Also, ever since the Gemini marketing video shenanigans, I don't really feel like trusting whatever Google's research says they have, if I can't test it myself.
>We train our T2V model on a dataset containing 30M videos along with their text caption. [...] We evaluate our model on a collection of 113 text prompts describing diverse objects and scenes. The prompt list consists of 18 prompts assembled by us and 95 prompts used by prior works (Singer et al., 2022; Ho et al., 2022a; Blattmann et al., 2023b) (see App. B). Additionally, we employ a zero-shot evaluation protocol on the UCF101 dataset >
The video was released by Google product marketing for a launch to customers, not research.
I'm still somewhat confused by this one. I understand the community has decided to be harsh on Google for that video to draw a line - fair, truth in advertising, etc. -, but at the same time, we all had an understanding of where that tech is at currently and the pace it progresses at. Did anyone watching it really assume it was realtime? Can we not differentiate between technical publications and marketing anymore? Do we have to vilify everyone in an R&D department for the sins of the product marketing wing?
It was completely dishonest. Considering how trash Googles actual AI products are they deserve to be dragged even more over that video.