I think another important point that AI is revealing is how diverse the population's preferences are. Legacy entertainment is nowhere as precisely tailored, because it tries to appeal to a wide audience.
Personally, all the Harry Potter AI shorts recently have been rather amusing, although they also vary significantly in detail and wit.
> Legacy entertainment is nowhere as precisely tailored
In some instances, it's even engineered to be broadly appealing. See Disney and Marvel.
On the other end of the spectrum, we have niche-specific creators who appeal to specific genre fans and can package their own tone and taste. That's actually really cool.
It's kind of like what happened to music. Electronic music, the DAW, and home recording opened the avenue for indie artists and all of the various genres.
Whether it's better is personal preference. And many find it so bad/soulless it makes anything around it impossible to enjoy.
Feels like going from artisanal sourdough bread to factory-made wonderbread. Sure it's "cleaner" looking... but that doesn't make it immediately better.
No, even one of the human worst human slop is still more enjoyable than whatever polished AI slop. In China the Niu Lai Film is way more successful than many AI slop.
I don't think Niu Lai is slop. They put a lot of effort and passion into that, even if they didn't have the skills, or know how to learn about how things are "meant" to be done. Slop is when you didn't even try, didn't even care about the output. There's plenty of humans who create slop, human spam.
Niu Lai is maybe more like Outsider music. The movie equivalent of "My Pal Foot Foot" by The Shaggs. They tried their best without knowing what they were doing, and ended up influencing artists like Frank Zappa & Brian Eno:
I haven't watched content for a long long time before AI slop started appearing, because the topics and the stories were boring and repackaged thirty times and ultimately very safe (need to be profitable).
AI has enabled small creators with new ideas and people with nothing but love of storytelling to be competitive with corporate slop.
Yes most of it's bad, but some of it is very innovative. No Hollywood slop has been innovative for a long time.
I’m sorry to say that’s a failure on your part. Small creators with new ideas and love of storytelling already existed and were making fantastic work before AI. That you think everything was the same just shows you weren’t paying attention beyond Hollywood blockbusters, but the work was there and continues to be, no AI necessary to produce it.
There is no reason why gamers should be OK with use of AI to make games - AI doesn't solve any problems currently haunting the industry, it only exacerbates existing problems. If people were suddenly OK with AI in games, games won't get better - they will get even worse.
Nah man I hate what AI has done to my job. But I think people outside of major tech don't realize how far down the path we are.
I remember I was on a call with a client about a new product we put out which hosts modules of their code on our system, and we were talking about AI and they were asking how they should separate their AI made prototypes with their hand made production items, because obviously stuff that makes it to production obviously has to be remade by humans.
There was a long silence, then someone on my team said no developer had ever once opened a IDE on the entire production product we had built and they where using. Development began 2 years ago and by that time not one developer out of 2,000 at my company was using IDEs.
I am not saying you need to be "OK" with the use of AI to make games. I am saying your "OK" doesn't matter, it will happen. If you fight the lost cause you can delay it, but then you will have no control over how the world looks once the fight is over. Don't get caught up in the fight to prevent it, look for a future compromise you are happy with and work on shaping that future.
This isn't the first time something like this happened, and we can see the results of hoping for it to go away. The invention of the car was full of people who wanted to ban cars, and eventually they lost and we now have tons of car dependent hell holes... What all of those people should have focused on was making sure the laws/regulations/patterns/thoughts around cars were healthy and balanced so that the car future would be healthy and balanced. Instead, they where all or nothing, and once they lost, they no longer had any say in what happened and cars broke through to very little resistance beyond no/yes.
I don't know what is so difficult for you to understand in "just because you enjoy selling trash, doesn't mean I or others enjoy selling trash too"?
If your company managed to find an executive to pay for your trash - fine, this literally happens all the time, every day and happened before AI too - B2B software is widely known to be lowest quality software available. Your and your colleagues' job is to produce as much code as possible, in the shortest timeframe possible for the lowest possible price. In that context it's no wonder you all happily use AI, you work on slop, so a machine allowing you to produce even more slop even faster is a godsend.
It's much more difficult to get people to use your software if they don't have an idiot manager above them forcing them to use it or when there's real market competition.
The market forces will be such that everyone will sell "trash" in the future, otherwise they can't compete. And I will say "trash" charitably even though much of the code written by AI is already better than most human programmers.
Triply bamboozled. The argument assumes one only ever wants to open the menu for the currently active application. With 2 or more applications there's a richer space of possibilities.
Off-topic, but that showcase image in this repo is truly pathetic. "What should I get Mum?", "find me something to do on Sunday morning" - is this seriously what people need AI for now?
... and so what? Your response was that they're not a company - Mozilla Corporation IS a private, for-profit company and one of their responsibilities is managing Firefox. Similar structure is used by OpenAI, so I guess OpenAI is also not a company?
So the top-most entity is the Mozilla Foundation, they control and dictate what the subsidiary, also called Mozilla, can and cannot do. The OpenAI foundation cannot dictate what OpenAI Corp can and cannot do.
1. Mozilla isn't working in a capital intensive domain like Transformer Tech unlike OpenAI so there is no need to bend over demands this much.
2. Mozilla Corp is fully owned by Mozilla Foundation. OpenAI Corp was created by the OpenAI non profit to take external investment. The OpenAI non profit chose to give chunks of the OpenAI Corp to investors because it needed money. By selling stakes, they gave control of the company away. That's the difference.
3. OpenAI Corp answers to their stakeholders of which OpenAI foundation is only one and a minor stakeholder. Mozilla Corp answers to Mozilla Foundation only. That's the difference.
4. Presentation. The mozilla websites for the foundation and the subsidiary both use the org domain which is used by non profits, unlike openain's com use. Not a rule but a choice in presentation.
"Through special voting and governance rights held solely by the OpenAI Foundation, the OpenAI Foundation appoints all members of the board of directors of OpenAI Group and can replace directors at any time."
--
> Mozilla Corp is fully owned by Mozilla Foundation
~85% of Mozilla Corp's revenue comes from "search partnerships, subscriptions and advertising revenue" a.k.a. from Google - not from Mozilla's own products.
Mozilla Corp is in practice owned by Google.
--
> Mozilla Corp answers to Mozilla Foundation only
In 2020 Mozilla laid off 250 employees[0] and then gave its CEO a $2.5 million USD pay increase[1]. Next year the CEO got another pay increase of $1.3 million USD[2].
They sure sound like a very nice Foundation to answer to - not very bothered by laying people off to give the CEO a pay increase or by losing market share for 10 years straight. Again, how are they different from other companies?
reply