• self@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    8 months ago

    weird OpenAI neglected to mention that what the real artists were doing with the technology was spend a lot of time heavily editing and fucking rotoscoping its output to look barely passable

    but the result was still uninteresting garbage that’s only barely notable if you think generative AI did it, and we’ve established that all the coherent parts of this were done (as usual) with the hard work of a team of uncredited humans

    • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I am confused, was the expectation really a magic automate entire movie clip button? Because thats not how any kind of creative generative ai works in my experience.

      llms are not sentient, they cannot perform “intentional reasoning” of course the showcased art is a human work. Of course the raw output has hallucinations, gpt4 is not except of that either but its still a great drafter.

      The results stands to appear technologically very impressive. This kind of thing was perceived as never to be possible and improves quickly.

      No cameras, no physical shooting, no actors. Just a few creatives and something to compute.

      • self@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        8 months ago

        oh come the fuck off it, OpenAI’s marketing presents sora as exactly a magic automate entire movie clip button. here’s OpenAI marketing the stupid thing as a world simulator which is fucking laughable if it can’t maintain even basic consistency. here’s an analysis of how disappointing sora actually is

        tonight’s promptfans are fucking boring and I’m cranky from openai’s shitty sora page crashing my browser so I guess all you folks doing free marketing for Sam Altman can fuck off now

        • self@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          8 months ago

          also:

          The results stands to appear technologically very impressive. This kind of thing was perceived as never to be possible and improves quickly.

          No cameras, no physical shooting, no actors. Just a few creatives and something to compute.

          like @gnomicutterance@hachyderm.io I am begging generative AI idiots to realize how out of touch “no cameras, no physical shooting, no actors” is as a supposed milestone when it applies equally well to Xavier: Renegade Angel… except Xavier looked fucked up on purpose

            • froztbyte@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Tbh I find both acceptable, and not solely because I thought of the one. Current working mental taxonomy:

              Fans: the internet weird-nerds choosing to be bodyshields for this shit absent any other reason whatsoever

              Fondlers: those that write the thonkpieces as demonstrated elsethread (the infosec panic one)

      • flere-imsaho@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        8 months ago

        it’s quite telling that you don’t think that actors are “creatives” but think that “gpt-4 is a great drafter”.