of Thrones. Instead of writing a tie-in novel, aspiring genre authors will write screenplays and turn them into AI movies.

Like the hot take but it is needlessly negative because it doesn’t go far enough.

You could make the same argument about musical instruments, or being able to record and playback music, dj tools, etc.

I think what you get is the power law distribution for tons of content. Some of the stuff is still mega valuable, but distribution just gets more and more important and it’s harder and harder to break through. This is what the “democratization” of any previously difficulty-gated endeavor does.

More niches will be created, more fragmentation in tastes, stuff like that. Not just completely valueless content.

Incumbents and platform providers get to win through it all though, because humans still want to fill their time.

Ironically I think it might, by serving as a synthetic generator to learn to better understand artistic values for those who need it. We wouldn't know what is ever so slightly wrong about replicator Earl Grey, without trying it for a while.

A lot of people right now claim that they cannot tell apart AI output from human art, while many of them seem to grow rather agitated and stressed after repeated exposure. I bet they're going to be forced into exclusively making art manually, or viewing exclusively human art at some point, and through that ways, AIs could increase value of human made data.

I find it funny that wishes for AI arts always seem to be more anime and end to Marvel slop. They want human slop go away thanks to AI slop? I'm not meaning to call out someone for contradiction or inconsistency - as I do understand the sentiment. But it gives me chuckles.

AI is going to watching those. AI watches much faster than humans.

Because few are great storytellers, people like celebrities, and having a shared cultural reference point.

Even TikTok's main fuel are likes and shares. Isolated material will just cease to be interesting, because it's from your own imagination.

> We'll have media that caters to people's long-tail interests.

This isn't inherently a bad thing but I don't believe it's without its costs, one of which being that with everyone watching (potentially) completely unique media there'll be no shared cultural artifacts to communicate with others about.

VivziePop may have started as a small creator but the recent creations such as Hazbin Hotel have now become things where the enjoyment can be shared with other fans, which in some ways is the secondary purpose of all media. Media enjoyed alone can still be rewarding, media enjoyed with others can be much more than that (except for going to the cinema with strangers, that can disappear immediately).

It seems like a common idea that if we can just generate a practically-infinite stream of media then we've solved some kind of problem with there just not being enough "content" (I hate using the term in this way but it's concise), and while I do sympathise with the points of view from people that can't find things they like, I also don't really believe that "Content is a problem".

More variety itself isn't a problem, but I'm not convinced that in general there's a _lack_ of content. Humans have already reached peak saturation in terms of the sheer amount of text, audio and video that's created every day. No single item of media is itself a problem, but perhaps the total aggregate of everything isn't helpful.

> There will be an abundance of talent that is finally able to create their vision rather than nepotism their way into one of 500 limited annual roles of autonomy.

Is it possible that part of what creates quality is having to collaborate with others? Would Star Wars have been as good as it was without Marcia Lucas?

Yay, I can't wait for entertainment to stop being soulless corporate sequels and reboots and derivatives, and now with an LLM I can now get soulless machine generated sequels and reboots and derivatives!

Sounds like hell. Yeah let’s have everybody live in their own bubble, that’ll work out great (not) and let’s have that bubble be able to be influenced in the tiniest ways so they will consume more products, amazing!

Maybe we can finally get shows/movies that are faithful to the books instead of whatever slop we normally get (Looking at you WoT). Obviously a book != a script (like script for a show/movie, not a code script) but with LLMs I feel confident it could generate a script that could be reviewed directly or review the final video then go back and tweak the script as needed ("Ahh crap, it misunderstood the 'you' in that sentence and the wrong character just spoke in the generated video, let me fix that and re-gen that scene").

>Egyptians waging war with the Atlanteans. But perhaps with the serious tone of "The Wire". That would never have been greenlit before

This is quite literally what the Marvel / Star wars mass media slop is, a sort of syncretistic version of every pop culture phenomenon scientifically engineered down to A/B tested audience taste. It's excatly what you're complaining about, never-ending banal stuff. It'll be Disneyfication on steroids.

It's a sort of media masturbation, hooking your brain up to itself and feeding it its own output, what the large studios are already doing with their franchises, just on an individual level. You'll basically sit in your own never-ending Marvel hell, basically D.F Wallace's Infinite Jest.

Art is obviously the opposite, something external and disruptive, a creative act from someone who isn't you.

One real example of AI generated video that in my opinion marks the start of common people consuming AI video are the bigfoot vlog vidoes. The first time ever i see normal people watching this and genuinely like it.

> No more Disney-fication, no more Marvel / Star Wars "mass media slop". We'll have media that caters to people's long-tail interests.

Lol. Where do you think these models will get the source data for these amazing generations?

Also, an average person's "long tail" is incredibly boring (I know mine is). You will need someone to create a next Breaking Bad, or a next Discworld, or... Your slop-generating machine will not be able to generate it from a "long tail"