Eh... it's already started on YouTube. There's a whole new genre of movie content that has chatgpt summarize the movie while they play 15 minutes of clips. It's higher effort garbagisation because someone needs to at least do some low effort video editing.
We recently launched a 24/7 news channel:
Email has problems, yet the good and productive uses vastly outweigh the bad actors. The vast majority of systems humans use have benefit, otherwise they would be unwound by governments (eg. crypto).
People want to be creative more than they want to be destructive. The destroyers will be moderated, just as they are in every system.
I want a world where every kid can make their own Star Wars or Princess Mononoke and create more than Scorsese's entire career within a single year.
Rad goal. Good luck as someone who consumes more YouTube than mainstream content. I'm all for unlocking the potential of creators.
If things stay the same as ever, this life will have been boring. I'm not cut out for another twenty years of smartphone incrementalism.
Fuck the status quo. I don't live for "same". Everything in the world as it exists isn't enough.
The future could be the most exciting thing if we dream and build it.
I feel sorry for you.
You know what really sucks? How labor intensive and capital intensive filmmaking is. How hard it is to make it into the field. How almost impossible it is to lead a production.
Think about all of the great ideas that wither on the vine because the Hollywood studio system only has so much capital and can only back so many projects.
Think about how many months and years go into a single film, and how few of them succeed.
Think about the opportunity cost of learning a creative skill - locking you out of all the other skills you could use to build your vision.
When the cost structures drop, people will be more creative and more cooperative. The long tail will be all of us.
Very few; great ideas mostly happen outside of the Hollywood studio system, which is largely about expensive packaging of low-risk ideas, not great ones.
Allow me to point to the thousands of creatives trying to cut it that cannot break in. I've met perhaps over a hundred of them personally. I, myself, am one of these people.
> which is largely about expensive packaging of low-risk ideas, not great ones.
The market serves different segments and there's a lot of intelligence built around vehicles of all types, shapes, and sizes. I don't think Hollywood is stupid at all. I think it's simply a small local optima when we're about to jump the peak to a new Mt. Everest.
I'm not saying great ideas don't fail to get realized.
I’m saying that the Hollywood systen is actively hostile to great ideas, so that the reason greay ideas fail to get realized is not the limited resources within the Hollywood system, which is more inclined to crush great ideas than to realize them with whatever resources it has.
(Limited money outside the Hollywood system might be a problem, though.)
> I don't think Hollywood is stupid at all.
I didn't say anything about its intelligence, merely its function, it is far from stupid.
In my opinion it's the McDonald's of movies. Not particularly good, always the same few usual suspects on the menu, nothing adventurous but mindless consumerism. And a few people get rich off it. It's business, not art. But people use it in masses because it's easy to get and they know what they're getting. Some excellent stuff comes out of there too but it almost feels like an accident sometimes.
If you're really into your art form, I wouldn't even try to get in there. Sure, alternative cinema won't make you rich. But if that's your goal you're in the wrong business anyway. Making it in Hollywood is more about who you know and who you f*k than about your skills.
Often, "making it" in the Hollywood studio system is about being a part of an exclusive club. Very few people are allowed to proliferate their own ideas within the walled garden.
Why? I'm not sure what are you talking about but I doubt most factory workers or butter churners were particularly excited about their jobs...
> How almost impossible it is to lead a production.
The problem I see is that if everyone is capable of making high-end movies the market will become oversaturated. There is only a limited amount of time consumers can spend watching tv so if making high quality (by current standards) content becomes trivial that will simply raise the overall "quality" bar. As long as there is money to be made it will make sense to invest into improving your content by investing into better "AI", GPUs or whatever. So we'll just end up more or less where we started.
I mean that sort of already happened didn't it? We can do things (CGI & production wise) that were impossible or even unimaginable as recently as the 80s or 90s. And things which were extremely expensive and required thousands of hours to accomplish back then are trivial now. So what? Did it become much easier to break in into the industry than before? Or did the bar just got higher?
> When the cost structures drop, people will be more creative and more cooperative
Maybe. But considering that most people and not very creative and most of their "ideas" are garbage we're just a likely to drown in a sea of technically/visually high quality content that's artistically and creatively worthless. By "garbage" I mean content that very few people will choose to willingly consume if they had alternative options.
You're imagining inventing a car and feeling the wind in your hair on the open road, others are imagining being stuck in traffic and cities becoming more and more dominated by parking lots. You're criticizing them for a lack of vision, but that's not correct; they're peering into the same future, and seeing something different.
That doesn't make them "antiprogress," they're critics with concerns that would be worth engaging with instead of dismissing. If you care about this project and you want to make the best version of it - ask them why they think that way instead of responding to the version of their concerns which is in your head, and then give some thought to how you could address it.
(I'm ambivalent leaning towards skeptical, so not much much of a dog in the race, trying to bridge a miscommunication.)
I don't think that's a bad thing. It's a good perspective to keep in mind when disagreeing with someone though.
I like Star Trek the Next Generation... a lot! It was on when I was a teenager, and I like it because it's nostalgic and actually a pretty wholesome show compared to a lot of the shit that gets produced today. I'd love to see more than the existing 7 seasons, but they'll never make any more of them. It would be incredible if I could just ask my PC "Generate a new Star Trek TNG episode with the original actors and a believable, good story". I could watch a new one every week forever if I wanted! At the speed technology is moving, I expect we might see that in my lifetime.
We all saw the cheesy "infinite Seinfeld generator" a few weeks ago. That's v0.1. The technology will inevitably get better--in fact the only thing that could torpedo a realistic "infinite nostalgic TV show generator" are the copyright goons trying to hold it back.
It would be incredible, but incredibly awful.
Also, a series is going to have a (set of) formula, but what makes an episode good is if it deviates from that formula.
I want to put mocap and editing into this. Humans can tweak high level knobs, then dive into specifics.