OpenAI introduces Sora, its text-to-video AI model.... GAME OVER! Porn lovers rejoice .. ChatGPT .. Google VEO 2

The Untouchable GDFOLKS

Real Niggas Get Real Pussy
BGOL Investor
Maybe I'm just a dumbass but it looks like a real life cartoon.

Does anyone see this getting so good to a point where they could replace real actors with AI generated actors? Won't they still need someone to do the voices even if they're using AI characters. No way AI is gonna show the emotions of real actors.

Even music. AI don't got bars. I can't see AI replicating how an artist can put together a song.
I agree with you. I am not impressed by this shit either. Shit looks like cut scenes from video games.
 

guyver

Rising Star
Platinum Member
Not that passable.

Even if you think both artists are garbage you have to admit their recording and mixing is better than this.

The piano is too loud and drowns out a lot of the vocals. There's random volume dips all over the track and the vocal processing chains are completely off. It sounds like a garage recording.

To make matters worse, They got the Weeknd's flow wrong and his vocal inflections are on the wrong words. IMO he's not the greatest singer in the world, but he's better than that.

Drake works with some of the best writers in the business and this song is trash. There's practically no separation between the sections. No changes in the beat. No changes in the flow and the title is a cliche.

The AI got everything right except the standards.

it's not about being fans of either artist. Here is a link of 21 Savage and Travis Scott. If I didn't know it was AI, I'm not familiar enough with either artist to question the vocals and would assume it was real ie passable. Passable does not mean award winning. Passable just means it's able to create a usable product. The Drake & Weeknd song was played close to a million times before being pulled. I'm guessing everyone wasn't aware it was AI initially.

The question was could actors be replaced by AI. The song was an example of human speech and the current degree of emotions AI is able to capture today. I went on to say AI possibly would be able to replicate artist styles by using the artist old work as a base. Since the song lyrics weren't created by AI, it's not an example of what I was speaking to. The songs production or structure were not my focus as I'm not aware if those elements were AI or not.

You are saying all of this because you are aware it's AI. At best, you are more knowledgeable or more of a technical fan of music. To the average person, they would not know the difference with the vocals and most aren't into music enough to care about anything you are mentioning as far as quality mixing or song structuring.





 

Dannyblueyes

Aka Illegal Danny
BGOL Investor
it's not about being fans of either artist. Here is a link of 21 Savage and Travis Scott. If I didn't know it was AI, I'm not familiar enough with either artist to question the vocals and would assume it was real ie passable. Passable does not mean award winning. Passable just means it's able to create a usable product. The Drake & Weeknd song was played close to a million times before being pulled. I'm guessing everyone wasn't aware it was AI initially.

The question was could actors be replaced by AI. The song was an example of human speech and the current degree of emotions AI is able to capture today. I went on to say AI possibly would be able to replicate artist styles by using the artist old work as a base. Since the song lyrics weren't created by AI, it's not an example of what I was speaking to. The songs production or structure were not my focus as I'm not aware if those elements were AI or not.

You are saying all of this because you are aware it's AI. At best, you are more knowledgeable or more of a technical fan of music. To the average person, they would not know the difference with the vocals and most aren't into music enough to care about anything you are mentioning as far as quality mixing or song structuring.







I might not know, but if I came across "heart on my sleeve" in the record pool I would stack it in the "by request only" pile. Without Drake I'd delete it immediately.

That's the biggest hurdle with AI. Computers can't rap so you still need a human model. Same way you need a human actor and a green screen to create a CGI monster on screen. If the rapper or actor isn't good the song or film won't be either.

You might remember a few years ago when a near perfect AI Barack Obama called Donald Trump a dipshit. The reason it was so convincing is because the human model was a skilled actor who spent years pretending to be Obama. However, if the model was someone other than Jordan Peele it would have been an obvious fake.

Same thing applies to movies. You could make any actor look like Denzel Washington, but if they can't act like Denzel everyone will know.
 

guyver

Rising Star
Platinum Member
I might not know, but if I came across "heart on my sleeve" in the record pool I would stack it in the "by request only" pile. Without Drake I'd delete it immediately.

That's the biggest hurdle with AI. Computers can't rap so you still need a human model. Same way you need a human actor and a green screen to create a CGI monster on screen. If the rapper or actor isn't good the song or film won't be either.

You might remember a few years ago when a near perfect AI Barack Obama called Donald Trump a dipshit. The reason it was so convincing is because the human model was a skilled actor who spent years pretending to be Obama. However, if the model was someone other than Jordan Peele it would have been an obvious fake.

Same thing applies to movies. You could make any actor look like Denzel Washington, but if they can't act like Denzel everyone will know.

Your focus is on the people themselves and I'm more focused on the AIs ability to replicate humans. Not only how they sound, but characteristics of how those people speak. Basically the ability to sound human compared to let's say robocalls that clearly don't sound human.

Even using your focus on performance, the AI in both songs were passable. More importantly, I dont see many entertainers giving up the rights to their likeness short-term, so the acting would not be compared to a Denzel. Although I'd argue that itd likely be a better AI version of Denzel than a generic AI actor/character. People watch bad acting on Tubi and YouTube and are still entertained.

I was mainly speaking to vocal performances. Visually actors may not have much to be concerned currently. Going to your point about trowing away trash music. That is you someone who professionally DJs for a living. Every generation claims music has gotten worse compared to their respective time. We just saw younger people saying Travis Scott should have won rap album of the year and older people saying Killer Mike put out a better product so the younger generation should shut the fuck up and Travis was trash. Taste or standards change over time and we are all programmed to some level. If AI generated music is the new standard, the past generations may think it's trash, but future generations may accept it and believe it's quality.
 

Dannyblueyes

Aka Illegal Danny
BGOL Investor
Your focus is on the people themselves and I'm more focused on the AIs ability to replicate humans. Not only how they sound, but characteristics of how those people speak. Basically the ability to sound human compared to let's say robocalls that clearly don't sound human.

Even using your focus on performance, the AI in both songs were passable. More importantly, I dont see many entertainers giving up the rights to their likeness short-term, so the acting would not be compared to a Denzel. Although I'd argue that itd likely be a better AI version of Denzel than a generic AI actor/character. People watch bad acting on Tubi and YouTube and are still entertained.

I was mainly speaking to vocal performances. Visually actors may not have much to be concerned currently. Going to your point about trowing away trash music. That is you someone who professionally DJs for a living. Every generation claims music has gotten worse compared to their respective time. We just saw younger people saying Travis Scott should have won rap album of the year and older people saying Killer Mike put out a better product so the younger generation should shut the fuck up and Travis was trash. Taste or standards change over time and we are all programmed to some level. If AI generated music is the new standard, the past generations may think it's trash, but future generations may accept it and believe it's quality.
When I evaluate a new song my main question is "does it work with what I'm already playing?" It has little to do with my taste or opinion of new music.

In that sense, the biggest reason I wouldn't put "heart on my sleeve" on rotation is the frequent volume drops. If you're dancing or nodding your head to the beat those drops kill the vibe and pull you out of the song.

Those volume drops are also what give away the fake. Love him or hate him, Drake and his team would never allow that. Similarly, if I showed you a Picasso drawn in crayon on the back of a napkin you would know it wasn't real regardless of how close the artist matched Picasso's style. In both cases the medium is part of the art.

With the Travis Scott song the biggest giveaway is the transition after the opening "whiplash" section. Travis Scott's transitions are usually marked with a lot of reverb and delay. This copycatter tries to achieve the same results using only his voice and the results are terrible!

I don't like Travis Scott and you might not either. But compare the transition on "sicko mode" to the abomination you posted and see if you can spot the difference.



If you REALLY don't like Travis Scott the transition is around 57 seconds in.
 

guyver

Rising Star
Platinum Member
When I evaluate a new song my main question is "does it work with what I'm already playing?" It has little to do with my taste or opinion of new music.

In that sense, the biggest reason I wouldn't put "heart on my sleeve" on rotation is the frequent volume drops. If you're dancing or nodding your head to the beat those drops kill the vibe and pull you out of the song.

Those volume drops are also what give away the fake. Love him or hate him, Drake and his team would never allow that. Similarly, if I showed you a Picasso drawn in crayon on the back of a napkin you would know it wasn't real regardless of how close the artist matched Picasso's style. In both cases the medium is part of the art.

With the Travis Scott song the biggest giveaway is the transition after the opening "whiplash" section. Travis Scott's transitions are usually marked with a lot of reverb and delay. This copycatter tries to achieve the same results using only his voice and the results are terrible!

I don't like Travis Scott and you might not either. But compare the transition on "sicko mode" to the abomination you posted and see if you can spot the difference.



If you REALLY don't like Travis Scott the transition is around 57 seconds in.


I get what you are saying. However, like I said before that is your ear as a professional DJ. You don't represent the average consumer. Even now, you are probably only listening this actively because you are aware it's AI. Any other day, you'd just think it was a rough version or a bad song in general. It wouldn't surprise me if artist haven't already been playing around with this. Just like with ghost writing, it's not like they openly say it and you could have likes it.

It's not about my personal feelings on Travis or any of the artist that have been copied. All I'm saying is to the untrained ear, they wouldn't pay attention to the things you are bringing up. It's even worse if the person is like me and not that familiar with the artist like Travis or 21. Not saying they are trash, but let's say you don't think to highly of them like people complain about Future's style. To reiterate, I don't think Future is trash and i like some of his songs. You'd just think it's more of the trash from him that you've never been a fan of and you aren't going to deep dive it. Most of us are causal fans ( maybe not the best term) and aren't listening from a musicians perspective.
 

Dannyblueyes

Aka Illegal Danny
BGOL Investor
I get what you are saying. However, like I said before that is your ear as a professional DJ. You don't represent the average consumer. Even now, you are probably only listening this actively because you are aware it's AI. Any other day, you'd just think it was a rough version or a bad song in general. It wouldn't surprise me if artist haven't already been playing around with this. Just like with ghost writing, it's not like they openly say it and you could have likes it.

It's not about my personal feelings on Travis or any of the artist that have been copied. All I'm saying is to the untrained ear, they wouldn't pay attention to the things you are bringing up. It's even worse if the person is like me and not that familiar with the artist like Travis or 21. Not saying they are trash, but let's say you don't think to highly of them like people complain about Future's style. To reiterate, I don't think Future is trash and i like some of his songs. You'd just think it's more of the trash from him that you've never been a fan of and you aren't going to deep dive it. Most of us are causal fans ( maybe not the best term) and aren't listening from a musicians perspective.

The average listener might not notice the volume drops, but they'll notice the song doesn't sound right. They may not notice the lack of reverb in the Travis Scott song, but they'll know it doesn't feel like Travis Scott.

You could be right about artists using this technology, but why would they? Why would Drake use AI when he could do it himself? At least ghostwriting helps him create a better song than he could make on his own.
 

guyver

Rising Star
Platinum Member
The average listener might not notice the volume drops, but they'll notice the song doesn't sound right. They may not notice the lack of reverb in the Travis Scott song, but they'll know it doesn't feel like Travis Scott.

You could be right about artists using this technology, but why would they? Why would Drake use AI when he could do it himself? At least ghostwriting helps him create a better song than he could make on his own.

You right. They may say this doesn't feel like a usual Travis song and just think it's trash or he's falling off. Keep in mind to our knowledge this is a nobody doing this alone without resources and may not care much about the overall quality. The corporations with major resources are going to put more capital and effort into the product. This is also where it is today. In a year there will likely be vast improvements.

Because everyone isn't Drake or have Drake resources. Why would anyone automate any function. To reduce time and overall cost. AI does not necessarily need to create a finished product. It can give you a starting point. I use it for things I don't want to think about or to make improvements to things I've worked on regularly now. Think about the artist who are really just entertainers or eye candy like Ice Spice. I don't need to have her in the booth for hours to get the cadence I need anymore. Most of the rappers today aren't artist, so they'd likely be more than willing to do less work.
 

Dannyblueyes

Aka Illegal Danny
BGOL Investor
You right. They may say this doesn't feel like a usual Travis song and just think it's trash or he's falling off. Keep in mind to our knowledge this is a nobody doing this alone without resources and may not care much about the overall quality. The corporations with major resources are going to put more capital and effort into the product. This is also where it is today. In a year there will likely be vast improvements.

Because everyone isn't Drake or have Drake resources. Why would anyone automate any function. To reduce time and overall cost. AI does not necessarily need to create a finished product. It can give you a starting point. I use it for things I don't want to think about or to make improvements to things I've worked on regularly now. Think about the artist who are really just entertainers or eye candy like Ice Spice. I don't need to have her in the booth for hours to get the cadence I need anymore. Most of the rappers today aren't artist, so they'd likely be more than willing to do less work.
Couldn't disagree more.

The idea that "most rappers today aren't artists" is nearly 50 years old. We tend to believe the youth have been brainwashed and dumbed down in a way we never were.

I believe 16 to 24 year olds assert their identity and independence through music. It's their way of being different from us. What's trash to us might be dope to them because we're not listening for the same things.

When I look at the playlist for a high school dance I used to shake my head and say "why would anybody want to hear that?"

Now I try to figure out what these songs have in common. Pay attention to how kids respond to them on the dance floor. Not only does it tell me what to play next, that understanding often makes you appreciate it. That's why Ice Spice's "Princess Diana" is on my top 10 of 2023 list.

If a producer or programmer doesn't get what makes a rapper unique and likable their project is doomed before they start. It will always sound fake and unappealing no matter how good the tech is.

Getting back to acting, a lot of Denzel Washington's acting success comes from his $10 million smile. An actor or AI could imitate that smile perfectly, but if they don't know the nuances that smile conveys it's always going to look fake.
 
Last edited:

guyver

Rising Star
Platinum Member
Couldn't disagree more.

The idea that "most rappers today aren't artists" is nearly 50 years old. We tend to believe the youth have been brainwashed and dumbed down in a way we never were.

I believe 16 to 24 year olds assert their identity and independence through music. It's their way of being different from us. What's trash to us might be dope to them because we're not listening for the same things.

When I look at the playlist for a high school dance I used to shake my head and say "why would anybody want to hear that?"

Now I try to figure out what these songs have in common. Pay attention to how kids respond to them on the dance floor. Not only does it tell me what to play next, that understanding often makes you appreciate it. That's why Ice Spice's "Princess Diana" is on my top 10 of 2023 list.

If a producer or programmer doesn't get what makes a rapper unique and likable their project is doomed before they start. It will always sound fake and unappealing no matter how good the tech is.

Getting back to acting, a lot of Denzel Washington's acting success comes from his $10 million smile. An actor or AI could imitate that smile perfectly, but if they don't know the nuances that smile conveys it's always going to look fake.

Are rappers today more focused on creating music or using music as a stepping stone. Of said artist how many see it as an opportunity to make money as opposed to mastering their craft. You just had someone who is considered a top tier MC say he was uninspired to rap and even before that ventured into other things. Like it or not rap is treated as more of a gate way these days. This isn't new but it has increased over the years and it doesn't matter if they are old or young. You keep trying to turn this into a discussion about liking a generations music or being a fan of an artist. My point is simply the average fan likely wouldn't notice the difference and someone who isn't a fan is even less likely. Even the things you mentioned, the issues would be corrected by professionals who are attaching their name to it.

In movies, does the average movie watcher care about practical effects vs CGI? In music, how many people care about real instruments being used vs electronic synthesizer. People may appreciate them more but on average or at large people don't care.

There are scenes in animated movies that convey enough emotions to the audience. You really think the same can't be done with basically a more realistic model.

The AI is literally being trained on who the artist is. With enough data it will capture whatever characteristics the person currently has. If AI wasn't a threat to creators or artists, why did the different guilds have it as a point of discussion during the strikes? You don't concern yourself with none threats.

You are sounding like Blockbuster not believing Netflix business model would be a threat. Actors as a whole aren't going to be replaced, but anywhere that companies can cut cost AI will be used. Didn't Jamrs Earl Jones give permission for AI to use his voice. More people will do the same and more improvements will happen with the visual aspect. Your argument is what I imagine performers were saying about movies and TV taking over instead of going to watch live plays at the theater. The average person doesn't care about the nuances of live performances. They just want to be entertained. The average consumer will not care if human emotions are captured flawlessly and over time it may very will be.

They aren't perfect but did you actually look at the videos created by Sora? Again, if you are randomly going through YouTube, most people aren't saying that's AI for everything Sora created. The same with music. Most will accept what they see or hear until they are informed otherwise.
 

code_pirahna

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Maybe I'm just a dumbass but it looks like a real life cartoon.

Does anyone see this getting so good to a point where they could replace real actors with AI generated actors? Won't they still need someone to do the voices even if they're using AI characters. No way AI is gonna show the emotions of real actors.

Even music. AI don't got bars. I can't see AI replicating how an artist can put together a song.
LocknChase.png


To today



Yes to all of your questions
 

xxxbishopxxx

Rising Star
BGOL Investor

Dannyblueyes

Aka Illegal Danny
BGOL Investor
Are rappers today more focused on creating music or using music as a stepping stone. Of said artist how many see it as an opportunity to make money as opposed to mastering their craft. You just had someone who is considered a top tier MC say he was uninspired to rap and even before that ventured into other things. Like it or not rap is treated as more of a gate way these days. This isn't new but it has increased over the years and it doesn't matter if they are old or young. You keep trying to turn this into a discussion about liking a generations music or being a fan of an artist. My point is simply the average fan likely wouldn't notice the difference and someone who isn't a fan is even less likely. Even the things you mentioned, the issues would be corrected by professionals who are attaching their name to it.

In movies, does the average movie watcher care about practical effects vs CGI? In music, how many people care about real instruments being used vs electronic synthesizer. People may appreciate them more but on average or at large people don't care.

There are scenes in animated movies that convey enough emotions to the audience. You really think the same can't be done with basically a more realistic model.

The AI is literally being trained on who the artist is. With enough data it will capture whatever characteristics the person currently has. If AI wasn't a threat to creators or artists, why did the different guilds have it as a point of discussion during the strikes? You don't concern yourself with none threats.

You are sounding like Blockbuster not believing Netflix business model would be a threat. Actors as a whole aren't going to be replaced, but anywhere that companies can cut cost AI will be used. Didn't Jamrs Earl Jones give permission for AI to use his voice. More people will do the same and more improvements will happen with the visual aspect. Your argument is what I imagine performers were saying about movies and TV taking over instead of going to watch live plays at the theater. The average person doesn't care about the nuances of live performances. They just want to be entertained. The average consumer will not care if human emotions are captured flawlessly and over time it may very will be.

They aren't perfect but did you actually look at the videos created by Sora? Again, if you are randomly going through YouTube, most people aren't saying that's AI for everything Sora created. The same with music. Most will accept what they see or hear until they are informed otherwise.

It's less about using rap as a stepping stone and more about taking advantage of lanes that weren't open a generation ago.

I disagree with your blockbuster/netflix comparison. Instead I think this is more like the debate around automated kiosks in fast food restaurants. 5 or 10 years ago BGOL had a 20+ page debate on how this evil tech was going to cost jobs. Instead, these kiosks saved so much time fast food places struggle to staff their kitchens and keep up with the orders.

I should point out that AI is already prevalent in music. Not as a way to replace musicians or entertainers, but in the form of stem separation. The surviving Beatles used that technology to separate the piano from the vocals and create a new song from one of John Lennon's home recordings. I use this tech to isolate vocals from a song, run it through a multitrack and create clean versions for bar mitzvahs. Akai created a stem sampler so that producers could expand their artistic palette.

I believe the biggest use of AI and film will be for crowd scenes. Rather than trying to wrangle 500 extras the production can use AI characters. They would no longer have to worry if the guy in the back is wearing the same shirt from yesterday's shot or if the little girl in front picked her nose halfway through the scene. That means they can wrap sooner and save money on the production.

In the short term a lot of extras will lose work, but ultimately it will allow studios to pump out more movies. Don't be surprised that these same studios end up struggling to find actors.
 

guyver

Rising Star
Platinum Member
It's less about using rap as a stepping stone and more about taking advantage of lanes that weren't open a generation ago.

I disagree with your blockbuster/netflix comparison. Instead I think this is more like the debate around automated kiosks in fast food restaurants. 5 or 10 years ago BGOL had a 20+ page debate on how this evil tech was going to cost jobs. Instead, these kiosks saved so much time fast food places struggle to staff their kitchens and keep up with the orders.

I should point out that AI is already prevalent in music. Not as a way to replace musicians or entertainers, but in the form of stem separation. The surviving Beatles used that technology to separate the piano from the vocals and create a new song from one of John Lennon's home recordings. I use this tech to isolate vocals from a song, run it through a multitrack and create clean versions for bar mitzvahs. Akai created a stem sampler so that producers could expand their artistic palette.

I believe the biggest use of AI and film will be for crowd scenes. Rather than trying to wrangle 500 extras the production can use AI characters. They would no longer have to worry if the guy in the back is wearing the same shirt from yesterday's shot or if the little girl in front picked her nose halfway through the scene. That means they can wrap sooner and save money on the production.

In the short term a lot of extras will lose work, but ultimately it will allow studios to pump out more movies. Don't be surprised that these same studios end up struggling to find actors.
You got it. You went from why would artist use AI to I use AI in my work. My argument the entire time has been AI will be able to reduce cost or labor in entertainment. I said artist will take advantage of the technology as you said you do. I further said consumers would accept or in some cases not know the difference enlarge. Although what you seem to be describing doesn't sound like AI. I use Excel at work. That doesn't mean I'm using AI. It's just a normal computer program. Excel has introduced AI to the program though. You furthered one of my points by saying you are involved in creating music more than just being a DJ. Your ear is different than most of us here on the board. We aren't listening to songs the same way as you.

My comparison is correct. My statement wasn't about the technology. It was about you (Blockbuster) not seeing the change that is happening in front of you and not believing it is a threat to your business. I would be Netflix who saw the potential in home delivery of DVDs and went on to embrace streaming. By the time Blockbuster acknowledged the threat to their business and tried to adapt it was too late. Worse they had the opportunity to buy Netflix and Blockbuster is dead today.the focus is the mindset of the organizations and embracing innovation or not.

Artist have had opportunities outside of rap since the 90s if not 80s. Yes, it's increased to new levels but that doesn't change the fact that this isn't new. There is a difference from people wanting to be artist because they love their craft and those who primarily enter for money and clout. The same applies to every industry or career. There are people who will work for nothing because they love what they do be it doctor, lawyer, teacher or computer programmer. They actively try to improve their skills and stay up to date on changes in their fields. Taking it back to rappers, there are some who blantly say rap is a hustle for them and it's not necessarily a love for the art. Those are the artist who will willingly use AI to reduce the work. Others will use AI like ghostwriters, reference tracks or writing camps to get ideas. The AI could create something that is good enough to use as is.like I said before the person who isn't a studio rat will let AI do the heavy lifting. I don't know how Travis Scott did the concert in Fortnite, but maybe moving forward it will all be AI. The same way Soldierboy used a computer program from home to create his first hit, someone will use AI to do the same. People will see the success, learn how to do it and follow the trend as always.
 

Dannyblueyes

Aka Illegal Danny
BGOL Investor
You got it. You went from why would artist use AI to I use AI in my work. My argument the entire time has been AI will be able to reduce cost or labor in entertainment. I said artist will take advantage of the technology as you said you do. I further said consumers would accept or in some cases not know the difference enlarge. Although what you seem to be describing doesn't sound like AI. I use Excel at work. That doesn't mean I'm using AI. It's just a normal computer program. Excel has introduced AI to the program though. You furthered one of my points by saying you are involved in creating music more than just being a DJ. Your ear is different than most of us here on the board. We aren't listening to songs the same way as you.

My comparison is correct. My statement wasn't about the technology. It was about you (Blockbuster) not seeing the change that is happening in front of you and not believing it is a threat to your business. I would be Netflix who saw the potential in home delivery of DVDs and went on to embrace streaming. By the time Blockbuster acknowledged the threat to their business and tried to adapt it was too late. Worse they had the opportunity to buy Netflix and Blockbuster is dead today.the focus is the mindset of the organizations and embracing innovation or not.

Artist have had opportunities outside of rap since the 90s if not 80s. Yes, it's increased to new levels but that doesn't change the fact that this isn't new. There is a difference from people wanting to be artist because they love their craft and those who primarily enter for money and clout. The same applies to every industry or career. There are people who will work for nothing because they love what they do be it doctor, lawyer, teacher or computer programmer. They actively try to improve their skills and stay up to date on changes in their fields. Taking it back to rappers, there are some who blantly say rap is a hustle for them and it's not necessarily a love for the art. Those are the artist who will willingly use AI to reduce the work. Others will use AI like ghostwriters, reference tracks or writing camps to get ideas. The AI could create something that is good enough to use as is.like I said before the person who isn't a studio rat will let AI do the heavy lifting. I don't know how Travis Scott did the concert in Fortnite, but maybe moving forward it will all be AI. The same way Soldierboy used a computer program from home to create his first hit, someone will use AI to do the same. People will see the success, learn how to do it and follow the trend as always.

Your argument started with a terrible Drake ripoff made by AI. You said that because this bad copy was passable to people who are not fans or serious music listeners eventually the tech would progress to the point that the rapper is no longer necessary. Especially since most modern rappers only care about money and are not true artists anyway.

How does my last comment prove that point?

You further said that AI would get so good at analyzing actors that eventually an AI Denzel would be better than the real thing.

I said the opposite and stand by it.

I agree that AI is useful, but mainly in ways that enhance an artist's work, not replace it all together. I don't believe AI will ever have the capacity to do this for a number of reasons that I've already discussed.

Your Blockbuster argument ignores context. Netflix offered themselves for sale in 2000. At that point the dot com bubble had just burst and most people didn't have the internet or DVD players.

So why would the biggest video store rental chain in the country want to buy a company in a failing industry utilizing technology most people don't use to get movies they have to wait a week to watch?

For further context, Netflix started home streaming in 2007. A year later Hollywood writers went on strike to demand a bigger share of DVD royalties. They never mentioned streaming which means it wasn't just Blockbuster who didn't see the potential. The people who made the content used by Netflix didn't see it either.

Granted, Blockbuster eventually reached an adapt or perish moment and by the time they did it was too late. However, that's the other flaw in this comparison. AI is nowhere near that point and for most applications it never will.

Back to my automated fast food comparison, many restaurants restaurants benefited by embracing automatic kiosks. Many more didn't and they're still doing fine. Same applies to stem separation in music.

I should point out that I was already making clean versions of songs decades before this technology came out. The only difference now is that I don't need an instrumental to do it. Likewise, plenty of artists who don't perform or compose music with computers and synthesizers are still doing fine.

Yes, rappers have taken on lanes like acting since the 1980s. Back then they were limited to bit parts and low budget movies. The only exceptions were household names like Will Smith, or trained actors like Tupac. For the rest it was barely worth considering. However, since 2008 the landscape as completely changed.

Yes, some rappers call their music a hustle, but back in 1992 Rakim said rap was his job. If one of the greatest MCs who ever lived can view his work this way then modern hustlers can still create great art as well.

Full disclosure, I see DJing as a hustle. The money I make allows me to spend eight hours a day honing my craft instead of punching a clock. It doesn't cheapen my art, it enhances it.
 

guyver

Rising Star
Platinum Member
Your argument started with a terrible Drake ripoff made by AI. You said that because this bad copy was passable to people who are not fans or serious music listeners eventually the tech would progress to the point that the rapper is no longer necessary. Especially since most modern rappers only care about money and are not true artists anyway.

How does my last comment prove that point?

You further said that AI would get so good at analyzing actors that eventually an AI Denzel would be better than the real thing.

I said the opposite and stand by it.

I agree that AI is useful, but mainly in ways that enhance an artist's work, not replace it all together. I don't believe AI will ever have the capacity to do this for a number of reasons that I've already discussed.

Your Blockbuster argument ignores context. Netflix offered themselves for sale in 2000. At that point the dot com bubble had just burst and most people didn't have the internet or DVD players.

So why would the biggest video store rental chain in the country want to buy a company in a failing industry utilizing technology most people don't use to get movies they have to wait a week to watch?

For further context, Netflix started home streaming in 2007. A year later Hollywood writers went on strike to demand a bigger share of DVD royalties. They never mentioned streaming which means it wasn't just Blockbuster who didn't see the potential. The people who made the content used by Netflix didn't see it either.

Granted, Blockbuster eventually reached an adapt or perish moment and by the time they did it was too late. However, that's the other flaw in this comparison. AI is nowhere near that point and for most applications it never will.

Back to my automated fast food comparison, many restaurants restaurants benefited by embracing automatic kiosks. Many more didn't and they're still doing fine. Same applies to stem separation in music.

I should point out that I was already making clean versions of songs decades before this technology came out. The only difference now is that I don't need an instrumental to do it. Likewise, plenty of artists who don't perform or compose music with computers and synthesizers are still doing fine.

Yes, rappers have taken on lanes like acting since the 1980s. Back then they were limited to bit parts and low budget movies. The only exceptions were household names like Will Smith, or trained actors like Tupac. For the rest it was barely worth considering. However, since 2008 the landscape as completely changed.

Yes, some rappers call their music a hustle, but back in 1992 Rakim said rap was his job. If one of the greatest MCs who ever lived can view his work this way then modern hustlers can still create great art as well.

Full disclosure, I see DJing as a hustle. The money I make allows me to spend eight hours a day honing my craft instead of punching a clock. It doesn't cheapen my art, it enhances it.


I never said rappers wouldn't be needed.

At no point did I say or imply an AI Denzel voice would be better than Denzel.

Blockbuster was being used as an analogy for your mindset. We don't need to deep dive the history. I have no idea why you are attempting to compare streaming to AI.

If rappers say I don't really care about the art of rapping and thier focus is making money, exactly what does that have to do with Rakim calling rap his job or you not believing money doesn't devalue your art? Saying something is your job especially in his context means he took it seriously or he respected his craft. The fact that you claim to work on your craft in your free time says it's more than a hustle. Otherwise, you wouldn't care to do anything related to DJING once you finished a job or at best to prep. Saying you hustle as in work hard or it's a way you earn money is not the same as saying it's a hustle and if it doesn't work out I'm on to the next thing or I only care about the money.

Again, what you are describing does not seem to be AI. Yes, it's technology that made your job easier.

I said you got it because at this point you seem to just be replying just to reply. Outside your opinion about AI not advancing and your weird stance of not seeing the difference between someone with your background compared to the average music fan, you've damn near over the course of the discussion agreed with most of my statements to the point of repeating them in your own words. What's left to discuss?

The videos below are what is being made today allegedly and with no modifications. The second video does a good job of showing human and animal reactions. I doubt most would question the video beyond thinking they were stock videos With minor possible issues that would be taken as bad edits. Even without audio, you can't honestly say you don't see these improving to the point of effectively conveying emotions to the audience. We accepted bad dubbed foreign films for years and loved it. AI will likely be able to produce better content. Before you over think the comment, please don't start talking about old Kung fu movies and their history in the US.

https://cdn.openai.com/sora/videos/lagos.mp4

https://cdn.openai.com/sora/videos/cat-on-bed.mp4

https://cdn.openai.com/sora/videos/man-on-the-cloud.mp4
 

ny1800

Rising Star
Registered
AI is in its infancy and its already putting thousands of jobs at risk
good luck americans
Do I hear a riot taking place in the near future?

Americans running around with super soakers wettin' up all the computers destroying them...If not water in them super soakers then we'll find the right liquid to fry those robots.
 

Dannyblueyes

Aka Illegal Danny
BGOL Investor
I never said rappers wouldn't be needed.

At no point did I say or imply an AI Denzel voice would be better than Denzel.

Blockbuster was being used as an analogy for your mindset. We don't need to deep dive the history. I have no idea why you are attempting to compare streaming to AI.

If rappers say I don't really care about the art of rapping and thier focus is making money, exactly what does that have to do with Rakim calling rap his job or you not believing money doesn't devalue your art? Saying something is your job especially in his context means he took it seriously or he respected his craft. The fact that you claim to work on your craft in your free time says it's more than a hustle. Otherwise, you wouldn't care to do anything related to DJING once you finished a job or at best to prep. Saying you hustle as in work hard or it's a way you earn money is not the same as saying it's a hustle and if it doesn't work out I'm on to the next thing or I only care about the money.

Again, what you are describing does not seem to be AI. Yes, it's technology that made your job easier.

I said you got it because at this point you seem to just be replying just to reply. Outside your opinion about AI not advancing and your weird stance of not seeing the difference between someone with your background compared to the average music fan, you've damn near over the course of the discussion agreed with most of my statements to the point of repeating them in your own words. What's left to discuss?

The videos below are what is being made today allegedly and with no modifications. The second video does a good job of showing human and animal reactions. I doubt most would question the video beyond thinking they were stock videos With minor possible issues that would be taken as bad edits. Even without audio, you can't honestly say you don't see these improving to the point of effectively conveying emotions to the audience. We accepted bad dubbed foreign films for years and loved it. AI will likely be able to produce better content. Before you over think the comment, please don't start talking about old Kung fu movies and their history in the US.

https://cdn.openai.com/sora/videos/lagos.mp4

https://cdn.openai.com/sora/videos/cat-on-bed.mp4

https://cdn.openai.com/sora/videos/man-on-the-cloud.mp4

You're the one that compared streaming to AI when you brought up the blockbuster/netflix comparison. I've tried to explain why that comparison doesn't make sense.

"The fact that I work on DJing in my free time shows that it's more than a hustle?"

That's not free time. Sure, nobody cuts me an hourly check when I rehearse, but that rehearsal makes me a better DJ which leads to better bookings. In that sense it's no different than a tech contractor studying for certifications between jobs.

"Saying you hustle as in work hard or it's a way you earn money is not the same as saying it's a hustle and if it doesn't work out I'm on to the next thing or I only care about the money."

It's exactly the same thing.

I'm not playing parties to afford patches for a tent under the bridge. There's nothing wrong with an artist leaving the game because they couldn't get things they want and need.

Also, rapping is a terrible way to make money.

I don't see these videos improving to the point of reflecting emotion, because machines are incapable of understanding what emotion is. A computer can be programmed with the facial features and body language that indicate sadness, but if it doesn't know what sadness feels like that portrayal will always be hollow and inauthentic.

That's AI's fundamental weakness.
 

guyver

Rising Star
Platinum Member
You're the one that compared streaming to AI when you brought up the blockbuster/netflix comparison. I've tried to explain why that comparison doesn't make sense.

"The fact that I work on DJing in my free time shows that it's more than a hustle?"

That's not free time. Sure, nobody cuts me an hourly check when I rehearse, but that rehearsal makes me a better DJ which leads to better bookings. In that sense it's no different than a tech contractor studying for certifications between jobs.

"Saying you hustle as in work hard or it's a way you earn money is not the same as saying it's a hustle and if it doesn't work out I'm on to the next thing or I only care about the money."

It's exactly the same thing.

I'm not playing parties to afford patches for a tent under the bridge. There's nothing wrong with an artist leaving the game because they couldn't get things they want and need.

Also, rapping is a terrible way to make money.

I don't see these videos improving to the point of reflecting emotion, because machines are incapable of understanding what emotion is. A computer can be programmed with the facial features and body language that indicate sadness, but if it doesn't know what sadness feels like that portrayal will always be hollow and inauthentic.

That's AI's fundamental weakness.

Are you slow? For the third time. I never compared the two technologies. I was not really discussing Netflix and Blockbuster. I don't know how to further dump down an analogy to you. You were the focus of the statement. If you can't understand a basic concept like that, there is nothing more to discuss.

Yes, putting time and effort into your craft says it's more than just a way to make money. There's a difference between Kobe Bryant and a bench player who basically just shows up to work. If you are using 8 hours of your free time to improve your skills or knowledge, that is showing dedication to the craft. Your end goal may really be money, but you are showing a dedication to your craft. Moving on after failing doesn't mean the person didn't take their craft seriously. Do you want the lawyer who does just enough to get paid or one who puts pride into their work and enjoys their work to the point of making sacrifices long after earning their degree. Now can you be harding working and not care about the craft? Of course, but point is along with not caring about the craft they don't care to work hard. They want the benefits of the lifestyle with little effort.

It doesn't have to understand emotion to reflect emotions. Do babies under the concept of emotions. They learn behavior by emulating what they see initially. It doesn't stop adults from reacting to babies who don't know what they are expressing. We aren't talking about robots. We are discussing digital images that will emulate human emotions. No different than what we already see today with cartoons. We aren't discussing AI being truly conscious. I'm not discussing AIs ability to interact with a human actor. You've never laughed at the old looney toons cartoons that didn't have vocals. Didn't people care when Bambi's mother dies. Didn't the same thing happen with the Lion King? What about Transformers when Prime died. Humans connect emotionally to what they see. That doesn't change just because it's AI.

The amount of money a rapper makes doesn't matter. Kids believe the image of wealth being shown and believe you can become wealthy from rap. You also left the fame aspect as an alternative reason for wanting to be a rapper. If you don't make money, that is more incentive to use AI to reduce your time spent working on music.

Supposedly three years ago someone doubted Sora would exist in our lifetime. Clearly they were wrong. All we are hearing is how this technology is moving faster than predicted.

While he may not have been primarily focused on actors, Tyler Perry someone who is more knowledgeable than us believes AI will cause a shift in the industry. Do you believe he is only thinking of production studios or behind the scenes functions? He stated he has adapted AI to reduce make up time. You've been focused on what I assume to be main actors. Did you consider background actors. What about supporting actors who have small roles. Kids that can't be on set due to laws. Did you forget imperfections can be modified? You'll see small blending until the day a workable product can be used.


Will Smith was pretending to be AI and people believed it was a AI. What does that tell you about people's ability to distinguish real from fake.
https://www.reddit.com/r/agedlikemilk/s/cBzAxnAjpU


 

jimmiewine

"Are you gonna bring Halle? That's a fine bitch!"
BGOL Patreon Investor
Maybe I'm just a dumbass but it looks like a real life cartoon.

Does anyone see this getting so good to a point where they could replace real actors with AI generated actors? Won't they still need someone to do the voices even if they're using AI characters. No way AI is gonna show the emotions of real actors.

Even music. AI don't got bars. I can't see AI replicating how an artist can put together a song.
This is one of the reasons why the actors were striking in Hollywood. Case in point: Someone posted a AI video with Sylvester Stallone and it was so real (even the voice) that I had to do a double take!
 

jimmiewine

"Are you gonna bring Halle? That's a fine bitch!"
BGOL Patreon Investor
Maybe I'm just a dumbass but it looks like a real life cartoon.

Does anyone see this getting so good to a point where they could replace real actors with AI generated actors? Won't they still need someone to do the voices even if they're using AI characters. No way AI is gonna show the emotions of real actors.

Even music. AI don't got bars. I can't see AI replicating how an artist can put together a song.
Where have you been? I have heard AI generated songs from Tupac, Michael Jackson, Eminem, etc. There is an AI generated Michael Jackson song AND video on YouTube that is so real it will make your head spin!
 

T_Holmes

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
This could potentially put a lot of people out of work. I look at it mostly from that perspective. They're already trying to squeeze out extra/background performers by digitizing their images. There's a reason why the strike last year was considered a major tipping point.

Creators will definitely try to work as cheaply as possible. That's just good business. Will the average joe get that bent out of shape if their computer-created imagery or sound is a little off? Couldn't say. If all of the people griping about CGI for the past 5 years is any indication, nothing less than perfection is allowed. :p

But that said, haters gonna hat, but consumers consume. I promise you that if the market gets flooded with art in this style, the average person will not rebel. They will just adapt to the format. That's just what we do.

Personally, the average person is already susceptible to fake info, so I see it as an issue from that perspective. But it's not like people need real info to act on their hatred and biases now, so a lack of confirmation isn't really helping to set things right, anyway.
 

cashwhisperer

My favorite key is E♭
BGOL Investor
This could potentially put a lot of people out of work. I look at it mostly from that perspective. They're already trying to squeeze out extra/background performers by digitizing their images. There's a reason why the strike last year was considered a major tipping point.

Creators will definitely try to work as cheaply as possible. That's just good business. Will the average joe get that bent out of shape if their computer-created imagery or sound is a little off? Couldn't say. If all of the people griping about CGI for the past 5 years is any indication, nothing less than perfection is allowed. :p

But that said, haters gonna hat, but consumers consume. I promise you that if the market gets flooded with art in this style, the average person will not rebel. They will just adapt to the format. That's just what we do.

Personally, the average person is already susceptible to fake info, so I see it as an issue from that perspective. But it's not like people need real info to act on their hatred and biases now, so a lack of confirmation isn't really helping to set things right, anyway.

The thing about AI, is that the shit is time consuming. Testing prompts over and over, and that's just for single frames. I imagine video will be an even bigger headache. It's good for certain things like stock footage, video games, scenic shots for movies/tv, but what else?? If you're trying to do multi-camera green screen you might as well stick with the current process. :dunno: I'm just seeing a lot of limitations currently.
 

chemist

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Where have you been? I have heard AI generated songs from Tupac, Michael Jackson, Eminem, etc. There is an AI generated Michael Jackson song AND video on YouTube that is so real it will make your head spin!

I've heard Biggie over Jay-Z lyrics. You can use the artists voice but you're not writing like them. R&B is a little different because they may have writers but MC's, the greats have a distinct flow and delivery that I don't think just anybody can replicate.
 

Jupiter-One

Potential Star
Registered
What many people don't grasp is the PACE of this technology...This is not like the computer going from large ventricle transporters to the micro chip...this is ENTIRELY different in pace...somebody mentioned the hands not being realistic...that will be changed NEXT WEEK...Not next month or by next year....within two years this will actually look MORE realistic than any movie you see on TV...Lots of jobs nearly INSTANTLY...It's time to level up your knowledge and get some AI Certifications on Product Management and Development..,it's going to happen faster than you realize and you can either charge into the storm to get through it or ignore it and get slammed by the full intensity of the storm...either way...Storm is coming
 

Dannyblueyes

Aka Illegal Danny
BGOL Investor
Are you slow? For the third time. I never compared the two technologies. I was not really discussing Netflix and Blockbuster. I don't know how to further dump down an analogy to you. You were the focus of the statement. If you can't understand a basic concept like that, there is nothing more to discuss.

Yes, putting time and effort into your craft says it's more than just a way to make money. There's a difference between Kobe Bryant and a bench player who basically just shows up to work. If you are using 8 hours of your free time to improve your skills or knowledge, that is showing dedication to the craft. Your end goal may really be money, but you are showing a dedication to your craft. Moving on after failing doesn't mean the person didn't take their craft seriously. Do you want the lawyer who does just enough to get paid or one who puts pride into their work and enjoys their work to the point of making sacrifices long after earning their degree. Now can you be harding working and not care about the craft? Of course, but point is along with not caring about the craft they don't care to work hard. They want the benefits of the lifestyle with little effort.

It doesn't have to understand emotion to reflect emotions. Do babies under the concept of emotions. They learn behavior by emulating what they see initially. It doesn't stop adults from reacting to babies who don't know what they are expressing. We aren't talking about robots. We are discussing digital images that will emulate human emotions. No different than what we already see today with cartoons. We aren't discussing AI being truly conscious. I'm not discussing AIs ability to interact with a human actor. You've never laughed at the old looney toons cartoons that didn't have vocals. Didn't people care when Bambi's mother dies. Didn't the same thing happen with the Lion King? What about Transformers when Prime died. Humans connect emotionally to what they see. That doesn't change just because it's AI.

The amount of money a rapper makes doesn't matter. Kids believe the image of wealth being shown and believe you can become wealthy from rap. You also left the fame aspect as an alternative reason for wanting to be a rapper. If you don't make money, that is more incentive to use AI to reduce your time spent working on music.

Supposedly three years ago someone doubted Sora would exist in our lifetime. Clearly they were wrong. All we are hearing is how this technology is moving faster than predicted.

While he may not have been primarily focused on actors, Tyler Perry someone who is more knowledgeable than us believes AI will cause a shift in the industry. Do you believe he is only thinking of production studios or behind the scenes functions? He stated he has adapted AI to reduce make up time. You've been focused on what I assume to be main actors. Did you consider background actors. What about supporting actors who have small roles. Kids that can't be on set due to laws. Did you forget imperfections can be modified? You'll see small blending until the day a workable product can be used.


Will Smith was pretending to be AI and people believed it was a AI. What does that tell you about people's ability to distinguish real from fake.
https://www.reddit.com/r/agedlikemilk/s/cBzAxnAjpU




That benchwarmer could work just as hard with the same dedication as Kobe. We don't know because it's rarely talked about unless the player is a superstar. Dedication to your craft is only one of the boxes you have to check to be good at something.

Babies feel emotion by instinct. No one has to teach them how to cry when they're hungry or their diapers are soiled. If they didn't have this ability most would starve to death within 3 months.

The difference from an AI image and the cartoons you speak of is that they are created by humans who intuitively understand that these emotions. The reason it hurts when Optimus prime or Bambi's mother dies is because the screenplays are written by writers who know first hand what it's like to feel that kind of loss. Dialogue is expressed by actors who felt the same. The background music is performed by musicians and composers who understand how to express this loss through music. The animators have a limited pallet compared to a human face, but when you add these elements together it creates an emotional scene.

I don't know Tyler Perry's intentions with AI. What I can tell you that using it for background performers is no small thing.

I was one of about 300 crowd extras in the Kurt Russell movie miracle. They had a sit in a section of the Vancouver Agrodome while they filmed a series of scenes. 3 hours later they would have us move to a different section and film in the scenes again. In post the used CGI to blend the shots and make it look like the stadium was full. It took 6 weeks.

The extras are cheap, but the production also pays the crew, actors, and support staff. If they could have used AI to simulate the crowd in some of those shots and cut the shot down to two or three weeks it could have saved millions.

Best of all, they wouldn't run afoul of SAG or IATSE because the tech doesn't replace anyone they represent. At worst they might negotiate a higher hourly rate to make up for the lack of downtime. Even if they did the production still saves money and the talent gets paid more for less work so it's a win.

But no. I don't think it will ever be possible or practical to replace a supporting or lead actor.
 
Last edited:
Top