Mind blowind OpenAI's text to video SORA.

[BrianHG]

The visuals speak for themselves...



Go here to see all 48 videos with their prompt text: https://openai.com/sora

[tszaboo]

I've used text to picture AI models on my PC out of curiosity. The output was total garbage 99% of the time. Dall-e seems to produce better results out of the box, unless you need photorealistic images, but that's paywalled now. So when we see these short videos, yes, they look amazing. And I can totally believe that they weren't made just by typing up a prompt in 10 seconds and pressing go. I would bet on that all these videos are highly curated, and they spent maybe a 100 hours on a 10 second clip, telling the AI which part to redraw, maybe even frame by frame.

[Eagcress88]

I also think that there were very detailed prompts given there, which probably took more time to compose than if a person had drawn it all themselves. Even text-to-image generators sometimes still draw people with six fingers and so on.

[nctnico]

I saw the clips on a different site. Without going into the good and bad, let's dwell on the moment a little bit. IMHO it is mind blowing that such technology exists nowadays. My grandfather used to travel by steam trains and model-T Fords. Go figure.

[Bud]

The old man in the video just hated his burger 
They need to work more on generating happy faces 

[BrianHG]

[tom66]

I do seriously wonder if being a 3D artist, animator or even a semi-professional videographer will be a job any more in 2030.  This technology is incredible.

[Bud]

Cinema has never replaced Theatre, though many at the time were saying it will.

[BrianHG]

I do seriously wonder if being a 3D artist, animator or even a semi-professional videographer will be a job any more in 2030.  This technology is incredible.

If not by 2030, you can bet by 2040 that most except the most talented will either have to find new jobs, or become an expert at text prompting the AI to get the results you want to see.

On the other hand, this will become a god-send for directors.  They will just be fiddling/editing lines of text of their scene script into their AI generator until they get every seen looking exactly the way they want.  Hundreds of trials until it looks and feels like the final production scene they want.

On the other hand, now novelists may release new books and they might create a real life looking film simultaneously.

We will also see old scanned in comic books turned into real life movies, with almost no effort except for style cues.

[BrianHG]

Cinema has never replaced Theatre, though many at the time were saying it will.

Right you are.  Real life performances will always be a thing, though the big-scale production stuff will become harder to find, it will never disappear.  The live large scale stuff will be reserved for those who can afford it.

But, how much do you want to bet that there will be multiple live performance adaptations of of AI generated movies in the future.  I guarantee this will happen on a regular basis.

[BrianHG]

Go here to see all 48 videos with their prompt text: https://openai.com/sora

[BrianHG]

[Bud]

Watched the first 2 minutes and every single clip immediately feels fake.I do not know who that thing "shocked", it certainly did not shock me. There may be applications to it but the guy saying "it is so realistic" is talking BS.

[ebastler]

On the other hand, now novelists may release new books and they might create a real life looking film simultaneously.

What makes you so optimistic regarding the future need for human novelists? 
At least as far as Hollywood-style film scripts are involved, AI should be able to produce those nicely.

[SiliconWizard]

On the other hand, now novelists may release new books and they might create a real life looking film simultaneously.

What makes you so optimistic regarding the future need for human novelists? 

FTFY.

[RAPo]

Is it really, or are we blinded by the beatifull images?

[BrianHG]

On the other hand, now novelists may release new books and they might create a real life looking film simultaneously.

What makes you so optimistic regarding the future need for human novelists? 
At least as far as Hollywood-style film scripts are involved, AI should be able to produce those nicely.

Someone still has to come up with the prompts, for now anyways.  However, soon everything will be almost all AI generated and the human reaction will become the want to have some story from an authentic human.  Having human actors, actual locations and sounds will be reserved for live theatrical performances.

[berke]

All of this is going too fast.

What is the likelihood that the big players have training algorithms and/or hardware that is much more efficient than what has been revealed publicly?  I have a hard time believing that gradient descent-like algorithms (ADAM etc.), which are theoretically inefficient (much slower convergence than second derivative Newton methods) but fit in memory, are a good use of resources to train these humongous models.  Do they really just throw obscene amounts of computing power at these kinds of algorithms with no or very little secret sauce?  Or did they figure out how to run something with a higher rate of convergence on these big models?  Are they using some kind of analog hardware (not even talking quantum here)?

Also I wouldn't be surprised if TLAs already had 10 to 15 years ago technology comparable to what we have today, specifically something at least like OpenWhisper and for images maybe something similar to the first versions of Stable Diffusion.  After all we know they had voice keyword spotting systems in the 90s.

How good was the accuracy of classical, publicly known "non-AI" voice recognition algorithms back then?  It has to have been be pretty damn good to be usable for mass surveillance without triggering a deluge of false alarms that have to be cleared by tens of thousands of human operators. 

In other words, I think the AI we're seeing now has been recently technology-transferred to the public, however some of the secret sauce (for fast training) might still be held as secrets.  Heck, maybe OpenAI subcontracts the NSA to train their models on their massive farms and/or non-classical computers.  Someone call the WTO, I sense unfair government subsidies!

[KE5FX]

In other words, I think the AI we're seeing now has been recently technology-transferred to the public, however some of the secret sauce (for fast training) might still be held as secrets.  Heck, maybe OpenAI subcontracts the NSA to train their models on their massive farms and/or non-classical computers.  Someone call the WTO, I sense unfair government subsidies!

That's not realistic, given that the silicon needed to train these models takes up entire warehouses and didn't exist only a few years ago.

It's been a long time since the three-letter agencies had access to better tech than the public.

[berke]

That's not realistic, given that the silicon needed to train these models takes up entire warehouses and didn't exist only a few years ago.

What I'm saying is that they might have better algorithms or custom hardware.

It's been a long time since the three-letter agencies had access to better tech than the public.

If you're in a position to know you shouldn't be revealing such secrets!

[voltsandjolts]

This looks so much more complex than many engineering tasks, why can't AI do my PCB designs yet?

[BrianHG]

That's not realistic, given that the silicon needed to train these models takes up entire warehouses and didn't exist only a few years ago.

What I'm saying is that they might have better algorithms or custom hardware.

Custom hardware is being developed.  Including training and inference directly on the memory as well as analog memory with analog comparators, which wont be as fast, but also use magnitudes less power for the learning phase and inference phases.

This looks so much more complex than many engineering tasks, why can't AI do my PCB designs yet?

Nvidia and Google are already doing this for the chip design and advanced reports show much better designs than humans working with pre-fab cell libraries.  However, I'm not sure a 4090 has enough juice to do this as I'm sure it was done on a server rack of their top tier processors.

[BrianHG]

     I can say one thing, in the future, if someone goes through the trouble to film a real authentic live stunt they've been planning for months and invested thousands of dollars to complete will be written off as AI generated.

     Such filmed stunts or events, even actual crime scene security camera footage will never have any credibility to them and such filmed stunts will be a thing of the past.  (Which also wont be believed since everyone will say that old filmed stunt was AI generated and its release date was faked...)

[SiliconWizard]

Is it really, or are we blinded by the beatifull images?

It's more or less the second option, but it may not make a lot of difference for many. We'll also probably grow into not seeing the difference, or even knowing what "real" art creation is, or even what reality is altogether.

One important aspect of this IMO is the fact that machine-generated content does not confront us to our own inability in the common way, that is by measuring ourselves to others (that's until we grow into measuring ourselves to machines, if it ever happens, which I don't know, but doubt for now.) In other words, we stop potentially feeling inferior to some other people who are able to do stuff we are not able to. While that can be a trigger for actually willing to improve ourselves, and has been, I'm afraid we'll more easily fall into the comfort of not doing anything to go out of our way, and not feel anything about it, because we'll have no one else to compare to, if we all become just passive consumers of everything.

[Alex Eisenhut]

and for the immature among us ... like me... (maybe nsfw?)
https://youtu.be/fY1EIArdsto
https://youtu.be/4LlV3_wvUE8
https://youtu.be/PiEow9uEPsU
https://youtu.be/6emCWRSOUuY
it's soooo stupid, I love it

[tom66]

That's not realistic, given that the silicon needed to train these models takes up entire warehouses and didn't exist only a few years ago.

What I'm saying is that they might have better algorithms or custom hardware.

It's been a long time since the three-letter agencies had access to better tech than the public.

If you're in a position to know you shouldn't be revealing such secrets!

It has been said by someone close to OpenAI that 30 seconds of SORA video currently costs around $500-700 in cloud compute resource, therefore it's likely to remain a closed beta for some time before they can figure out how to lower the cost and scale it to the massives.  SORA appears to be a well-converging DALL-E 3 (it shows similar artefacts to DALL-E 3, suggesting common datasets).

As for access to specialised hardware: yup Nvidia make server-specialist cards just for AI.  These are certainly out of the reach of the masses, because they have to be sold as part of a whole system, which probably costs nigh-on $50k per server.

[Neutrion]

I again ask myself whether the pros and cons of this tech. are in  balance. And I don't see it.
Pros: It will be cheaper to make movies, and ads. Some new artform will also develop itself, which will be completely dependent on these thech giants, censorship, payment, etc.

Cons: People within 1-2 years will not belive anything which they don't experience themself. Basically everything what broadcasting technology brought to us will be lost on the individual level.
That will mean complete social breakdown and chaos. (Just think about the flat Earth believer at the moment.)

I don't think people creating these technologies even think about the consequences what they do. They just do it because they can. Or the are afraid of "the enemy".
And  all the features are aiming to replacing ANY need for humans. At the end the developers as well. Yes there is work going on  modells which can replace even mathematicians, and I suppose also electrical engineers and the rest.
Some controlling will be needed at the beginning but the human capabilities of creating and understanding anyhing without these tech giants will be degrading rapidly. (Like when people completely forgetting map reading using the navi.) Possibly even supressed, as those not controlled fully will be suspicious and possible threats.



Even if no superintelligence would be created,(which is also a real danger) everything will be controlled by very few people on the level not imaginable even in dictatorships. I think if we don't stop this, our species will be extinct or living under nightmarish conditions very soon.

[KE5FX]

Totalitarian dictatorship may or may not result from widespread development and deployment of this particular technology, but it will absolutely be required if you want to stop it. 

What I don't get is why so many people actually want to do a robot's job... or a dictator's.   

[tom66]

It's certainly going to be an interesting time.  I don't know how exactly to feel about these models.

On the one hand, it might well be possible to generate any art you could conceive of... for instance, "Make a version of Iron Man where Mr Bean plays the role of Tony Stark and accidentally creates the armoured suit whilst fiddling with his toothbrush."    The options for creativity are huge.   It will allow the output of an animation studio to increase several fold.

But on the other hand it's easy to see how this will decimate many industries, because it's arguable that there is only so much content that people can consume (otherwise it just becomes noise), and AI threatens huge parts of the creative community here.  Films like Iron Man have the budget they do in part because thousands of artists work on the animation process.  Feasibly they might be replaced by 10 people training and tweaking an AI model.  It's a potential bloodbath.

I am seeing some commentary from artists around AI training being banned on their copyrighted work, but this isn't currently illegal.  This might be a case that makes it to the Supreme Court in the US in the near future (and other jurisdictions,  Getty are suing Stable Diffusion creators StabilityAI).  But the cat is out of the bag on this.  You can train an SD model at home on a <$1,000 graphics card, and generate imagery in seconds.  So even if large-scale training by companies in the UK and US is banned, this technology will just move elsewhere.  And Hollywood insiders will complain that they can't compete with Beijing or Mumbai's new film outputs, and legislators and unions will get beaten down into allowing the technology eventually.  It does feel unstoppable.

[MT]

Totalitarian dictatorship may or may not result from widespread development and deployment of this particular technology, but it will absolutely be required if you want to stop it. 

What I don't get is why so many people actually want to do a robot's job... or a dictator's.   

Pick a future "war theater" then press "False Flag videos" and incoming in 5-4-3-2-1.

[KE5FX]

The effect will be to teach people that they can't blindly believe anything they see on a screen or hear over a speaker.

I see that as a positive effect.

Relax.  This is what Joe Strummer J. L. Borges trained us for.

[Bud]

Train train train, the keyword here is "train". What you going to train your stupid AI on if there will be no human generated material to use for training.

[tom66]

Train train train, the keyword here is "train". What you going to train your stupid AI on if there will be no human generated material to use for training.

Zero-shot learning; GPT has already demonstrated it can train off its own data.

[Neutrion]

Totalitarian dictatorship may or may not result from widespread development and deployment of this particular technology, but it will absolutely be required if you want to stop it. 

What I don't get is why so many people actually want to do a robot's job... or a dictator's.   

Can you define a human job under these circumstances, and in the near future?

The effect will be to teach people that they can't blindly believe anything they see on a screen or hear over a speaker.

I see that as a positive effect.

Relax.  This is what Joe Strummer J. L. Borges trained us for.

So you regularly watch your presidents/governors/supreme courts speeches in real life? Because that is what you will  need, that is what I am talking about. Or there will be truth agencies which tell you what is of what you can see the truth and what is not. Not good in a democracy.

Even if there will be some methods to find out what has happened and what not, you basically have to treat everything what you see as possible fake. So the basic human judgement will loose its value completely. This is what society is built on. But hey why bother, if one can make video production easier?

Train train train, the keyword here is "train". What you going to train your stupid AI on if there will be no human generated material to use for training.

Zero-shot learning; GPT has already demonstrated it can train off its own data.

And using big data on multiple dimensions it is not a big deal to filter out humans. Mobile phone total surveillance is also good way to do it. Every connected data basically, from every sensor.

[Muxr]

Train train train, the keyword here is "train". What you going to train your stupid AI on if there will be no human generated material to use for training.

They are already doing this. They are making synthetic training data, generated by AI.

[berke]

And using big data on multiple dimensions it is not a big deal to filter out humans. Mobile phone total surveillance is also good way to do it. Every connected data basically, from every sensor.

I have an idea, I know it will sound a bit extreme but what if there was a law forcing people to stay and work from home?  Even if it was for just a few months.  Imagine the goldmine of data (voice and video) you could get from all those Teams/Zoom calls.  There could be an exemption for people whose jobs don't produce trainable data anyway.

[BrianHG]

[RJSV]

   'Old scanned in comic books...'. - Brianhg

   God help us, if AI ever gets hold of old, 1970's
'ZAP COMICS' copies....heh heh heh
   ("You can't pick your friends nose", and other, Ron Crumb topics, too graphic to discuss here)!

[Bud]

All this is good for is another Shrek movie, that is it.

[BrianHG]

Finally, some people get to use SORA.  Here are some of the results...

[SiliconWizard]

Train train train, the keyword here is "train". What you going to train your stupid AI on if there will be no human generated material to use for training.

They are already doing this. They are making synthetic training data, generated by AI.

Oh yeah. Some kind of digital consanguinity. Sounds good.

[xrunner]

Oh man! If you're a political dirty trickster you GOT to get access to one of these systems! 

[jonovid]

still need human artist's to do cleanup!
some technical details that need fixing to make the videos more believable. 

[BrianHG]

[soldar]

AI is developing in various fields, not only graphics creation. Also in language creation and translation. Also in driving cars. Also in robots of the two legged and four legged types built by Boston Dynamics, Honda, etc. I just saw some YouTube videos of robots made by a Chinese company, Limx Dynamics, and they are quite impressive.