Seedance 1.0 (opens in new tab)

Most art is in some way or form derivative of another work or a combination of somesorts. I enjoy derivative works. To me, AI already has value. I don't seek endless gratification through originality.

You could make the same argument about musical instruments, or being able to record and playback music, dj tools, etc.

I think what you get is the power law distribution for tons of content. Some of the stuff is still mega valuable, but distribution just gets more and more important and it’s harder and harder to break through. This is what the “democratization” of any previously difficulty-gated endeavor does.

More niches will be created, more fragmentation in tastes, stuff like that. Not just completely valueless content.

Incumbents and platform providers get to win through it all though, because humans still want to fill their time.

A lot of people right now claim that they cannot tell apart AI output from human art, while many of them seem to grow rather agitated and stressed after repeated exposure. I bet they're going to be forced into exclusively making art manually, or viewing exclusively human art at some point, and through that ways, AIs could increase value of human made data.

I find it funny that wishes for AI arts always seem to be more anime and end to Marvel slop. They want human slop go away thanks to AI slop? I'm not meaning to call out someone for contradiction or inconsistency - as I do understand the sentiment. But it gives me chuckles.

Even TikTok's main fuel are likes and shares. Isolated material will just cease to be interesting, because it's from your own imagination.

This isn't inherently a bad thing but I don't believe it's without its costs, one of which being that with everyone watching (potentially) completely unique media there'll be no shared cultural artifacts to communicate with others about.

VivziePop may have started as a small creator but the recent creations such as Hazbin Hotel have now become things where the enjoyment can be shared with other fans, which in some ways is the secondary purpose of all media. Media enjoyed alone can still be rewarding, media enjoyed with others can be much more than that (except for going to the cinema with strangers, that can disappear immediately).

It seems like a common idea that if we can just generate a practically-infinite stream of media then we've solved some kind of problem with there just not being enough "content" (I hate using the term in this way but it's concise), and while I do sympathise with the points of view from people that can't find things they like, I also don't really believe that "Content is a problem".

More variety itself isn't a problem, but I'm not convinced that in general there's a _lack_ of content. Humans have already reached peak saturation in terms of the sheer amount of text, audio and video that's created every day. No single item of media is itself a problem, but perhaps the total aggregate of everything isn't helpful.

This is quite literally what the Marvel / Star wars mass media slop is, a sort of syncretistic version of every pop culture phenomenon scientifically engineered down to A/B tested audience taste. It's excatly what you're complaining about, never-ending banal stuff. It'll be Disneyfication on steroids.

It's a sort of media masturbation, hooking your brain up to itself and feeding it its own output, what the large studios are already doing with their franchises, just on an individual level. You'll basically sit in your own never-ending Marvel hell, basically D.F Wallace's Infinite Jest.

Art is obviously the opposite, something external and disruptive, a creative act from someone who isn't you.

Is it possible that part of what creates quality is having to collaborate with others? Would Star Wars have been as good as it was without Marcia Lucas?

Lol. Where do you think these models will get the source data for these amazing generations?

Also, an average person's "long tail" is incredibly boring (I know mine is). You will need someone to create a next Breaking Bad, or a next Discworld, or... Your slop-generating machine will not be able to generate it from a "long tail"

If there was an HN clone generated on the fly for you or the guy you replied to then what's the difference? Especially if you imagine you didn't know it was generated. That's the problem with this tech, for you there's no difference. But probably a difference for society.

Some people are talking to ChatGPT though. We are here, for now.

It will happen for different people at different times, but at some point the realization that you are looking at people who don't exist living lives that aren't possible to sell you products that won't help you will click for you, and when it does it will cut you off from society in a way we don't currently have words for.

Brands pay for ads because it generate sales. If people become vegetables that doomscroll all day, barely pausing to eat and have a dump, they will also stop purchasing stuff.

Or maybe people will be so addicted that social medias as a drug becomes a commercial product in its own riggt and tiktok can paywall it.

The TikTok algorithm is good at figuring out what you do. Not what you say. So the content will be a lot more engaging.

I’m starting to wonder if it will. There seems to be this pattern that an awesome T2V model will come out and everyone starts clamoring for an I2V model and then when the I2V version drops a couple months later it’s not as good. I’m starting to get the feeling that I2V is just intrinsically challenging in a way that makes it hard to do well at all.