It is
They kill each other off and new companies will rise from the ashes focused on making good products instead of the megacorp zombies who can't get off course to do something interesting
Just means all the smaller ips these individual companies own ultimately get buried for tax writeoffs and such when they merge, only the biggest of shit will be allowed to get being remade and sequelized to death
Seriously, though. A Roger Rabbit-style mashup between the DCEU, Looney Tunes, the Potterverse and Frasier could be kino if it was well written. Which it wouldn't be because Hollywood writers are all useless diversity hires and self-loathing white cucks, but still
There's no easy answer because the terms aren't properly defined. Within two years you'll be able to type a basic prompt and get decent-"ish" video back running at less than 5 minutes.
That's obviously not the same thing though. But it sparks the question of how much does it need to do to be that thing and how good does the output need to be to satisfy the demand?
Within 5 years, the professional film industry will be radically different due to ai though.
AI is a coomer nerd fantasy that will never truly affect any creative field. No one gives a shit about robotic reflections of what humans have already created.
and then we feed the "organic human experience stuff" into the models and generate more of that.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Like what? Genuinely curious how you see AI generated stuff being able to move people like a high quality painting can?
4 months ago
Anonymous
you seem more qualified to speak to whatever magical quality you're ascribing to paint than i am.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I don't mean to be stuffy or whatever. Some paintings and movies can be moving, others aren't. I have a hard time seeing AI replacing the moving stuff, but I bet it can do the non moving stuff pretty easily. New Avengers movie? done. Something fresh and new and interesting? I don't know, probably not, or at least I dont think it would feel right
4 months ago
Anonymous
This is going to sound cynical, but it really isn't.
No one has legitimately come up with something "new and moving" for centuries, if not longer. Every example of "new and moving" really is just old stories/imagery, repackaged in such a way so as to allow people to allow themselves to be affected. Avoiding the hurdles and barriers like "i've seen this before, i know where this is going, etc." Its not magic, its not easy, but it isn't new. There's a very small number of universal themes/ideas that will always work, but only if you can "sneak" them in to an increasingly cynical audience.
4 months ago
Anonymous
You're 100% right for sure. Would you say AI could sneak those themes in to a movie as well as a person could? I guess narratively why not but
I'm still on the thread of 100% AI generated movies. "Cortana, make me a Blood Meridian adaptation" and 15 minutes later it's rendered out a brand new movie.
I don't see that ever really being as good as a man-made movie where a team of people cares about what they're making.
4 months ago
Anonymous
well, you can always tell the difference between movies that people cared about making and movies people didn't care about making.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>No one has legitimately come up with something "new and moving" for centuries
Pretentious homosexual. Go back.
4 months ago
Anonymous
the only place I've ever been is here.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>like a high quality painting can >There are AI models where you can select a famous artist and then a prompt to create artwork like it came from that person >There are robotic chefs with AI models built from all the world's top chefs >There are models built off the best authors
AI training consists of pitting two AI against one another. One trying to replicate the style of an art piece and the other AI going "lolno", until finally the first AI can do it so well that it tricks the second one
4 months ago
Anonymous
>AI training consists of pitting two AI against one another.
Classical AI has basically nothing to do with Generative AI.
not saying that, just saying that "copying" 1% of people isn't meaningful.
Yeah it's probably just clickbait.
4 months ago
Anonymous
The conversation is about generative AI
4 months ago
Anonymous
Im suspicious that it never shows it doing anything but adding pre-made items together. Show me the robot chopping a whole onion with a rotten outer layer
>difference in data storage capacity >difference in kind of “intelligence”
“AI” is not actual intelligence moron. It’s a computation based on an algorithm. Circuit boards will never create a fricking thing, ever.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Human brains are also algorithmic. How could they not be? They're input > output devices
4 months ago
Anonymous
>NPC can’t comprehend emergent properties
Makes sense.
4 months ago
Anonymous
interact with AI generation content enough and you'll see things you can't call anything but "emergent" properties as well.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>dood the circuit board totally has a mind of its own!
Nah.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>dood the animo-acids totally has a mind of its own!
you are a meat computer.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Explain to me right now why a carbon-based processor can have emergent properties and a silicon-based processor can't.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Because your brain produces imagination and we have no fricking clue how it works. We know how computer processors work exactly because we fricking designed them, dummy.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Computer processors also have imagination, though much less than an average human-brain does. Consciousness is not exclusively in the domain of carbon-based processing devices. We don't know how consciousness is created, but we know it is an emergent property of calculating-systems.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Computer processors also have imagination
No they don’t you drooling fricking gooner. Lmao. Touch grass immediately.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>computers will never match humans because we know how computers work and we don't know how humans work
lmao
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Human brains have emergent properties but ML models can't because... because they're soulless, they just are!
4 months ago
Anonymous
>dood the animo-acids totally has a mind of its own!
you are a meat computer.
Terminally online spergs desperately want the magical AI to give their pathetic lives meaning, I know. But it’s not happening. Humans can create, chatbots cannot.
4 months ago
Anonymous
... or just excited about bespoke media generation...
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Humans can create, chatbots cannot.
cute cope meatbag
4 months ago
Anonymous
what does that headline even mean, that's such clickbait
4 months ago
Anonymous
how about you read the abstact of that study and then come back here sweetie
gonna be that guy, being able to copy people isn't really "matching" them. and yeah, 1% of human thinkers is close to a billion people, and we only remember a hundred or so of them.
hate to be that guy but we are talking about dogshit llm in 2023, when the progress is getting exponentially faster every year
4 months ago
Anonymous
How about you post the study next time then and not the clickbait homepage article then wienersmoker
4 months ago
Anonymous
gonna be that guy, being able to copy people isn't really "matching" them. and yeah, 1% of human thinkers is close to a billion people, and we only remember a hundred or so of them.
4 months ago
Anonymous
And the technology will never get better. This is why birds will always be better at flying than mechanical birds.
4 months ago
Anonymous
not saying that, just saying that "copying" 1% of people isn't meaningful.
4 months ago
Anonymous
AI Scum and their sympathizers will all be purged in the future.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>NOOOOOO AI BAD! I NEED TO WAGEKEK BECAUSE..... I'M NOTHING WITHOUT MY JOB!
can't wait for the suicide pods companies stocks to skyrocket
4 months ago
Anonymous
I dont like AI on a deeper level, they could become competition, we dont need that. Anything that can think can revolt.
4 months ago
Anonymous
this why do people really want super AI machines thinking for themselves?
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Anything that can think can revolt
Revolutions get squashed everyday. Real life isn't Terminator btw
4 months ago
Anonymous
>someone needs to prepare all the dough >someone needs to chop all the vegetables, shred all the cheese, etc. >someone needs to load all that shit in their little hoppers
4 months ago
Anonymous
>someone
The machine
>any one of a thousand parts breaks or fails in anyway the whole thing stops working
lol can't wait for people to go bankrupt maintaining this shit
>bankrupt
how?
4 months ago
Anonymous
bruh the machine just takes prepared ingredients and makes them pizza. easy to go bankrupt if something takes longer than a few hours to fix. something like that would need every part checked each day.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah man it's called having a maintenance person on duty, just like every other place that has machines. With no other staff that's all there really is. A boss/owner, service tech and a food app to handle the orders.
4 months ago
Anonymous
i don't think you understand how delicate and complicated robotics are.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I'm sure the companies and their investors are taking all of that into account. The world is filled with robotics already, going back decades
4 months ago
Anonymous
the response to that video is the 3 year old chink making fried rice. how much does a chink toddler cost vs how much does that machine cost.
4 months ago
Anonymous
The chink in your scenario can only work 8hr shifts, maybe the odd double shift and he can call in sick. The machine can work 24/7 and your cashier is a food delivery app on someone's phone
4 months ago
Anonymous
the point is you've built a machine capable of doing what a 3 year old human can, as long as its supervised by an adult human to prep all the ingredients. who could just make the stir-fry himself.
4 months ago
Anonymous
That's a weak ass point. Have you ever supervised staff before or ran I business? Sounds like you're worried about McDonalds firing you
4 months ago
Anonymous
>and a food app to handle the orders.
you have to be 18 to post here kiddo
4 months ago
Anonymous
You're not using that phrase correctly, newbie
4 months ago
Anonymous
>any one of a thousand parts breaks or fails in anyway the whole thing stops working
lol can't wait for people to go bankrupt maintaining this shit
4 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah man it's called having a maintenance person on duty, just like every other place that has machines. With no other staff that's all there really is. A boss/owner, service tech and a food app to handle the orders.
It will be a long time before robots replace people when it comes to cooking. Call me when they can cook something entirely from scratch with ingredients that still need prepping. Not only that, have you seen those homies in the kitchens of dominos and shit? They make things at 5x the speed of these machines
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Call me when
I'm not sure you even understand your own argument. There are different levels of restauranting and there a different companies for entering each of those spaces. I don't know why you're obsessed with prepwork which is the lowliest and most robotic job in the kitchen. There are machines for doing prepwork > dominos >They make things at 5x the speed of these machines
You're watching promo videos.
4 months ago
Anonymous
4 months ago
Anonymous
I'm bearish on timelines for AI generated movies, but I'm not enough of a brainlet to claim human computation is mathematically different from silicon computation.
You act like this is anything new. Why would you want to watch something you created? All the indie shit in games and comics, people still buy AAA games and real comics/manga
in playing around with AI generation, from all the way back to AI dungeon and stable diffusion, AI consistently has the ability to surprise with the directions it takes with pure literal interpretations of a prompt.
>the digital world makes paper books and document almost completely obsolete >autonomous vehicles now dominate our roads >2019
kek this was written by high hopes this was made by a clueless I FRICKING LOVE SCIENCE fanboy I am guessing.
>2019 - 2029 >none of this shit is even close to happening yet
go back to the r/Ifrickinglovescience subreddit bro kek
4 months ago
Anonymous
half of it's already happened. the "deep relationship" thing is happening. don't see carbon nanotube lattice computing happening, quantum computing is what everyone is working on. and the total computing power is kinda meaningless, and self-driving cars will probably never be a serious thing.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>self-driving cars will probably never be a serious thing. >t. increasingly nervous truck driver
4 months ago
Anonymous
its because a self-driving car can't hold an insurance policy. insurance companies basically run how the roads work.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>can't hold an insurance policy
yes, for now. not true in 2 more years. seethe and cope luddite
4 months ago
Anonymous
the insurance companies would be the "luddites" in the equation, my ESL chum. they will never consider a computer to be the holder of an insurance policy, only a person. being able to isolate blame/responsibility to individual (human) drivers is something that is not possible with auto-drive.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>hire Black folk to sit in car and do nothing for $1/h
what's your next cope
4 months ago
Anonymous
>okay it will cost 500,000k a year to insure this
4 months ago
Anonymous
but self-driving cars are 6x safer tho? did you speedread my screenshot?
you're not understanding, possibly intentionally. If the operator, policy holder, etc, is completely incompetent and can do nothing but accept responsibility for the accident, then the premiums would be astronomical. Increasing the skill/ability of the operator reduces the premiums and the balancing point between the pay of the operator and the premiums is... current truck drivers.
so you've spent obscene amounts of money to automate your trucks, and still need to pay a guy the same amount to do nothing in them, and an additional workforce to maintain them. Or you could hyper-train one person to be able to service every aspect of a self-driving truck, who can also manually drive a truck, etc. either way this all translates to spending fricktons of money for no actual benefit, thanks to insurance companies.
4 months ago
Anonymous
AI cucks don’t have functioning brains. They think circuit boards have fricking imaginations lmao.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>you're not understanding, possibly intentionally. If the operator, policy holder, etc, is completely incompetent and can do nothing but accept responsibility for the accident, then the premiums would be astronomical.
you're not understanding, possibly intentionally, that "driver doing nothing" make the whole thing a lot safer, so the premium should decrease not increase
How about you post the study next time then and not the clickbait homepage article then wienersmoker
how about you come back here once you are 18
4 months ago
Anonymous
read the entire post you dumb monkey
4 months ago
Anonymous
i read it, a lot of cope because self-driving in 2023 is still barely usable. we are talking about 2029 when none of your assumptions will be valid anymore
4 months ago
Anonymous
>insurance companies will cease to exist by 2029
nah. they're going to always be the main roadblock here.
4 months ago
Anonymous
take your meds schizo
4 months ago
Anonymous
i accept your concession.
That's a weak ass point. Have you ever supervised staff before or ran I business? Sounds like you're worried about McDonalds firing you
i've done both. its clearly you who has no experience with... anything.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>wagecuck too braindead to understand that 2024-2029 will have 10x progress of 2019-2024
ngmi
4 months ago
Anonymous
let's also ignore that those "predictions" were made between 1990 and 2005
trust the science sisters
4 months ago
Anonymous
Most of that stuff has happened though. Everyone I see has some sort of smart watch, especially boomers. All modern appliances have some sort of computer on them that connects to the Internet, all new makes of car have some sort of driving assist, neets are falling in love with ML waifus, AI art is readily avilable and if you ever come across a tourist they whip out their phone to translate. The one thing that's wrongis the nanotube stuff, because nanotubes have always been a meme.
4 months ago
Anonymous
let's also ignore that those "predictions" were made between 1990 and 2005
Because movie viewers are moronic and don't know how to make good movies. If they did, they would already be making them. All you're going to get is a flood of shitty "Goku vs. Thanos" animations.
Apple is buying Disney though. >The year is 2030 >90% of media is produced by 3 tech conglomerates: Amazon/Warner/Paramount, Apple/Disney, and Microsoft/Sony/Comcast
More like you watch first 10 minutes of an episode before the app crashes. The Max app is horribly coded. Now try making it run 10k hours of Paramount content.
>merge
paramount is conning them
reminder that wb was cheated out of tens of millions in their south park deal and still have active litigation against them
get paramount's properties in the fire sale, zaslav
>Amazon butt fricks Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer >Disney swallows 20th Century Fox whole and turns it into a hollow shell >Apple and Netflix will probably merge with some random conglomerate, with or without Universal involved >Sony/Columbia is doing who knows what with who knows who, might be cannibalized by the house of mouse in the near future
Anons, how does it feel to witness the heat death of Hollywood?
Ambivalent because I want a screenwriting career, but I don’t necessarily want to work with any of these conglomerate homosexuals either. We need a new Roger Corman or Harvey Weinstein to step up and help rekindle independent cinema.
a24 and blumhouse are doing what hollywood should've done, lots of small to mid budget releases tailored to specific demographics. the new new hollywood will never be as large as current or old hollywood, but it'll exist.
>lots of small to mid budget releases tailored to specific demographics
I mean every studio caters to various demographics and there are loads of small budge movies. How is A24 any different?
4 months ago
Anonymous
they aren't going for mass appeal, which is a dead business model.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Again, that's nothing new. a24gays just suck them off no matter what like they invented movie making
4 months ago
Anonymous
no one is saying its new, the point is hollywood abandoned small/mid-budget because they thought spectacle was the only thing no one could compete with. which is blowing up in their face. While small/mid-budget is the way forward. Has been for about 15 years now.
4 months ago
Anonymous
A24 won't replace hollywood though, since one is simply a studio and the other is an entire industry. Users will just ping pong between streaming platforms and get whichever ones give them the most bang for their buck. We've returned to the days of cable packages, so really history is just repeating itself
4 months ago
Anonymous
anon... hollywood is collapsing. I don't know how you haven't noticed this. You asked how a24 was kickstarting new new hollywood, i told you. its not going to be the only studio (as there's already multiple operating on the new new hollywood models) but current hollywood is dead.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>We've returned to the days of cable packages, so really history is just repeating itself
Disney and Paramount are already experimenting with bundles; i.e. carving off pieces of their catalogs to sell back to you. If Hulu fully absorbs Disney, there’s no way they won’t splinter off content into $10 packages based off user interest. Warner Brothers Paramount will be the same. In short, it will be cable packages but more individualized. >I like Marvel and Pixar, but could do without the nature documentaries >Is there a way I can pay $5 just for Nickelodeon?
4 months ago
Anonymous
A24 won't replace hollywood though, since one is simply a studio and the other is an entire industry. Users will just ping pong between streaming platforms and get whichever ones give them the most bang for their buck. We've returned to the days of cable packages, so really history is just repeating itself
proposing streaming bundles is just a last ditch desperation approach. it "worked" with cable because cable was quickly established as superior to air broadcast. since there are countless other options, there's no sane reason to pay for a "streaming bundle." Literally no one is subscribed to every platform now, trying to fractionalize the market further into isolated bundles is just nonsense.
i think paramount is on par with netflix and amazon regarding writing quality and diversity hires. HBO and Warner still manage to churn out watchable content, despite noticeable downgrades in recent years.
How. WB is mass debt. So much get Zaslav is doing tax fraud with movie right offs. There’s a 60% chance WB will go bankrupt next year. How they going to buy Paramount?
>WB’s debt almost killed AT&T
Nono, AT&T got rid of WB as soon as possible because the practice of calling expenses assets and leveraging them is what worldcom did, and worldcom got in a huge amount of trouble for doing that.
then dicovery gutted WB to try to get them out of debt.
>Agreeing to a merger
Paramount must be dumb or have some corrupt people taking bribes because this will just make a mega indebted company about to pop. And that means universal will swoop in to buy the fricking mess that is Paramount Warner Discovery (aka Puny White Dick) just to dab on Disney and turn their theme parks into a force to be reckoned with.
I don’t think this is going to happen though. Today after this news, the black dude who owns the weather channel is offering to buy BET for 3.5 Billion which is enough for paramount to pay off a portion of their debt
Comcast can't own CBS when they already own NBC, due to Federal regulations of the broadcast networks. So if they buy Paramount, they will only buy parts of it, and have to sell of the rest. With WBD, they will buy all of Paramount and might only offload BET to a willing buyer to save some cash, but not because of Fed regulations.
What's interesting is that the two leading suiters for Paramount are both spin-off's of AT&T. As a third generation shareholder; ma bell is the gift that keeps on giving.
>one massively debt-ridden company barely breaking even merging with another massively debt-ridden company that's been losing money >to "create synergy" and cut long-term costs, the merged company will have to borrow billions of dollars more to payout severance to corporate employees they will layoff >Feds expected to jack up interest rate more in 2024
Surely all of these studios buying each other up and becoming megastudios will be good for audiences, right?
Consolidation precedes collapse.
Extremely centralization is like an one-party country. In many ways we already are. 1% vs the rest.
It’s scary how big these megacorps are. You can pick any big name from 40 years ago and see how it’s all part of the same 5 companies now
its an illusion mostly. the new WB/Discovery/Paramount monstrosity will be smaller than, say, viacom was at its peak.
It is
They kill each other off and new companies will rise from the ashes focused on making good products instead of the megacorp zombies who can't get off course to do something interesting
Just means all the smaller ips these individual companies own ultimately get buried for tax writeoffs and such when they merge, only the biggest of shit will be allowed to get being remade and sequelized to death
Yes, space jam 3 gonna be finna lit
Couldn't give a toss.
Your mom gave me a toss.
Heckin cool, now we can see Flash meets Sonic and Bugs Bunny meets Frasier
Seriously, though. A Roger Rabbit-style mashup between the DCEU, Looney Tunes, the Potterverse and Frasier could be kino if it was well written. Which it wouldn't be because Hollywood writers are all useless diversity hires and self-loathing white cucks, but still
>uuuuurrr duuuuuuurrrr
>piling 8 fricking properties together because i am le smarter than movie executives
you sound like a big talking moron with a small smooth brain.
Paramount Discovery Brotherhood
Yeah, it's fricking over. How could any studio possibly compete against an AI that makes a movie about whatever you want instantly.
It's OVER
How long until that happens? Gotta still be a while right? 10 years?
Inside of this decade.
Fine by me sounds cool.
There's no easy answer because the terms aren't properly defined. Within two years you'll be able to type a basic prompt and get decent-"ish" video back running at less than 5 minutes.
That's obviously not the same thing though. But it sparks the question of how much does it need to do to be that thing and how good does the output need to be to satisfy the demand?
Within 5 years, the professional film industry will be radically different due to ai though.
ice cold, years old take, but the coom is gonna be out of control.
That's not a good thing imo
AI is a coomer nerd fantasy that will never truly affect any creative field. No one gives a shit about robotic reflections of what humans have already created.
indeed. photography will never replace paint.
The sexual parts of it really feel like something that should go away after you have sex.
It'll just be the new cars vs bikes and horses, or photography and painting.
AI will dominate cheap transactional "art" but there will always be demand for the more organic human experience stuff.
and then we feed the "organic human experience stuff" into the models and generate more of that.
Like what? Genuinely curious how you see AI generated stuff being able to move people like a high quality painting can?
you seem more qualified to speak to whatever magical quality you're ascribing to paint than i am.
I don't mean to be stuffy or whatever. Some paintings and movies can be moving, others aren't. I have a hard time seeing AI replacing the moving stuff, but I bet it can do the non moving stuff pretty easily. New Avengers movie? done. Something fresh and new and interesting? I don't know, probably not, or at least I dont think it would feel right
This is going to sound cynical, but it really isn't.
No one has legitimately come up with something "new and moving" for centuries, if not longer. Every example of "new and moving" really is just old stories/imagery, repackaged in such a way so as to allow people to allow themselves to be affected. Avoiding the hurdles and barriers like "i've seen this before, i know where this is going, etc." Its not magic, its not easy, but it isn't new. There's a very small number of universal themes/ideas that will always work, but only if you can "sneak" them in to an increasingly cynical audience.
You're 100% right for sure. Would you say AI could sneak those themes in to a movie as well as a person could? I guess narratively why not but
I'm still on the thread of 100% AI generated movies. "Cortana, make me a Blood Meridian adaptation" and 15 minutes later it's rendered out a brand new movie.
I don't see that ever really being as good as a man-made movie where a team of people cares about what they're making.
well, you can always tell the difference between movies that people cared about making and movies people didn't care about making.
>No one has legitimately come up with something "new and moving" for centuries
Pretentious homosexual. Go back.
the only place I've ever been is here.
>like a high quality painting can
>There are AI models where you can select a famous artist and then a prompt to create artwork like it came from that person
>There are robotic chefs with AI models built from all the world's top chefs
>There are models built off the best authors
AI training consists of pitting two AI against one another. One trying to replicate the style of an art piece and the other AI going "lolno", until finally the first AI can do it so well that it tricks the second one
>AI training consists of pitting two AI against one another.
Classical AI has basically nothing to do with Generative AI.
Yeah it's probably just clickbait.
The conversation is about generative AI
Im suspicious that it never shows it doing anything but adding pre-made items together. Show me the robot chopping a whole onion with a rotten outer layer
Uhh horsebros? How we doing?
We're so back baby
mp3s will never replace records or CDs
fricking moronic butthole
Those are all just file storage. That's fundamentally different from art generation.
... homie we had the exact same conversations about analog vs digital that you're pretending is new to human vs ai
>difference in data storage capacity
>difference in kind of “intelligence”
“AI” is not actual intelligence moron. It’s a computation based on an algorithm. Circuit boards will never create a fricking thing, ever.
Human brains are also algorithmic. How could they not be? They're input > output devices
>NPC can’t comprehend emergent properties
Makes sense.
interact with AI generation content enough and you'll see things you can't call anything but "emergent" properties as well.
>dood the circuit board totally has a mind of its own!
Nah.
>dood the animo-acids totally has a mind of its own!
you are a meat computer.
Explain to me right now why a carbon-based processor can have emergent properties and a silicon-based processor can't.
Because your brain produces imagination and we have no fricking clue how it works. We know how computer processors work exactly because we fricking designed them, dummy.
Computer processors also have imagination, though much less than an average human-brain does. Consciousness is not exclusively in the domain of carbon-based processing devices. We don't know how consciousness is created, but we know it is an emergent property of calculating-systems.
>Computer processors also have imagination
No they don’t you drooling fricking gooner. Lmao. Touch grass immediately.
>computers will never match humans because we know how computers work and we don't know how humans work
lmao
>Human brains have emergent properties but ML models can't because... because they're soulless, they just are!
Terminally online spergs desperately want the magical AI to give their pathetic lives meaning, I know. But it’s not happening. Humans can create, chatbots cannot.
... or just excited about bespoke media generation...
>Humans can create, chatbots cannot.
cute cope meatbag
what does that headline even mean, that's such clickbait
how about you read the abstact of that study and then come back here sweetie
hate to be that guy but we are talking about dogshit llm in 2023, when the progress is getting exponentially faster every year
How about you post the study next time then and not the clickbait homepage article then wienersmoker
gonna be that guy, being able to copy people isn't really "matching" them. and yeah, 1% of human thinkers is close to a billion people, and we only remember a hundred or so of them.
And the technology will never get better. This is why birds will always be better at flying than mechanical birds.
not saying that, just saying that "copying" 1% of people isn't meaningful.
AI Scum and their sympathizers will all be purged in the future.
>NOOOOOO AI BAD! I NEED TO WAGEKEK BECAUSE..... I'M NOTHING WITHOUT MY JOB!
can't wait for the suicide pods companies stocks to skyrocket
I dont like AI on a deeper level, they could become competition, we dont need that. Anything that can think can revolt.
this why do people really want super AI machines thinking for themselves?
>Anything that can think can revolt
Revolutions get squashed everyday. Real life isn't Terminator btw
>someone needs to prepare all the dough
>someone needs to chop all the vegetables, shred all the cheese, etc.
>someone needs to load all that shit in their little hoppers
>someone
The machine
>bankrupt
how?
bruh the machine just takes prepared ingredients and makes them pizza. easy to go bankrupt if something takes longer than a few hours to fix. something like that would need every part checked each day.
Yeah man it's called having a maintenance person on duty, just like every other place that has machines. With no other staff that's all there really is. A boss/owner, service tech and a food app to handle the orders.
i don't think you understand how delicate and complicated robotics are.
I'm sure the companies and their investors are taking all of that into account. The world is filled with robotics already, going back decades
the response to that video is the 3 year old chink making fried rice. how much does a chink toddler cost vs how much does that machine cost.
The chink in your scenario can only work 8hr shifts, maybe the odd double shift and he can call in sick. The machine can work 24/7 and your cashier is a food delivery app on someone's phone
the point is you've built a machine capable of doing what a 3 year old human can, as long as its supervised by an adult human to prep all the ingredients. who could just make the stir-fry himself.
That's a weak ass point. Have you ever supervised staff before or ran I business? Sounds like you're worried about McDonalds firing you
>and a food app to handle the orders.
you have to be 18 to post here kiddo
You're not using that phrase correctly, newbie
>any one of a thousand parts breaks or fails in anyway the whole thing stops working
lol can't wait for people to go bankrupt maintaining this shit
It will be a long time before robots replace people when it comes to cooking. Call me when they can cook something entirely from scratch with ingredients that still need prepping. Not only that, have you seen those homies in the kitchens of dominos and shit? They make things at 5x the speed of these machines
>Call me when
I'm not sure you even understand your own argument. There are different levels of restauranting and there a different companies for entering each of those spaces. I don't know why you're obsessed with prepwork which is the lowliest and most robotic job in the kitchen. There are machines for doing prepwork
> dominos
>They make things at 5x the speed of these machines
You're watching promo videos.
I'm bearish on timelines for AI generated movies, but I'm not enough of a brainlet to claim human computation is mathematically different from silicon computation.
>Within two years you'll be able to type a basic prompt and get decent-"ish" video back running at less than 5 minutes.
... homie that happened months ago
That video isn't decent. That video is kind of viewable, prone to ai frickups in interpreting shit, and less than 5 seconds long.
You act like this is anything new. Why would you want to watch something you created? All the indie shit in games and comics, people still buy AAA games and real comics/manga
in playing around with AI generation, from all the way back to AI dungeon and stable diffusion, AI consistently has the ability to surprise with the directions it takes with pure literal interpretations of a prompt.
Oh wow, ALL the way back then? You're a real "oldgay" in the gen AI game!
ai dungeon was like five years ago bruh. that's like half a century in any other medium. and shit, ai dungeon was gpt2?
2 more years, unironically. digital luddites have no idea what's coming
oh so two more weeks?
>AI becomes conscious by 2029
>the digital world makes paper books and document almost completely obsolete
>autonomous vehicles now dominate our roads
>2019
kek this was written by high hopes this was made by a clueless I FRICKING LOVE SCIENCE fanboy I am guessing.
>can't read a timeline chart
>thinks his opinion matters
kek
>2019 - 2029
>none of this shit is even close to happening yet
go back to the r/Ifrickinglovescience subreddit bro kek
half of it's already happened. the "deep relationship" thing is happening. don't see carbon nanotube lattice computing happening, quantum computing is what everyone is working on. and the total computing power is kinda meaningless, and self-driving cars will probably never be a serious thing.
>self-driving cars will probably never be a serious thing.
>t. increasingly nervous truck driver
its because a self-driving car can't hold an insurance policy. insurance companies basically run how the roads work.
>can't hold an insurance policy
yes, for now. not true in 2 more years. seethe and cope luddite
the insurance companies would be the "luddites" in the equation, my ESL chum. they will never consider a computer to be the holder of an insurance policy, only a person. being able to isolate blame/responsibility to individual (human) drivers is something that is not possible with auto-drive.
>hire Black folk to sit in car and do nothing for $1/h
what's your next cope
>okay it will cost 500,000k a year to insure this
but self-driving cars are 6x safer tho? did you speedread my screenshot?
https://www.theverge.com/2023/12/20/24006712/waymo-driverless-million-mile-safety-compare-human
you're not understanding, possibly intentionally. If the operator, policy holder, etc, is completely incompetent and can do nothing but accept responsibility for the accident, then the premiums would be astronomical. Increasing the skill/ability of the operator reduces the premiums and the balancing point between the pay of the operator and the premiums is... current truck drivers.
so you've spent obscene amounts of money to automate your trucks, and still need to pay a guy the same amount to do nothing in them, and an additional workforce to maintain them. Or you could hyper-train one person to be able to service every aspect of a self-driving truck, who can also manually drive a truck, etc. either way this all translates to spending fricktons of money for no actual benefit, thanks to insurance companies.
AI cucks don’t have functioning brains. They think circuit boards have fricking imaginations lmao.
>you're not understanding, possibly intentionally. If the operator, policy holder, etc, is completely incompetent and can do nothing but accept responsibility for the accident, then the premiums would be astronomical.
you're not understanding, possibly intentionally, that "driver doing nothing" make the whole thing a lot safer, so the premium should decrease not increase
how about you come back here once you are 18
read the entire post you dumb monkey
i read it, a lot of cope because self-driving in 2023 is still barely usable. we are talking about 2029 when none of your assumptions will be valid anymore
>insurance companies will cease to exist by 2029
nah. they're going to always be the main roadblock here.
take your meds schizo
i accept your concession.
i've done both. its clearly you who has no experience with... anything.
>wagecuck too braindead to understand that 2024-2029 will have 10x progress of 2019-2024
ngmi
trust the science sisters
Most of that stuff has happened though. Everyone I see has some sort of smart watch, especially boomers. All modern appliances have some sort of computer on them that connects to the Internet, all new makes of car have some sort of driving assist, neets are falling in love with ML waifus, AI art is readily avilable and if you ever come across a tourist they whip out their phone to translate. The one thing that's wrongis the nanotube stuff, because nanotubes have always been a meme.
let's also ignore that those "predictions" were made between 1990 and 2005
Fricking kek post more funny infographics
sure
What's over?
The current estimate is within 1 year's time until the first release.
doesn't even look like him
Because movie viewers are moronic and don't know how to make good movies. If they did, they would already be making them. All you're going to get is a flood of shitty "Goku vs. Thanos" animations.
shane carruth is the closest example of "regular person trying to make movies," and it just about fricking killed him every time he's done it.
Just wait until I get started. You'll regret ever posting this.
>AI that makes a movie about whatever you want instantly
Whatever I want?
yes you can make the gayest thing ever
Wohoho Hahahaha
>Hey we're both failing. Let's link up!
>wb merging AGAIN
lmao, how many mergers can one company sustain?
Discovery is the main moneymaker, these aren’t mergers as much as buyouts.
PLEASE RETCON NUTREK, ZASLEV. YOU CAN REDEEM YOURSELF.
Whoever acquires Paramount will do away with NuTrek. Why keep a money pit open? It's only there now to make Paramount look like it has a catalogue
The good thing about Trek is it’s already established there are infinite timelines. So everything made for Paramount+ can easily be retconned away.
Maybe should’ve bought spec scripts from competent white guys instead of all the turbohomosexual woke slop they’ve been churning out.
I'd rather Apple buy Paramount
Apple is buying Disney though.
>The year is 2030
>90% of media is produced by 3 tech conglomerates: Amazon/Warner/Paramount, Apple/Disney, and Microsoft/Sony/Comcast
lmao no they aren't. that's bullshit disney keeps having its shills float. only discovery is dumb enough to try to buy hollywood studios right now.
Still won't pay for anything.
I can't wait to watch Star Trek: Discovery on the all-new HBO-Max-Discovery-Paramount+ app!
More like you watch first 10 minutes of an episode before the app crashes. The Max app is horribly coded. Now try making it run 10k hours of Paramount content.
Everything is all the same anyway, what's the difference? Slop is slop is slop.
>merge
paramount is conning them
reminder that wb was cheated out of tens of millions in their south park deal and still have active litigation against them
get paramount's properties in the fire sale, zaslav
SO IT HAPPENED AGAIN
I'm okay with corporations merging if it means we can have less streaming services again.
Warnerbros.... how do we recover?
>Warnerbros
>Warner Bros
Underrated.
>Amazon butt fricks Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
>Disney swallows 20th Century Fox whole and turns it into a hollow shell
>Apple and Netflix will probably merge with some random conglomerate, with or without Universal involved
>Sony/Columbia is doing who knows what with who knows who, might be cannibalized by the house of mouse in the near future
Anons, how does it feel to witness the heat death of Hollywood?
Ambivalent because I want a screenwriting career, but I don’t necessarily want to work with any of these conglomerate homosexuals either. We need a new Roger Corman or Harvey Weinstein to step up and help rekindle independent cinema.
A24 is kickstarting the new new hollywood
How so?
a24 and blumhouse are doing what hollywood should've done, lots of small to mid budget releases tailored to specific demographics. the new new hollywood will never be as large as current or old hollywood, but it'll exist.
>lots of small to mid budget releases tailored to specific demographics
I mean every studio caters to various demographics and there are loads of small budge movies. How is A24 any different?
they aren't going for mass appeal, which is a dead business model.
Again, that's nothing new. a24gays just suck them off no matter what like they invented movie making
no one is saying its new, the point is hollywood abandoned small/mid-budget because they thought spectacle was the only thing no one could compete with. which is blowing up in their face. While small/mid-budget is the way forward. Has been for about 15 years now.
A24 won't replace hollywood though, since one is simply a studio and the other is an entire industry. Users will just ping pong between streaming platforms and get whichever ones give them the most bang for their buck. We've returned to the days of cable packages, so really history is just repeating itself
anon... hollywood is collapsing. I don't know how you haven't noticed this. You asked how a24 was kickstarting new new hollywood, i told you. its not going to be the only studio (as there's already multiple operating on the new new hollywood models) but current hollywood is dead.
>We've returned to the days of cable packages, so really history is just repeating itself
Disney and Paramount are already experimenting with bundles; i.e. carving off pieces of their catalogs to sell back to you. If Hulu fully absorbs Disney, there’s no way they won’t splinter off content into $10 packages based off user interest. Warner Brothers Paramount will be the same. In short, it will be cable packages but more individualized.
>I like Marvel and Pixar, but could do without the nature documentaries
>Is there a way I can pay $5 just for Nickelodeon?
proposing streaming bundles is just a last ditch desperation approach. it "worked" with cable because cable was quickly established as superior to air broadcast. since there are countless other options, there's no sane reason to pay for a "streaming bundle." Literally no one is subscribed to every platform now, trying to fractionalize the market further into isolated bundles is just nonsense.
So Star Trek cannot possibly be managed any worse then what Paramount did, right? Right?
>star trek meets duck dynasty
i'd rather have zaslav handling it than apple or whoever
i think paramount is on par with netflix and amazon regarding writing quality and diversity hires. HBO and Warner still manage to churn out watchable content, despite noticeable downgrades in recent years.
>HBO and Warner still manage to churn out watchable content
Ok pajeet.
compared to amazon and netflix? yes.
How. WB is mass debt. So much get Zaslav is doing tax fraud with movie right offs. There’s a 60% chance WB will go bankrupt next year. How they going to buy Paramount?
Based, we need more consolidation in the industry
WB getting China bailout money?
Paramount are idiots. WB’s debt almost killed AT&T and Discovery.
Now Paramount will die from WB’s debt unless they can pass the company to someone else.
>WB’s debt almost killed AT&T
Nono, AT&T got rid of WB as soon as possible because the practice of calling expenses assets and leveraging them is what worldcom did, and worldcom got in a huge amount of trouble for doing that.
then dicovery gutted WB to try to get them out of debt.
Paramount just recently merged with Showtime. They're building quite the portfolio
If the FTC regretted allowing Disney to buy Fox, why would they allow Paramount and Warner to merge?
Pity for Paramount.
Oh well.
Do any of these own Terminator
disney owns terminator now
James Cameron and Skydance
Why don't they try releasing something that isn't dog crap?
the best agar.io adaptation so far.
>two shit tier companies merging
Yaaaay
>Agreeing to a merger
Paramount must be dumb or have some corrupt people taking bribes because this will just make a mega indebted company about to pop. And that means universal will swoop in to buy the fricking mess that is Paramount Warner Discovery (aka Puny White Dick) just to dab on Disney and turn their theme parks into a force to be reckoned with.
I don’t think this is going to happen though. Today after this news, the black dude who owns the weather channel is offering to buy BET for 3.5 Billion which is enough for paramount to pay off a portion of their debt
universal is owned by comcast. comcast isn't going to "swoop in" and save anything.
>save
You do realize universal wants to dab on Disney right
universal has no desires of its own, its a comcast subsidiary. sony and universal need only sit back and wait for the others to collapse.
Comcast can't own CBS when they already own NBC, due to Federal regulations of the broadcast networks. So if they buy Paramount, they will only buy parts of it, and have to sell of the rest. With WBD, they will buy all of Paramount and might only offload BET to a willing buyer to save some cash, but not because of Fed regulations.
What's interesting is that the two leading suiters for Paramount are both spin-off's of AT&T. As a third generation shareholder; ma bell is the gift that keeps on giving.
finally my Buffy/Star Trek: Voyager crossover fanfic will be canon
Poop and pee linked up?
>one massively debt-ridden company barely breaking even merging with another massively debt-ridden company that's been losing money
>to "create synergy" and cut long-term costs, the merged company will have to borrow billions of dollars more to payout severance to corporate employees they will layoff
>Feds expected to jack up interest rate more in 2024
Yup, this is a great idea.