Nobody really knows how brains work to make sentient copies. All AI does is suck up all the information available (real and junk) and makes derivatives of that information on demand.

Anyway, the problem with YouTube video makers is they start out making videos they find interesting and when successful they are stuck catering to their audience to make money. Audiences are fickle and when content creators venture out of their niche people complain.

Watch the videos you like and don't watch content you don't like. I don't care about the content creators' beliefs or other hobbies to be honest.

Going by what is being said here, talking about videos he made I never saw you all started watching, after I checked out of his videos.

Back then one of this videos did feature a gun but it was done in a timid way, almost apologetic manner which I thought strange at the time...

The subjects he features now seem to be a long long way from those subjects that made him popular. I cant help but think people carried on watching even thought the interest in the subject wasnt really there.

David used to have entire YT channel dedicated to the airsoft "guns". Why is this drama about the right to own and carry a non-automatic firearm going on? He is not a criminal and he has right to own and carry a gun and even to use it for self defense in Texas. Nowadays this is a privilege outside of the USA and a couple of other countries. This thread is about his new YT "ai" content, not about the gun control and restrictions pushed by the modern US trotskyists and leftists.

analog_programmer wrote on Today, 11:17:

David used to have entire YT channel dedicated to the airsoft "guns". Why is this drama about the right to own and carry a non-automatic firearm going on? He is not a criminal and he has right to own and carry a gun and even to use it for self defense in Texas. Nowadays this is a privilege outside of the USA and a couple of other countries. This thread is about his new YT "ai" content, not about the gun control and restrictions pushed by the modern US trotskyists and leftists.

Some people cannot help but tell others how to live their lives, I don't get it myself as I prefer to let people live as they legally wish.

For context I'm from Australia which has some of the strictest gun laws in the world ..I hate it, our government is a literal nanny state which the voters are very quickly tiring of.

Anyway that's enough of that from me as its off topic and I don't want to derail the thread.

I genuinely sympathize with David for struggling with mental health issues.

And anything that can help him rekindle his creative joy is something I applaud.

The thing is that his AI project is more something for him to play and experiment with, to see what's possible.

The point he's making, that everybody can now make something resembling a live action movie, is indeed wild, if you look at the big picture.

But what he showed in the trailer is not yet of the quality to be published as a feature film, and I don't see a lot of people being eager about attending a movie theater screening to see it.

To put this in contrast: I recently saw the pilot episode of the AI-generated Dr. who fan series on YouTube. And the quality of that really blew me away. I actually found myself enjoying it, with it really feeling like a Dr. Who episode. That episode was done so well, that the (completely AI-generated) characters appeared real, unpolished and relatable. The person who prompted the scenes obviously went through the effort (and no doubt lots of expensive tokens) to get the AI to generate convincing scenes with the right atmosphere.

It did get a few things wrong here and there, including one character with different eye colors in different scenes that took me out of it a little. But all in all, it felt like a quality production, and not slop.

So it's not that you can't do anything impressive (or even something that could genuinely be considered art) with AI. It's that it still requires a great deal of effort, even with these incredibly powerful tools, to make something that goes beyond the level of generic slop.

And in that sense, David should play and experiment with it some more before committing to making something truly impressive with it, which would take a great deal of his time.

But maybe this is truly his new passion. If it is, good for him, and I genuinely wish him lots of fun, fulfilment and luck with it.

digger wrote on Today, 12:52:

But what he showed in the trailer is not yet of the quality to be published as a feature film, and I don't see a lot of people being eager about attending a movie theater screening to see it.

Having watched the "trailer" for this project, I'm don't know who the audience for this is.

I understand this is a passion project based on a screenplay he wrote many years ago. Generative AI has given him an opportunity to bring his screenplay to life (sort of).

But I can't see this appealing to anyone else outside of morbid curiosity. Even leaving aside the AI aspect, it feels like a high school film project in terms of quality of story, writing, acting, etc.

It's also a gross mismatch with the brand and audience he built on Youtube re: retro computing and associated projects. Pivoting into AI generated movies isn't going to go over well, regardless of the quality of the output.

So it's not that you can't do anything impressive (or even something that could genuinely be considered art) with AI. It's that it still requires a great deal of effort, even with these incredibly powerful tools, to make something that goes beyond the level of generic slop.

This is where I feel a lot of people use generative AI as a shortcut to avoid having to learn the fundamentals of whatever art form they are trying to learn. Trying to make a film production without any understanding of the basics (writing, storyboarding, scene composition, cinematography, lighting, editing, etc) is never going to end well.

There was a comment on Reddit about this sort of thing that AI basically gives a professional veneer to preschool level art. I feel a lot of generative AI productions fall into that category.

I liked some of his older videos, but was never a subscriber. The era and hardware he is most interested in is just not my thing.
I'm not entitled to him posting what I like and he is not entitled to my watch time.

It was sort of the same with Chris Titus Tech. When he announced he'll stop posting about Linux gaming, I just silently unsubscribed. He can post whatever he wants and I can watch whatever I want. That's it.

RandomStranger wrote on Today, 14:43:

I liked some of his older videos, but was never a subscriber. The era and hardware he is most interested in is just not my thing.
I'm not entitled to him posting what I like and he is not entitled to my watch time.

It was sort of the same with Chris Titus Tech. When he announced he'll stop posting about Linux gaming, I just silently unsubscribed. He can post whatever he wants and I can watch whatever I want. That's it.

Silently unsubscribed and stopped watching is exactly what I did when he started making videos I didnt want to watch.

Shponglefan wrote on Today, 14:37:

This is where I feel a lot of people use generative AI as a shortcut to avoid having to learn the fundamentals of whatever art form they are trying to learn. Trying to make a film production without any understanding of the basics (writing, storyboarding, scene composition, cinematography, lighting, editing, etc) is never going to end well.

There was a comment on Reddit about this sort of thing that AI basically gives a professional veneer to preschool level art.

This is where I feel everyone is currently failing when it comes to "artificial intelligence", the people making and releasing these systems included. They are trying to create a system that "knows" about everything and can allegedly do anything; it's just not realistic. There needs to be more focus in the design of the systems with targeted, quality training data, and to achieve a particular goal. The Chinese seem to have the right idea in this respect, where there are purpose-specific A.I.-powered systems for vehicle assembly, etc. They don't try to have the same hardware assemble vehicles and also be capable of pick-and-place electronics assembly, for instance. Basically, the approach needs to be that we need something more like a screwdriver, hammer or purpose-specific automated assembly system or medical diagnostic assistant, not Star Trek's Data, HAL-9000 or Harlan Ellison's A.M..

People and the companies are also looking for the proverbial free lunch, and I just don't think the numbers work. Consider the trillions of dollars that are being thrown at this right now. Consider the cost of the data-centres, the required hardware, installations, electricity, water, development time/effort/cost, etc. In order to offset all of this, how much would the companies realistically have to charge users of these systems, while remaining not just solvent, but profitable enough, long-term, to satisfy investors/shareholders, and fund hardware upgrades and ongoing development? Would that be realistically affordable for the average working slob to constantly use it to write their correspondence or generate their great break-out feature-film?

Focusing again on the movie-generation example, considering the time and effort that would be required to obtain output worthy of a theatre release — constant iterative prompting, supervision and correction — as well as the associated costs, again considering what the providers would have to charge per "token" or unit of processing capacity, would it end up actually being cheaper or in any way "better" than just using a traditional film crew?

keenmaster486 wrote on Yesterday, 03:24:

Dan9550 wrote on Yesterday, 03:10:

Also I don't want to go on about the whole gun thing, but just so I am clear being able to "open carry" is being able to carry a weapon in public? Any weapon? I read previous posts so I have the context on why people see this as controversial.

The vast majority of the gun violence you hear about America having happens in the cities, where guns are the most restricted - European levels of restriction. It still happens. Most of the guns being used in that violence were obtained illegally because the owners are felons who are not legally permitted to own firearms.

Anyway, the issue people have with what 8 Bit Guy did is that it was an "own the libs with epic memesauce" stunt that fell flat for reasons already discussed.

Meh, that old myth,
gun violence is peppered throughout the nation and is pretty even based on incidents per unit of population with the highest per capita actually in rural areas of extreme poverty.
(See Missouri, Kentucky or Tennessee )

The higher incidence per 1000 is very heavily tied to income and age over geography.

The people shooting to kill are nearly all young, male, poor and stupid and they mostly hurt other young and poor folk.
Domestic mental illness makes up a larger chunk of this than it should as well and we haven’t done much of anything to address it.

Drugs certainly don’t help any of the above and so called “super offenders” who drive a large chunk of problems all by themselves have yet to have any meaningful method of “dealing with” them forth by anyone on either side of the aisle.

Just get the “it’s unavoidable “ response from th R persuasion and stupid outlandish nonsense that usually just makes things worse.

We could do better but neither group is capable of doing literally anything to try to make meaningful changes or cooperate with the other side.

Worse our federal government does know who the gross offenders are who move area to area but doesn’t do anything to stop them and the local policing doesn’t work together effectively, the solution to interdepartmental incompetence is far worse than the problem causing innocent people to get caught in dragnets .

analog_programmer wrote on Today, 11:17:

David used to have entire YT channel dedicated to the airsoft "guns". Why is this drama about the right to own and carry a non-automatic firearm going on? He is not a criminal and he has right to own and carry a gun and even to use it for self defense in Texas. Nowadays this is a privilege outside of the USA and a couple of other countries. This thread is about his new YT "ai" content, not about the gun control and restrictions pushed by the modern US trotskyists and leftists.

If anyone has a link to his “offensive content “ I would like to take a look, I’m gonna guess it’s similar to his mad scientist videos and more boring than offensive.