I don't understand how anyone can be impressed by this. Okay, wow, a machine flickered some photographs together fast enough to trick your eye into seeing movement. Okay, splendid. The fundamental problem with these moving pictures — and why I will never be interested in a cinematograph show, no... matter how clever the illusions become — is that I simply have no interest in the stories a machine tells. I don't want to watch a projector's story any more than I want to sit and listen to a phonograph tell me about its hopes and dreams. If the story has no soul behind it, no living actor before you breathing the words, no stage, no real theater — then it lacks the one and only thing that can make it worthwhile or interesting.show more

This analogy is not it man AI uses the same existing mediums but removes the human element behind the creation The films no longer have nuanced connection to the human experience Instead just a series of images overcompensating a lack of depth with superficial window dressing

How do you manage to be stupider than Matt Walsh? How is that even possible?

you thought you did something there, didn't you?

You sir win post of the day, this is great 😂 the hoops some people jump through to discredit AI is hilarious

Bad take. Human creativity in all forms far out ways the copying and imitations of AI. Even if humans are inputting the prompts, it still is just randomly choosing things. In many made movies, every person, item, angle, reaction, and item in the shot is hand chosen and purposeful.

Point made just wish we didn’t even have to answer to Matt Walsh on any front

Just found his post funny

Me too! Can’t believe people still think it’s pressing a button

There were absolutely people like that when movies first came out. "No one will ever care about this!"

lol its crazy how people can never wrap their heads around the fact that technology improves, very fast, despite the overwhelming evidence. you can show people all the will smith spaghetti videos from 2 years ago and they will just nod and move on.

You should delete this post. Clearly it was made by AI cause it doesn’t make any fucking sense. You wanna use AI? Go type your prompts and circle jerk with other AI clowns over the slop you “create”.

I was feeling like Matt Walsh until fairly recently. But I've come to accept that if the final product manages to draw me in and hypnotize me as a great film can, then am I really going to care if it was mostly AI-generated? Probably not.

I love creating AI art, but Matt Walsh is right. Especially when it comes to AI videos, no matter how beautiful they are, most of the time watching them feels like a waste of time. Not a critique, just an observation. Perhaps this will change with time, but I don’t know how.

What u just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in ur rambling incoherent response were u even close to what could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this app is now dumber for having read it. May god have mercy on ur soul.

This is the dumbest analogy I've ever seen. A movie camera creates a new medium that can tell stories that others can't. Generated videos are still just videos but for people who confuse flashy spectacle with genuine creative inventiveness.

No one is impressed (today) by the machine. It was impressive at the launch (the same goes for AI, no one denies how good it is). People are impressed by the story told, by the mind that came up with it, by the actors playing it. The Oscars don't have a category: best projector.

An immense amount of effort went into it. Also nobody had ever seen anything like it before. Neither of which is true of ai (except for George Droid. It is the journey to the moon of ai)

Well done, sir. Some of us understand your irony. :-)

You failed the analogies portion of the SAT, didn't you?

pathetic non-creative take

If you think this is an apt comparison you’re a fucking idiot.

Hmmm, I think this is a bit of a non sequitur The main fallacy in this analogy is comparing something original (a new form media, created by humans) to something that is a remix of many original things created by humans (AI content) You seem to be missing the point

A person had a vision and set every detail as he needed to realize that vision. The camera didn’t design the sets, block the shots, choreograph the actors or do anything else, which is why A Trip to the Moon is still good 125 years later and AI slop is terrible forever.

I don't understand how anyone can be impressed by this. Okay, wow, a painter daubed some pigments together slowly enough to trick your eye into seeing shapes. Okay, splendid. The fundamental problem with these static canvases — and why I will never be interested in an art exhib

This probably hits hard if you’re too stupid to understand analogies

You cooked him

So much AI has clearly already atrophied your natural I… You are putting together two absurdly different complaints, go ask some model to explain this to you.

This guy is the Film Twitter version of this:

The photos are literally stitched together in the past what a waste of time. This tech isn't going anywhere just like fords mechanical horses. We need to be more forward thinking.

You seem to think because a machine was involved in some part of the process that means an AI taking over the entire imaginative process is the same as human illustrations flickering in a projector. A machine also made my coffee this morning. Your metaphor is incoherent.

@KobaSteel42069 The images you posted is from a film that was written by people, directed by people, acted by people, filmed by people, designed by people, AI does pretty much all of that. Your analogy is a fail.

Did you think this was good

oh honey you really thought you cooked here huh

This is the second person I've seen make this comparison (the other one with a typewriter), and it looks you either have no concept of the creative process or have no good argument to support using Ai for creativity. It says a lot about Ai-tech gurus that you can't see that.

that's it. runway needs a soul detector

Dont you get it that people want to watch real actors, real stories, written by people with their heart, that invoke emotions? AI is only mixing things that already exist. Its souless. Its not new technology like digital camera. Its different thing entirely.

banger response.