Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday February 27, @08:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the money-money-money dept.

In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter published Thursday, filmmaker Tyler Perry spoke about his concerns related to the impact of AI video synthesis on entertainment industry jobs. In particular, he revealed that he has suspended a planned $800 million expansion of his production studio after seeing what OpenAI's recently announced AI video generator Sora can do.

"I have been watching AI very closely," Perry said in the interview. "I was in the middle of, and have been planning for the last four years... an $800 million expansion at the studio, which would've increased the backlot a tremendous size—we were adding 12 more soundstages. All of that is currently and indefinitely on hold because of Sora and what I'm seeing. I had gotten word over the last year or so that this was coming, but I had no idea until I saw recently the demonstrations of what it's able to do. It's shocking to me."

[...] "It makes me worry so much about all of the people in the business," he told The Hollywood Reporter. "Because as I was looking at it, I immediately started thinking of everyone in the industry who would be affected by this, including actors and grip and electric and transportation and sound and editors, and looking at this, I'm thinking this will touch every corner of our industry."

You can read the full interview at The Hollywood Reporter

[...] Perry also looks beyond Hollywood and says that it's not just filmmaking that needs to be on alert, and he calls for government action to help retain human employment in the age of AI. "If you look at it across the world, how it's changing so quickly, I'm hoping that there's a whole government approach to help everyone be able to sustain."

Previously on SoylentNews:
OpenAI Teases a New Generative Video Model Called Sora - 20240222

Related Stories

Cards Against Humanity Writers Are Battling an AI to Keep Their Jobs, and You Can Watch 20 comments

Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1337

[Ed. The event is done by now but you can still watch it on YouTube.]

Cards Against Humanity writers are battling an AI to keep their jobs, and you can watch

The creators of Cards Against Humanity are back for their annual Black Friday stunt, and this one is delightfully dystopian. Starting at 11AM ET today and lasting for the next 16 hours, the human writers on the CAH team are facing off against an artificial intelligence to see who can create the most popular new pack of cards, based on how many people pay for more $5 packs. You can upvote or downvote your favorite cards for each side on CAH's website before buying, and you can also watch the humans struggle to come up with new iterations in real time over live stream.

On the line are $5,000 bonuses for every employee if team human comes up victorious, or heartless termination in the event the AI takes the top spot. We don't think CAH actually plans to fire their writers if they lose, but it is a clever stunt nonetheless to drum up the human vs. machine narrative at a time when automation may pose a very real threat to millions of jobs in the coming decade, writing included.

For Black Friday, we taught a computer how to write Cards Against Humanity cards. Now we put it to the test. Over the next 16 hours, our writers will battle this powerful card-writing algorithm to see who can write the most popular new pack of cards.

— CardsAgainstHumanity (@CAH) November 29, 2019

Robots Might Take Our Jobs, but Maybe We Need Them to 50 comments

Robots might take our jobs, but maybe we need them to - Utah Business:

AI is no longer just the musings of sci-fi writers. AI is being implemented in automation technology to help with manual labor and other types of tasks. The technology is at a point where nearly every industry could implement it, and many already have. The question is no longer when will this technology exist, but what do we do now that it does?

[...] In 2019, 5,333 workers died on the job in America. The following year, Covid-19 changed the landscape of the workplace, bringing even higher levels of on-the-job risk to nearly every industry.

[...] According to OSHA, about 20 percent of workplace fatalities are in the construction industry. As automation technology advances, making it affordable for business owners to use is essential in order to protect laborers in the industry.

[...] Ben Wolff, CEO of Utah-based Sarcos Robotics, says, “there are significant labor shortages expected in almost every skilled labor industry over the next decade despite the increase in the availability of automation technologies. The US is expecting a 2.4 million worker shortage in manufacturing from 2018 through 2028, as well as a $1.6 trillion global labor productivity shortfall in the construction industry.”

Though a shifting labor market can be scary, human workers are not replaceable. Leading AI researcher, Andrew Ng, says, “despite all the hype and excitement about AI, it’s still extremely limited today relative to what human intelligence is.”

AI Systems Can't Patent Inventions, US Federal Circuit Court Confirms 8 comments

'There is no ambiguity,' says judge:

The US federal circuit court has confirmed that AI systems cannot patent inventions because they are not human beings.

The ruling is the latest failure in a series of quixotic legal battles by computer scientist Stephen Thaler to copyright and patent the output of various AI software tools he's created.

In 2019, Thaler failed to copyright an image on behalf of an AI system he dubbed Creativity Machine, with that decision upheld on appeal by the US Copyright Office in 2022. In a parallel case, the US Patent Office ruled in 2020 that Thaler's AI system DABUS could not be a legal inventor because it was not a "natural person," with this decision then upheld by a judge in 2021. Now, the federal circuit court has, once more, confirmed this decision.

[...] The Patent Act clearly states that only human beings can hold patents, says Stark. The Act refers to patent-holders as "individuals," a term which the Supreme Court has ruled "ordinarily means a human being, a person" (following "how we use the word in everyday parlance"); and uses personal pronouns — "herself" and "himself" — throughout, rather than terms such as "itself," which Stark says "would permit non-human inventors" in a reading.

[...] According to BloombergLaw, Thaler plans to appeal the circuit court's ruling, with his attorney, Ryan Abbott of Brown, Neri, Smith & Khan LLP, criticizing the court's "narrow and textualist approach" to the Patent Act.

    UK Decides AI Still Cannot Patent Inventions
    When AI is the Inventor Who Gets the Patent?
    AI Computers Can't Patent their Own Inventions -- Yet -- a US Judge Rules

Original Submission

Adobe Stock Begins Selling AI-Generated Artwork 15 comments

On Monday, Adobe announced that its stock photography service, Adobe Stock, would begin allowing artists to submit AI-generated imagery for sale, Axios reports. The move comes during Adobe's embrace of image synthesis and also during industry-wide efforts to deal with the rapidly growing field of AI artwork in the stock art business, including earlier announcements from Shutterstock and Getty Images.

Submitting AI-generated imagery to Adobe Stock comes with a few restrictions. The artist must own (or have the rights to use) the image, AI-synthesized artwork must be submitted as an illustration (even if photorealistic), and it must be labeled with "Generative AI" in the title.

Further, each AI artwork must adhere to Adobe's new Generative AI Content Guidelines, which require the artist to include a model release for any real person depicted realistically in the artwork. Artworks that incorporate illustrations of people or fictional brands, characters, or properties require a property release that attests the artist owns all necessary rights to license the content to Adobe Stock.
AI-generated artwork has proven ethically problematic among artists. Some criticized the ability of image synthesis models to reproduce artwork in the styles of living artists, especially since the AI models gained that ability from unauthorized scrapes of websites.

Original Submission

AI Everything, Everywhere 32 comments

Dick Clark's New Year's Rockin' Eve has become a woke, sanitized shell of its former self. The crowd of rowdy, inebriated locals and tourists is long gone. What you see now is bouncing and screaming for the latest flash-in-the-pan artists while industry veterans like Duran Duran barely elicit a cheer.

Youtuber and music industry veteran Rick Beato recently posted an interesting video on how Auto-Tune has destroyed popular music. Beato quotes from an interview he did with Smashing Pumpkins' Billy Corgan where the latter stated, "AI systems will completely dominate music. The idea of an intuitive artist beating an AI system is going to be very difficult." AI is making inroads into visual art as well, and hackers, artists and others seem to be embracing it with enthusiasm.

AI seems to be everywhere lately, from retrofitting decades old manufacturing operations to online help desk shenanigans to a wearable assistant to helping students cheat. Experts are predicting AI to usher in the next cyber security crisis and the end of programming as we know it.

Will there be a future where AI can and will do everything? Where artists are judged on their talents with a keyboard/mouse instead of a paintbrush or guitar? And what about those of us who will be developing the systems AI uses to produce stuff? Will tomorrow's artist be the programming genius who devises a profound algorithm that can produce stuff faster, or more eye/ear-appealing, where everything is completely computerized and lacking any humanity? Beato makes a good point in his video on auto-tune, that most people don't notice when something has been digitally altered, and quite frankly, they don't care either.

Will the "purists" among us be disparaged and become the new "Boomers"? What do you think?.

Original Submission

Microsoft's New AI Can Simulate Anyone's Voice With Three Seconds of Audio 16 comments

Text-to-speech model can preserve speaker's emotional tone and acoustic environment:

On Thursday, Microsoft researchers announced a new text-to-speech AI model called VALL-E that can closely simulate a person's voice when given a three-second audio sample. Once it learns a specific voice, VALL-E can synthesize audio of that person saying anything—and do it in a way that attempts to preserve the speaker's emotional tone.

Its creators speculate that VALL-E could be used for high-quality text-to-speech applications, speech editing where a recording of a person could be edited and changed from a text transcript (making them say something they originally didn't), and audio content creation when combined with other generative AI models like GPT-3.

Original Submission

90% of Online Content Could be ‘Generated by AI by 2025,’ Expert Says 35 comments

Generative AI, like OpenAI's ChatGPT, could completely revamp how digital content is developed, said Nina Schick, adviser, speaker, and A.I. thought leader told Yahoo Finance Live:

"I think we might reach 90% of online content generated by AI by 2025, so this technology is exponential," she said. "I believe that the majority of digital content is going to start to be produced by AI. You see ChatGPT... but there are a whole plethora of other platforms and applications that are coming up."

The surge of interest in OpenAI's DALL-E and ChatGPT has facilitated a wide-ranging public discussion about AI and its expanding role in our world, particularly generative AI.

[...] Though it's complicated, the extent to which ChatGPT in its current form is a viable Google competitor, there's little doubt of the possibilities. Meanwhile, Microsoft already has invested $1 billion in OpenAI, and there's talk of further investment from the enterprise tech giant, which owns search engine Bing. The company is reportedly looking to invest another $10 billion in OpenAI.


Original Submission

Netflix Stirs Fears by Using AI-Assisted Background Art in Short Anime Film 15 comments

Over the past year, generative AI has kicked off a wave of existential dread over potential machine-fueled job loss not seen since the advent of the industrial revolution. On Tuesday, Netflix reinvigorated that fear when it debuted a short film called Dog and Boy that utilizes AI image synthesis to help generate its background artwork.

Directed by Ryotaro Makihara, the three-minute animated short follows the story of a boy and his robotic dog through cheerful times, although the story soon takes a dramatic turn toward the post-apocalyptic. Along the way, it includes lush backgrounds apparently created as a collaboration between man and machine, credited to "AI (+Human)" in the end credit sequence.

[...] Netflix and the production company WIT Studio tapped Japanese AI firm Rinna for assistance with generating the images. They did not announce exactly what type of technology Rinna used to generate the artwork, but the process looks similar to a Stable Diffusion-powered "img2img" process than can take an image and transform it based on a written prompt.

ChatGPT Can't be Credited as an Author, Says World's Largest Academic Publisher
90% of Online Content Could be 'Generated by AI by 2025,' Expert Says
Getty Images Targets AI Firm For 'Copying' Photos
Controversy Erupts Over Non-consensual AI Mental Health Experiment
Microsoft's New AI Can Simulate Anyone's Voice With Three Seconds of Audio
AI Everything, Everywhere
Microsoft, GitHub, and OpenAI Sued for $9B in Damages Over Piracy
Adobe Stock Begins Selling AI-Generated Artwork
AI Systems Can't Patent Inventions, US Federal Circuit Court Confirms

Original Submission

IBM Pauses Hiring to Onboard AI Instead 34 comments

IBM to Stop Hiring for Jobs That AI Could Do

Routine tasks like transferring employees between departments are likely to be fully automated:

American tech major IBM anticipates pausing hiring for positions that it believes artificial intelligence (AI) will eventually take over.

In an interview with Bloomberg, IBM CEO Arvind Krishna said the company will suspend or pause hiring for back-office functions such as human resources.

The company employs some 26,000 people in these non-customer-facing roles, Krishna said.

"I could easily see 30% of that getting replaced by AI and automation over a five-year period," he added.

[...] Routine tasks like transferring employees between departments or providing letters of employment verification are likely to be fully automated, said the company's chief.

Over the next ten years, he continued, it is likely that some HR functions related to workforce composition analysis and productivity will not be replaced.

“Meaningful Harm” From AI Necessary Before Regulation, says Microsoft Exec 41 comments

As lawmakers worldwide attempt to understand how to regulate rapidly advancing AI technologies, Microsoft chief economist Michael Schwarz told attendees of the World Economic Forum Growth Summit today that "we shouldn't regulate AI until we see some meaningful harm that is actually happening, not imaginary scenarios."

The comments came about 45 minutes into a panel called "Growth Hotspots: Harnessing the Generative AI Revolution." Reacting, another featured speaker, CNN anchor Zain Asher, stopped Schwarz to ask, "Wait, we should wait until we see harm before we regulate it?"
Lawmakers are racing to draft AI regulations that acknowledge harm but don't threaten AI progress. Last year, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) warned Congress that lawmakers should exercise "great caution" when drafting AI policy solutions. The FTC regards harms as instances where "AI tools can be inaccurate, biased, and discriminatory by design and incentivize relying on increasingly invasive forms of commercial surveillance." More recently, the White House released a blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, describing some outcomes of AI use as "deeply harmful," but "not inevitable."

Original Submission

Tech Industry Leaders Endorse Regulating Artificial Intelligence at Rare Summit in Washington 12 comments

On Wednesday, US Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) hosted an "AI Insight Forum" in the Senate's office building about potential AI regulation. Attendees included billionaires and modern-day industry titans such as Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, OpenAI's Sam Altman, and Jensen Huang of Nvidia. But this heavily corporate guest list—with 14 out of 22 being CEOs—had some scratching their heads.

"This is the room you pull together when your staffers want pictures with tech industry AI celebrities. It's not the room you'd assemble when you want to better understand what AI is, how (and for whom) it functions, and what to do about it," wrote Signal President Meredith Whittaker on X.

Tech Industry Leaders Endorse Regulating Artificial Intelligence at Rare Summit in Washington:

The nation's biggest technology executives on Wednesday loosely endorsed the idea of government regulations for artificial intelligence at an unusual closed-door meeting in the U.S. Senate. But there is little consensus on what regulation would look like, and the political path for legislation is difficult.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who organized the private forum on Capitol Hill as part of a push to legislate artificial intelligence, said he asked everyone in the room — including almost two dozen tech executives, advocates and skeptics — whether government should have a role in the oversight of artificial intelligence, and "every single person raised their hands, even though they had diverse views," he said.

Among the ideas discussed was whether there should be an independent agency to oversee certain aspects of the rapidly-developing technology, how companies could be more transparent and how the United States can stay ahead of China and other countries.

"The key point was really that it's important for us to have a referee," said Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and X, during a break in the daylong forum. "It was a very civilized discussion, actually, among some of the smartest people in the world."

Schumer will not necessarily take the tech executives' advice as he works with colleagues on the politically difficult task of ensuring some oversight of the burgeoning sector. But he invited them to the meeting in hopes that they would give senators some realistic direction for meaningful regulation.

Congress should do what it can to maximize AI's benefits and minimize the negatives, Schumer said, "whether that's enshrining bias, or the loss of jobs, or even the kind of doomsday scenarios that were mentioned in the room. And only government can be there to put in guardrails."

Other executives attending the meeting were Meta's Mark Zuckerberg, former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates and Google CEO Sundar Pichai. Musk said the meeting "might go down in history as being very important for the future of civilization."

First, though, lawmakers have to agree on whether to regulate, and how.

Congress has a lackluster track record when it comes to regulating new technology, and the industry has grown mostly unchecked by government in the past several decades. Many lawmakers point to the failure to pass any legislation surrounding social media, such as for stricter privacy standards.

AI Energy Demands Could Soon Match The Entire Electricity Consumption Of Ireland 12 comments

Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:

We hear plenty of legitimate concerns regarding the new wave of generative AI, from the human jobs it could replace to its potential for creating misinformation. But one area that often gets overlooked is the sheer amount of energy these systems use. In the not-so-distant future, the technology could be consuming the same amount of electricity as an entire country.

Alex de Vries, a researcher at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, authored 'The Growing Energy Footprint of Artificial Intelligence,' which examines the environmental impact of AI systems.

De Vries notes that the training phase for large language models is often considered the most energy-intensive, and therefore has been the focus of sustainability research in AI.

Following training, models are deployed into a production environment and begin the inference phase. In the case of ChatGPT, this involves generating live responses to user queries. Little research has gone into the inference phase, but De Vries believes there are indications that this period might contribute significantly to an AI model's life-cycle costs.

According to research firm SemiAnalysis, OpenAI required 3,617 Nvidia HGX A100 servers, with a total of 28,936 GPUs, to support ChatGPT, implying an energy demand of 564 MWh per day. For comparison, an estimated 1,287 MWh was used in GPT-3's training phase, so the inference phase's energy demands were considerably higher.

Google, which reported that 60% of AI-related energy consumption from 2019 to 2021 stemmed from inference, is integrating AI features into its search engine. Back in February, Alphabet Chairman John Hennessy said that a single user exchange with an AI-powered search service "likely costs ten times more than a standard keyword search."

[...] "It would be advisable for developers not only to focus on optimizing AI, but also to critically consider the necessity of using AI in the first place, as it is unlikely that all applications will benefit from AI or that the benefits will always outweigh the costs," said De Vries.

Original Submission

Microsoft Aims to Equip Two Million People in India With AI Skills by 2025 22 comments

Looks like Microsoft is preparing yet more helpful tech reps...

Tech billionaire and globalist Bill Gates' Microsoft has announced plans to recruit up to two million workers from India who will be trained to use artificial intelligence.

According to Microsoft Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Satya Nadella, the company will equip two million Indians with AI skills by 2025 in an effort to generate more jobs in the nation of nearly 1.5 billion. (Related: Technocrats Gates and Altman admit current AI is the stupidest version of AGI but believe it can eventually "overcome polarization" – or in reality – censor views.)

"We are devoted to equip two million-plus people in India with AI skills, that is, really taking the workforce and making sure that they have the right skills in order to be able to be a part of this domain," said Nadella on Wednesday, Feb. 7, during a Microsoft CEO Connection event in Mumbai. "But it's not just the skills, it's even the jobs that they create."

The skilling program will focus on training individuals in Tier-2 and Tier-3 cities – cities with 50,000 to 99,999 residents and 20,000 to 49,999 residents, respectively – as well as rural areas with below 20,000 residents in an effort to "unlock inclusive socio-economic progress," according to the company in a statement.

Original Submission

OpenAI Teases a New Generative Video Model Called Sora 9 comments

OpenAI teases an amazing new generative video model called Sora []:

OpenAI has built a striking new generative video model called Sora that can take a short text description and turn it into a detailed, high-definition film clip up to a minute long.

Based on four sample videos that OpenAI shared with MIT Technology Review ahead of today's announcement, the San Francisco–based firm has pushed the envelope of what's possible with text-to-video generation (a hot new research direction that we flagged as a trend to watch in 2024).

"We think building models that can understand video, and understand all these very complex interactions of our world, is an important step for all future AI systems," says Tim Brooks, a scientist at OpenAI.

[...] Impressive as they are, the sample videos shown here were no doubt cherry-picked to show Sora at its best. Without more information, it is hard to know how representative they are of the model's typical output.

It may be some time before we find out. OpenAI's announcement of Sora today is a tech tease, and the company says it has no current plans to release it to the public. Instead, OpenAI will today begin sharing the model with third-party safety testers for the first time.

In particular, the firm is worried about the potential misuses [] of fake but photorealistic video []. "We're being careful about deployment here and making sure we have all our bases covered before we put this in the hands of the general public," says Aditya Ramesh, a scientist at OpenAI, who created the firm's text-to-image model DALL-E [].

But OpenAI is eyeing a product launch sometime in the future. As well as safety testers, the company is also sharing the model with a select group of video makers and artists to get feedback on how to make Sora as useful as possible to creative professionals. "The other goal is to show everyone what is on the horizon, to give a preview of what these models will be capable of," says Ramesh.

This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Tuesday February 27, @09:04PM (9 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 27, @09:04PM (#1346542) Journal

    Is it just me or is there very little new these days that is interesting or entertaining?

    I rarely find new movies that I care to see. A few. But not many.

    Maybe there are only so many story tropes, and we've used them all up. Any new story can be recognized as all of one, or a remix of several prior stories.

    Some movies are end-to-end Eye Popping special effects with a little bit of a story plot added.

    Don't even get me started on Series of Episodes. What seems to happen: It starts out great. Interesting. Spins out story lines. Sometimes the story lines get outlandish enough you don't know how they will make it pay off, and they either don't or can't. Or they just abandon story lines they began and never mention them again. In other words, it's all short term focused. What can we do in THIS episode to top our LAST episode and its ratings? No real interest in making it deeply entertaining, with a middle and ending of the story. So it either gets cancelled (sometimes on a cliffhanger), or it ends with a fizzle, possibly with many loose ends they did not bother to tie up.

    After many years, I just won't start watching a series until it has gone several seasons and appears to be interesting and I hear good things about it.

    Two examples:

    The Expanse. This started out good. Second season was good but different. As it progressed, I wondered if it would end well. Each season was seriously different. The ending was okay, but not spectacular. Sadly, this is probably better than most other series.

    Upload. Again, this starts out great. First season is great and leaves you wanting more. Second season is good. Leaves you wanting more. Then of course, long gaps in production due to covid. Now I'm beginning to wonder if they have any actual intent on bringing the story to an end. Will they actually ever resolve the major plot element that begins in the first episode? I think I've lost interest already. They're spending too much time now on playing tropes they started, and were good, but are now getting tiring and repetitive. Corporate greed and malice. Mediocrity. Selfishness and shallowness of people. Etc. These are relatable to a point. But they've worn these out.

    I don't even want to start any series made by Netflix. It is sure to be cancelled with no conclusion.

    As for movies. I've found some I really liked. But not that many. Back in the 80s and early 90s I abandoned TV and went to the movies most nights of the week after work when I was young, single and had a pocket full of money.

    I can't say I'm surprised that young people now find lots of other entertainment. Online. Video games. Cosplay. Short-form video (eg, "short attention span theater")

    Can AI actually do any worse?

    When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
    • (Score: 2) by Tork on Tuesday February 27, @09:36PM (2 children)

      by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 27, @09:36PM (#1346547)

      Is it just me or is there very little new these days that is interesting or entertaining?

      That question comes up every few years. Yes, there is plenty. The reason it doesn't seem like it is it comes in waves instead of as a steady stream. My wife and I have a few old shows we keep around (Supernatural, for example...) to fill in the blanks in-between seasons. Here's a few shows my wife and I have been enjoying the last couple of years:
      - Strange New Worlds / Lower Decks / Prodigy / Discovery. (pick up to two....)
      - Twisted Metal (i wish someone told me sooner it was a comedy)
      - Hello Tomorrow
      - Ted Lasso
      - Fall of the House of Usher
      - Succession
      - Doom Patrol
      - Umbrella Academy
      - Futurama (I think we're getting two new seasons)
      - Disenchantment. (I believe this one wrapped)
      - Resident Alien
      - Orville (this one is polarizing, im personally not a fan but it's popular in my circles)
      - One Piece (recent addition to Netflix, not referring to the anime .. tho it is good too and has a zillion eps)
      - Avatar the Last Airbender (JUST came out on Netflix...)
      - A number of Star Wars shows relating to Mandalorian. I have not watched Andor yet but that one has been recommended by my buddies a LOT.
      - not Book of Boba Fett
      - Loki (my personal fave of the whole list)
      - Last Week Tonight and Daily Show. (technically that's two but I don't know anybody that likes one but not the other.)

      I feel like I'm forgetting a couple of big ones, but you get the idea. I really liked WandaVision and Ms Marvel, too, but I don't get the sense those went over well here. Gah I feel like 2 seconds after I post I'll remember a couple of big omissions.

      🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
      • (Score: 2) by epitaxial on Tuesday February 27, @09:43PM

        by epitaxial (3165) on Tuesday February 27, @09:43PM (#1346549)

        I watched the latest Futurama season and it wasn't good. Jokes about voodoo curing covid and one episode is a 30 minute joke about crypto.

        The new Star Trek series might be a bit too much for this crowd though. Any more than one token black person in their show is too much.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by hendrikboom on Wednesday February 28, @01:00AM

        by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday February 28, @01:00AM (#1346579) Homepage Journal

        One that caught my interest is Dharmakshetra. Remember the Mahabharata? The longest poem ever written? About a major war in Indian mythology that destroyed pretty well everything? (Hint: the Bhaghavad Gita is a small part of it).
        Well, Dharmakshetra happens in the afterlife. It's a kind of judicial review determining whether the proper ethics of war were followed during the war.
        Fascinating stuff. And the more you know about the original mythology, the more you'll get out of it.
        I ended up downloading the Project Gutenberg translation of the Mahabharata to learn more about the underlying mythology.

        I watch Dharmakshetra on Netflix in small doses. It can be intense.

    • (Score: 2) by epitaxial on Tuesday February 27, @09:39PM

      by epitaxial (3165) on Tuesday February 27, @09:39PM (#1346548)

      I thoroughly enjoyed all of the various Mike Flanagan series, Haunting Of Hill House, Midnight Mass, etc. They're all self contained except for Midnight Club which is based on young adult fiction.

    • (Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 27, @11:05PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 27, @11:05PM (#1346563)

      I rarely find new movies that I care to see. A few. But not many

      The Sturgeon's law wasn't repelled as yet, ...

      Is it just me or is there very little new these days that is interesting or entertaining?

      ... so have you tried, say, pornhub? :large-grin:

    • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday February 27, @11:24PM

      by Freeman (732) on Tuesday February 27, @11:24PM (#1346566) Journal

      I read all of the Expanse books and watched the entire series. Aside from some annoyances with how they portrayed some characters, it was rather well done. They even killed off the pilot, instead of the soldier. Which still worked and I was okay with. What they did, was not finish the series. All things considered, the Book Series ends kind of weird. You're probably better off with how the film series ended (like there should be more), instead of the actual ending. (Not that some of the missing content wasn't great.)

      Spoiler for the book series ending:

      The reason why they can do faster than light travel with the portals is, because you are traveling through a giant squid/octopus space alien from an alternate dimension. In other words magic. Also, the "bad guy" that they were setting up at the end, tries to kill said Alien and nearly destroys humanity in the process. I forget exactly how it ends, it was that bad and I'm not inclined to re-read the giant space magic stupidness that they forced in the end. It's cringe like that meme "I'm not saying it was Aliens, but it was Aliens." Except use magic instead. 'cause we're already operating on the assumption that there's aliens in the book universe. The series was also co-authored, not written by one person. Which is interesting.

      I recently re-watched The Expanse series. When I got to the end of it, I was like, where's the other book or two?!? Then, I remembered that the book series ended horribly and was kind of sad that I had re-watched the series.
      Also "The Wheel of Time" series is literally being brutalized by Amazon. Assuming you've read the books and remember anything about them, then don't watch the series. It is horrible. So far, they've destroyed Matt and Perrin's characters. Egwene's character they were trying to spin as an option to be "the one, if you've read the books you'll know what I mean". They trashed the magic system, made Lan look weak, and added a lovers spat between Moiraine and Siuan. For every one thing they got right, they changed 4 things and got them all wrong. I could accept some changes, but instead what they've essentially created is their own loose interpretation of "The Wheel of Time" story. Which so far is about as bad of a book to movie series as I've ever seen.

      In the two above series, it felt like they were trying to "empower women" or whatever, but instead they just screwed the characters up. The Expanse less so, but still somewhat. The Wheel of Time, it's like they read the same books and decided that Egwene was a weak princess. When in fact, she's one of the strongest characters in the book series.
      I'm kind of afraid of what they're planning on doing with the Fallout series. Though at least they're not likely to try and re-create a specific storyline. Which means they have a lot more leeway.
      The ring of power series is also pretty good. While perhaps not as good as the original movie series, it's not bad.

      Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Snotnose on Wednesday February 28, @12:45AM

      by Snotnose (1623) on Wednesday February 28, @12:45AM (#1346577)

      The writers and producers have plenty of good ideas, but unless the studio thinks it will be a blockbuster it won't get greenlit.

      Like a lot of other ills in todays world I blame Wall Street.

      When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by gtomorrow on Wednesday February 28, @07:42AM

      by gtomorrow (2230) on Wednesday February 28, @07:42AM (#1346610)

      Here were produced rubbishy newspapers containing almost nothing except sport, crime and astrology, sensational five-cent novelettes, films oozing with sex, and sentimental songs which were composed entirely by mechanical means on a special kind of kaleidoscope known as a versificator.

      from everybody's favorite manual on the future, 1984, George Orwell.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by mhajicek on Wednesday February 28, @08:51AM

      by mhajicek (51) on Wednesday February 28, @08:51AM (#1346618)

      I think a big part of the problem is that the shows are scattered over too many exclusive streaming services. There is no one place (or even three places) you can go to see everything good. For me, if it's not on one of the services we have, it may as well not exist. I'm too lazy to keep switching services.

      The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday February 27, @09:27PM (5 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 27, @09:27PM (#1346544) Journal

    Isn't AI video synthesis just the latest "computer generated graphics" or "special effects" in the hands of creators?

    Wasn't every other advance going to cause the end of studios?

    Isn't it humans that create a human story with human characters that humans can relate to? (even if the human characters are dogs or robots, etc)

    When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
    • (Score: 3, Touché) by turgid on Tuesday February 27, @09:34PM

      by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 27, @09:34PM (#1346545) Journal

      I'm sure these AIs can hallucinate a good yarn.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Tork on Tuesday February 27, @09:55PM (3 children)

      by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 27, @09:55PM (#1346551)

      Isn't AI video synthesis just the latest "computer generated graphics" or "special effects" in the hands of creators?

      How far back are you going? I do remember Tron missed out on an award because of a general feeling that using a computer was cheating, somehow. I also have a faint impression of a Hershey's ad that used altered footage of Charlie Chaplain caused a brief round on the news. But if there was doom and gloom after that I didn't catch it. (not that I'm an authority on it but it is a topic I've followed practically my entire life.) I remember Motion Capture, for example, being embraced with open arms. Performance capture raised a few hackles early on, but I think that was more due to someone making an ill-received comment about replacing animators than an actual fear of unemployment.

      Anyway... you asked if they're 'just tools'. With respect, I don't think that's the right question. The question I have is "who goes homeless". Mocap, for example, brought in whole new workforce of both technicians and animators. Is AI going to do that, or is AI going to be used in lieu of these people? I actually don't know. For me it's less about the potential of the tool and more about the mindset of whoever's using it. There's an urban legend that a big big name in big-vfx movies made a remark that his problem was that the people under his employ were driving cars that were too expensive. On the flip side, maybe new avenues will open up. I've heard of computer animators working for dentists, for example. Lego has people on hand to make videos on how to assemble their projects. So... who knows?

      Is history going to repeat itself? It could, and I hope you're right, but there are different and very important variables in play, now.

      🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday February 27, @11:21PM (2 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 27, @11:21PM (#1346565) Journal

        Anyway... you asked if they're 'just tools'. With respect, I don't think that's the right question.

        With all the respect for your perspective, the question is not the wrong one either.

        On the flip side, maybe new avenues will open up.

        In the recent history, when decent video production tools became affordable, YouTube happened (and got quickly competed by ticktok and overflown by influencers).

        • (Score: 2) by Tork on Tuesday February 27, @11:27PM (1 child)

          by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 27, @11:27PM (#1346568)

          With all the respect for your perspective, the question is not the wrong one either.

          Fair enough, I'll buy that.

          In the recent history, when decent video production tools became affordable, YouTube happened (and got quickly competed by ticktok and overflown by influencers).

          Yes. It's actually kinda impressive what youtubers can do these days. Motion-tracking has apparently gotten down to the consumer level. I remember when you had to hire a specialty boutique for that sort of work. Did you know some Youtubers have hired computer animators, for example? I think that supports your point. I do hope you're right, I really love watching TV/Movies.

          🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
          • (Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Tuesday February 27, @11:46PM

            by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 27, @11:46PM (#1346572) Journal

            Did you know some Youtubers have hired computer animators, for example?

            (Yes, I did. Many channels even use this mode exclusively)
            When one does have something coherent to say, presenting PowerPoints in 1h-bites can be highly captivating. Example []

            My counter-counter-point: a compelling story can still override a compelling storytelling.