• KobaCumTribute [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    A lot of people here are missing the funniest thing about this: SAI is floundering, has lost most of its tech talent, and suffered hard to the double punch of SD3 sucking complete shit and Flux showing up like a month later and being everything people had expected SD3 to be but better. SAI has also been pivoting away from the open source release model that got them literally all of the attention they’ve gotten in the first place.

    So it looks like James Cameron’s role with this would be trying to use his reputation to grift more investor money to keep the company that now doesn’t have the engineers responsible for all the popular Stable Diffusion models anymore afloat. I wonder if he knows he’s hopping onto a failing grift or if they’ve successfully tricked him into thinking there’s anything of value left in SAI?

    • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah. They probably wined and dined him to try and get people to think their failing company still has some merit. This is a very common part of the tech grift, they find some celebrity to endorse them to get more money before they finally cut and run.

  • laziestflagellant [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 month ago

    Isn’t he supposed to be an infamous perfectionist with his work?

    I guess he might be the 0.001% of AI users who can actually get something usable out of the tools because he’s willing to hogtie and drag it through the streets until it does exactly what he wants but like

    You have shitzillion dollar CGI industries at your beck and call who can actually make 3D assets the regular way lmao why would you bother browbeating the slop machine instead

  • bazingabrain [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 month ago

    CGI 3 decades ago has nothing to do with what CGI is today lol. Its like comparing the fucking lumiere brother’s cinematographe and a camera from the company RED.

    • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      moreover, cgi 3 decades ago had nothing to do with stealing people’s art today and presenting it as your own as long as it goes through a computer rube goldberg machine

  • Huldra [they/them, it/its]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m pretty sure he has already done like two “4k remasters” where he just took whatever the latest blu-ray was then upscaled and denoised/grained it with AI so it looks like dogshit.

  • bortsampson [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I wonder if this has to do with integrating into modeling/vfx software like Houdini and Blender. Those “AI” tools are actually pretty good use cases for the tech.

    Edit: I mean the texture generators specifically.

  • StalinStan [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Nah, now shit is really gonna pop off. I am excited. Cause as much as this hurts artists it will eventually hurt the studios the most. And after all that settles we can just buy a cheap Chinese solar pannel to give us infinite cheap treats

      • StalinStan [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Everything is getting worse all the time. We can at least enjoy it a little. Democratization of the tools of artistic creation has historically only led to better art

        • Riffraffintheroom [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Having a program make art for you isnt democratizing the tools of art. The artist who created the Mona Lisa was Da Vinci. The merchant who gave Da Vinci money and said “paint a picture of my wife in front of a landscape” was the artist’s patron. You are not the artist when you tell the plagiarism machine to make a picture for you. You are the patron. This is obvious and self-evident.

          • StalinStan [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            You say that. Picture Ao3 after robust AI video tools are widely available. I am not hurt that I will be able to get a superwholock episode of Seinfeld with the real actors reading terrible dialog written by a 12 year old girl then they all kiss.

              • StalinStan [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                Will I find you there on r/neoliberal? Cause you seem to be mad that AI interferes with people’s ability to make money.

                I am here trying to be grillpilled about it. More people will have more treats in ways less reliant on the societal superstructure. That prefigures some amount of people’s art and culture. Which is good for the revolutionary consciousness. Overall it is a small thing with interesting possible effects. I see it as possibly being enriching and liberator to the spirit of the common worker and that is p cool if that happens.

                • Riffraffintheroom [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Artists are proletariat who sell their labour. AI tech bros are a bourgeois who steal the artist’s labour and profit from it. Again, this is really obvious to the point where I don’t know if you’re arguing in bad faith.