As much as I don't want jobs taken away by AI, a creative person with a vision that would usually required $1 million budget, could create such a video using AI by being very specific in what they require which would not be a " grey goo of the average of every concept "

eg. "scene 32, same 2 characters from the previous scene, now dressed in the garb of Egyption middle kingdom high priests, though with cat faces, dancing on the back of an elephant that is running fast with blurred feet on the surface of a river with licks of water that burst from the water in time with the music that I gave you before, length of song for this clip 2:21 to 2:31"

Your mind is your limit. AI is a tool. If you tell it "create me a music video for this song set in egypt" then it may turn out AI sloppy.

Interestingly, I enjoyed early GenAI videos much more. All those bizarre, fever dream like experiences from the lack of consistency between frames, where things would morph or pop in and out of existence. They had a certain flair and something truly distinct to the medium. Now it is mostly just this uncanny valley of bringing stock photography to life.

Obviously, there will be some who use AI to great artistic effect, but I'm really worried about the discoverability of actually interesting stuff, whether it uses AI or not. Everything will be swamped by the automated goo of mediocrity that will vastly dominate in volume.

My perhaps naive hope is that this pushes people back toward offline and local communities, as well as toward more physical art instead of even more consumerism.

I'm amazed how easily people dismiss this. They used less that an hour of wall clock time and max $50 to do this.

How much would it take for me to create videos like this? I'm guessing 1-4 years calendar time practicing half an hour every day just to break my lack of talent. Immeasurable cost given how there's no way in hell I'm going to invest that kind of time for a skill I don't actually want to acquire.

Somebody who's actually competent and talented is going to make some pretty amazing stuff cheaply with something like this, and the technology is nowhere near its peak yet.

A talented creative with a vision can now direct AI to build things that would have otherwise cost millions or been entirely impossible. I don’t understand the myopic view people have when it comes to this technology. Just three or four years ago, we saw the exact same skepticism with programming. People insisted it can't do this and it can't do that, but many of those things are possible today.

> A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon

I should hope that a "talented" creative "with a vision" could, do better, yes. But now a talentless hack devoid of vision can do something half decent too. And if you don't think this is half decent, just replace "now" with "soon".

remembering that line from the Portlandia sketch where the PTA is discussing the music their kids are listening to with the subtext that it's not indie enough :

"It is pap. It is pabulum." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdEPgB2yizw

> It's a grey goo of the average of every concept picked up from the concept of the song.

All right, but that's what an average entertainment product looks like. All these new TV shows have exactly the same look and feel about them. The same actors playing the same roles over and over again.

People keep comparing AI to some kind of once in a lifetime genius instead of an average person in the field.

We don't yet know the "load bearing" or "delve" or "not X. Not Y. Just..." Clichés of video AI - at least I don't know. But given it's instruction tuned, we can be confident they will be there, and that the breadth of what it can generate for a given prompt will have extremely low diversity compared to its training data.

People keep referring to the output of neural nets as the "average of the training data" but imho the deep value in neural nets and the interesting philosophical part is they are massive conditional probability engines whose results can change based on the variables you feed in.

"It's a grey goo of the average of every concept picked up from the concept of the song."

You just described 90% of todays music videos made by humans.

I remember an Apple ad from a while back where a hydraulic press crushes a bunch of musical instruments. Your "grey goo of the average" analogy resonates for me because these videos feel like what would ooze out if we take all relevant videos that were produced by humans and then crush them under a generative press.

Completely agree. Impressive as a tech demo, but that is pretty much where it ends. Give a talented kid an iPhone and they could create something significantly better and more interesting.

And this is the bear case on AI. Sure, if the quality of the output is largely meaningless or binary, e.g. it works or it doesn’t, then AI is useful, but as soon as subjective judgement or taste is involved it is useless.

It was made with zero artistic intent, so it has zero value. If you sat down a talented art student that cared, they could prompt AI to make something artistically interesting to watch.

> A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon with a $0 budget.

Only if you are really sloppy with your book keeping.

I think these videos are a great visual representation of what happens to your codebase of you let the agent vibe code the entire thing by itself without review and guidance!

It works... but once you actually start looking at the details there are so many small cases that need fixing.

Now, if you had someone with experience in editing, and they worked as a team, human + agent, then most of the small issues would be picked up and fixed during development.

Yeah, a $100 AI music video is materially worse than not having a music video.

I wonder how much of the sloppy feeling is created by the knowledge that its AI generated.

The scary thing is that this is the worst this technology will ever be.

The media industry is cooked.

Get ready for $100 movie theater tickets, because the cost actual creative work is going to go sky high in the next few years

Yes but they would have had to spend years training/practicing which apparently is not a thing we value anymore.

The hooks are more important than the quality. The whole short video stuff is designed to be filled by AI slop.

Even the long video format (I.e movies) are in big trouble due AI because the cheap/junk stuff they produce (I.e Netflix style ) will be easily produced with AI.

Not to mention that people will have the option to no longer subject themselves to the lecturing of various political crap that is being delivered through the big media producers(I.e Netflix)

"90% of everything is crap".

Although I guess we should probably update it to "99% of everything is slop.

You can find someone on Fiverr that’ll do a better job than this for $100. The concept will be completely different but it’ll be much better.

A lot of the replies to this are, predicably, disappointing. For what its worth, I entirely agree.

AI is good at a lot of things, but it genuinely sucks at anything that requires real creativity. The human at the heart of a creative endeavor can't be replaced, and I hope that never changes.

>But the end product has zero artistic value

It has more artistic value than most modern art.

We dont need music videos though. Music videos are absurd and meaningless.