He's a hypocrite, he says he's scared of the impact of the industry. But he IS the industry. He's gonna be putting set designers, sound stagers, et al out of work if he opts to use AI.
AI is just going to make the rich... richer. We do need some protections in place.
i find impossible to believe that people that are currently working in the music/film industries will not take advantage of these new technologies (see designers that went from pen and paper to software).
i think a decent analogy is music. software has completely taken over music production. but musicians are still making great music, analogue or otherwise.
these new technologies might even open up these industries to a lot more people since creation will no longer be hindered by learning different types of software.
- the behavior of big tech in the last 10-15 years minimum
- The arguably decrease of quality of movies as is from corporate ignoring artists who already had to protest just to prevent themselves from being degraded from writers to AI prompt editors.
- history of artists in film since... forever
I'm honestly very pessimistic. In theory, this means less artists in a VFX studio can charge the same amount (which as is, is way too little. Remember that multiple award winning movies had their VFX studio shutter months after the award), and each artist gets paid a proper living wage, now that there are less hands to re-distribute the money too. In reality, this may shut down what remnants of VFX there are, reduce in house artist, and the remaining artist make even less despite now being as productive as 10-50 artists from the decade prior.
A lot of optimism for such tech would need to come from trust, and every company involved have spent decades eroding that trust and then digging further underground.
>i think a decent analogy is music. software has completely taken over music production. but musicians are still making great music, analogue or otherwise.
music is a decent analogy. No one makes money making music anymore. You're an entrpreneur peddling merchandise as an emotional response from music that people listen to on Spotify that pays pennies (or less, if you sign on a record company). Modern music is the classic "being paid in exposure" trope in action.
sure musicians are making great music, but how many of them are getting paid? and how much? the quality is irrelevant here -- best songs ever written are on spotify making their creators $0.00031 per play.
its like how excel didn't eliminate payroll or accounts-payable, but now instead of needing 10 people you need 3, and will still attempt to pay them peanuts.
The flipside with this particular application is that we're going to be seeing some excellent indy movies produced by enthusiasts who never had the means before.
But yes, there's about to be a massive shakeup. You can blame Perry, but someone has to fund these tremendously expensive human efforts. If everyone else is underselling him with cheaper AI productions, where does that leave him?
> we need a universal basic income and progressive tax rates urgently if we want to avoid the world turning into a Gotham City kind of inequal shitshow.
Not really. IMHO the idea of universal basic income is not an actual solution, it's a soporific to passivate people until all their power is drained from them. What we really need is a Butlerian Jihad, to make technology and technologists subordinate to society, instead of letting society be subordinate to technologists and their technology (and the capital they serve and/or control).
cowboyscott|2 years ago
I'm very concerned about the impact of this thing that I get to control, and benefit from, the impact of.
kmlx|2 years ago
i find impossible to believe that people that are currently working in the music/film industries will not take advantage of these new technologies (see designers that went from pen and paper to software).
i think a decent analogy is music. software has completely taken over music production. but musicians are still making great music, analogue or otherwise.
these new technologies might even open up these industries to a lot more people since creation will no longer be hindered by learning different types of software.
yes, i'm an optimist :)
johnnyanmac|2 years ago
- the behavior of big tech in the last 10-15 years minimum - The arguably decrease of quality of movies as is from corporate ignoring artists who already had to protest just to prevent themselves from being degraded from writers to AI prompt editors. - history of artists in film since... forever
I'm honestly very pessimistic. In theory, this means less artists in a VFX studio can charge the same amount (which as is, is way too little. Remember that multiple award winning movies had their VFX studio shutter months after the award), and each artist gets paid a proper living wage, now that there are less hands to re-distribute the money too. In reality, this may shut down what remnants of VFX there are, reduce in house artist, and the remaining artist make even less despite now being as productive as 10-50 artists from the decade prior.
A lot of optimism for such tech would need to come from trust, and every company involved have spent decades eroding that trust and then digging further underground.
>i think a decent analogy is music. software has completely taken over music production. but musicians are still making great music, analogue or otherwise.
music is a decent analogy. No one makes money making music anymore. You're an entrpreneur peddling merchandise as an emotional response from music that people listen to on Spotify that pays pennies (or less, if you sign on a record company). Modern music is the classic "being paid in exposure" trope in action.
red-iron-pine|2 years ago
its like how excel didn't eliminate payroll or accounts-payable, but now instead of needing 10 people you need 3, and will still attempt to pay them peanuts.
beej71|2 years ago
But yes, there's about to be a massive shakeup. You can blame Perry, but someone has to fund these tremendously expensive human efforts. If everyone else is underselling him with cheaper AI productions, where does that leave him?
satao|2 years ago
tivert|2 years ago
Not really. IMHO the idea of universal basic income is not an actual solution, it's a soporific to passivate people until all their power is drained from them. What we really need is a Butlerian Jihad, to make technology and technologists subordinate to society, instead of letting society be subordinate to technologists and their technology (and the capital they serve and/or control).
Timber-6539|2 years ago