So yeah, I think we'd need new, much more sophisticated architectures. We'd also need a lot more compute, like 10x, 100x or maybe even 1000x more, to generate high-resolution video. Actually, the problem is probably not the amount of compute you need for inference, but the amount of compute you'd need to train a model with hundreds of billions of parameters or however much is needed to make that happen.
So instead of asking the AI to write a novel in one go, why not guide it through a similar process? At each step, pass in information from previous steps as context, focusing on just the details it needs at that step. Have it generate a summary, then a setting, then characters in that setting, then break the plot into chapters, and then scenes, and so on…
"Adam Sandler is like, in love with some girl, but then it turns out that the girl is actually a Golden Retriever. Or something."
I.e. this batman short: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fn4ArRmzHhQ (ai story and human drawing) provide a spot on jocker
These videos are mostly "human writes funny, says it's AI".
Just like most dreams. Can still be entertaining.
> Going to be an interesting thing to watch unfold.
Not really. If it's actually successful, it will probably devolve into near total fragmentation.
So just imagine people more being isolated and lonely, with fewer points of connection. They used to entertain each other; then they consumed the same entertainment together; then they stopped sharing anything all, because it became so personalized.
But is there far more of what any particular person would want to watch being produced than they would want to watch? Does anyone in the mood to watch something ever accept a less-than-preferred substitute?
If so, there is meaningful room for improvement in selection. (Not that I think AI is anywhere close to making a dent in it directly, though AI aids may increase productivity of human creative talent.) E.g., Instead of writing scripts from scratch, think of an AI writing first draft scripts from treatments, after training on a corpus of treatments and completed scripts.
The older I get the more true this becomes. There’s so many things I want to watch or read that I’ll never get to.
Best you can do is prioritize by some heuristic, watch/read/listen the top N%, hope you prioritized correctly, and bail at the earlies sign of mis-fit.
Rebooting every episode just because the premise is kinda cool and someone wants more of it diminishes what the series achieved both visually and conceptually.
If you could watch 100 different mini action movies where anything could happen. Everyone could die or everyone becomes nice and gets a desk job. It is less predictable and would be a fun thing.
What about you want to watch Law and Order SVU but just an average non-crazy day, fly on the wall style. I think that would be interesting.
The action laden sequences are by far the least interesting aspect of Breaking Bad, serving at best as a somewhat believable and tension-relieving climaxes for emotionally taxing, morally difficult and thrilling parts of the show.
The team behind Breaking Bad managed to tell a cohesive, character driven story despite all the creative restrictions making a show for a large TV network causes (think profitability, playing to as broad of a set of sensibilities as possible).
Telling a thousand different stories in the same world and with the same characters drains them of believability and lessens the emotional impact of the stories significantly - they become arbitrary.
Better Call Saul was a good show because it divorced one of the more important characters (but by far not a main character) almost entirely from the original and focused heavily on humor, with light aspects of drama. Breaking Bad was the other way around.
Therefore, I cannot think of a show that is running for it's 21st season as anything more than at best the visual equivalent of easy listening music, at worst a continued cash grab by the studio producing and network distributing it. For a work of art to be meaningful, it needs to come to some kind of conclusion regarding it's content lest it reiterates the same points again and again, becoming boring in the proccess.
Of course, there is something to be said in favor of easy listening music or TV productions intended mostly for basic entertainment, I recognise this discussion is largely predicated on taste. But I think calling something like that art misses the point that has made art historically so important for humans: The intentional representation of thoughts and experiences of the artist(s) in a specific medium meant to elucidate active engagement with the topics at hand.
EDIT: Added a word for clarity.
Deepfakes: the video game
This is rather probable business model for non General-AI targeted at the end consumer, incidentally it too reads like an AI response: specifically the part about the Drake equation and reminds me of Carbon Based Lifeforms - MOS 6581, whose lyrics also sound like an AI repeating a story about horses and Mongols like OPs [0]. And the start of album is a track called Abiogenesis that has a repetition of the Drake Equation in it, no less.
Putting all that together as a person that is actually studying AI/ML, I found it all rather freaky. Obviously, I know AI in it's current form is rather limited in it's capacity and scope but it makes for interesting lore none the less. Especially if it ever lives up to it's marketing hype. I'll be saving this post to look back at as I progress in my studies over the years.
0: https://genius.com/Carbon-based-lifeforms-mos-6581-lyrics
That remains to be seen, if the extent of ML thus far can be measured by it most ubiquitous use case then it's only pitfall is making people worse spellers than they already were. Autocorrect is a form of ML that quite honestly displays the MANY shortcomings at something that has been around for what? Nearly 20 years now?
While concern is the main response to new things, I'm cautiously optimistic, I'm just finding that it's use-cases seem trivial more than impactful let alone existential.
that is a ridiculous gaslight. ML makes people worse spellers, really?
At very least I can confidently say the next 20 years will have more disruption to society as a result of technology than the past 40.
Some of my predictions that I wrote down:
1. There will exist an experimental commercial fusion reactor that has achieved a continuous Q>1.
2. A true quantum computer will have solved a real world problem in math's or physics.
3. We'll be at the threshold for AGI-like specialized intelligence.
4. ML & AI research will have cracked several diseases, one of them Alzheimer's.
5. We're back on the Moon with a small base.
6. Protein folding is a solved problem using ML and QC.
I'm looking forward to revisit them in 2030, but I feel like we're on the right path.
So many buzzwords in there, but very creepy to think about.
Also: Open-ended NPC dialogues.
Someone at Netflix is looking at this, rubbing their hands together with dollar signs in their eyes.
How long before we have ~unlimited high quality entertainment? Before an AI can generate infinite episodes of your favorite show, podcast, comedian, and so on.
Going to be an interesting thing to watch unfold.