They could remove the word "AI" from each one of those feature titles, and the titles would be just as descriptive without them. At this point, it's just marketing noise, more distracting than informative. Maybe like "cyber" in the 1990s. Would you like some AI tea with your cybercrumpets?

"Background removal" or "Face aging" without AI were done before, and they were shit.

Putting "AI" into the feature title means "this time it actually works"

Its all local if that helps?

I think they've made lots of great practical choices! 100% in agreement with running local models for these tasks.

My opinion is that, for end users, if you name your feature "AI" to market it, you kind of already failed to read the room. You're writing to VCs while hoping it convinces customers.

Name what the feature does, what it gains them. Call it "smart" if you must imply some black box treatment.

Naming AI as the selling point for everything feels a lot like that Android tablet ad circa 2010:

"Your wife will love the new dual core Tegra™ chipset!"

> My opinion is that, for end users, if you name your feature "AI" to market it, you kind of already failed to read the room. You're writing to VCs while hoping it convinces customers.

100% this.

Maybe I live in a bubble, but consumer sentiment regarding AI seems extremely negative. Boasting "AI" features is more likely to lose sales than to create them.

But their target audience are creators, not consumers. Creators love AI.

Good point, though I think it depends on the creator.

Professional creators working at a corporation probably love AI.

Amateur independent creators that weren't making any money from their art hate AI and use it as a scapegoat. They weren't getting commissions before, and now they're claiming it's because AI is replacing commissioned art.

Ah, but true artists just need to wait till they die before their work turns really profitable ;)

Are you sure about that? Creators aren't too excited about all of their content being hoovered up and used without compensation or permission, or the AI industry manufacturing economic pressure that devalues quality and the skills they've developed for a craft they are passionate about.

> Creators love AI

This is way to broad, there is a whole slew of creators, at different scales with different motivations and what not, you can't really say that such a large group loves/hates anything.

Personally, I see video professionals loving AI features that save them boring work, same as for me as a programmer and hobbyist video editor, yet we want to manually do the interesting stuff.

And each is very specific to a use case, not a "general chat prompt for triggering API calls" but things like "ML model to categorize video clips and assigning tags + names, so you can find it faster" and similar.

I'd also get tired if it was "AI ala Microsoft/Google" where the goal is to get you to write forever with a chat bot somewhere else, but these features are very different from that.

You're right to be tired of it, and of course I haven't tired these specific features yet, but Davinci was already lowering the barrier to entry for filmmakers, and if 21 works as they say it will, then you're looking at a major lowering of said barrier.