Exactly, and many have done exactly the same kind of video using VFX. What's the difference? These kind of reactions remind me of the stories of the backlash following the introduction of calculators in schools...

Using VFX for realistic scenes is more involved. VFX requires more expertise to do convincingly and realistically, in the thousands of hours of experience. More involved scenes require multiple professionals. The tooling and assets costs more. An inexperienced person, in a hundred hours of effort, can put out 10ish realistic scenes with leading edge AI tools, when previously they could do 0.

This is like regulating handguns differently from compound bows. Both are lethal weapons, but the bow requires hours of training to use effectively, and is more difficult to carry discreetly. The combination of ease, convenience, and accessibility necessitates new regulation.

This being said, AI for video is an incredibly promising technology, and I look forward to watching the TV shows and movies generated with AI-powered tooling.

What if new AI tools negate the thousands of hours experience to generate realistic VFX scenes, so now realistic scenes can be made by both non-AI VFX experts and AI-assisted VFX laymen?

Do we make all usages of VFX now require a warning, just in case the VFX was generated by AI?

I think this is different to the bow v gun metaphor as I can tell an arrow from a bullet, but I can foresee a future where no human could tell the difference between AI-assisted and non-AI-assisted VFX / art

I believe this is evidenced by the fact that people can go around accusing any art piece of being AI art and the burden of proving them wrong falls on the artist. Essentially I believe we are rapidly approaching the point of it not mattering if someone uses AI in their art because people won't be able to tell anyway

> Using VFX for realistic scenes is more involved.

This really depends on what you're doing. There are some great Cinema 4d plugins out there. As the plethora of YouTube tutorials out there clearly demonstrate, multiple professionals, and vast experience, are not required for some of the things they have listed. Tooling and assets costs are 0, in the high seas.

Until Sora is widely available, or the open source models catch up, at this moment it's easier to use something like Cinema 4d than AI.

What if i use an LLM powered AI to operate VFX software to generate a realistic looking scene? ;)

so if I used Blender it's banned? it's very tough to draw that line in the sand

> What's the difference?

The ease and lack of skill required. That brings whole another set of implications.

I'm sorry, but using a calculator to get around having to learn arithmetic is not even close being the same thing. Prove to me that you can do basic arithmetic, and then we can move on to using calculators for the more complex stuff where if you had to could at least come to the same value as the calculator.

People using VFX aren't trying to create images in likeness of another existing person to get people to buy crypto or other scams. Comparing the two is disingenuous at best.

Not op, but my answer to this would be years of practice and skills. Someone might have an amazing idea, but might have trouble putting their vision on paper. ChatGPT and generative art helps "idea people" concretize their vision more easily. The promise of generative AI is exactly this in my opinion; giving the ability to anyone to simply wish an idea into a concrete "thing"

Ideas are, will be, and always has been, worthless on their own.

As the GP was suggesting, ideas+generative ai is not worthless. That's what makes it significant.

Ideas can change the world. Memes (not the internet-images) are extremely powerful.

But if you meant, an idea alone can't be packaged and sold. That's true...

Ondat does that, a bunch of people are using them. And Akamai acquired them, probably to scale their model

See others' advice on seeking professional help.

In my opinion, don't put too much effort into schooling if you want to code. Learn and build. Join a startup if you want to learn to touch a bit of everything, or build your own project if you want to learn to fail and still progress.

Also, what I can say from my experience, is that people that I know that felt lost and depressed around your age are the most interesting people I know today. They're still lost, in the sense that they haven't figured out what they want to be when they grow up (even though they're 40+). They just learned to use and channel their energy and creativity and turn it into positive for them and those around them.

Can someone ask why does it needs to cater to AA and AAA studios?

Unreal is already great for this, with Unity trying it's best to get there. We need an engine focused on the problems of smaller developers, especially on mobile. Defold is another open source engine that seems focused on this, which makes more sense to me.

Wow, that's a horrible way of thinking about the user experience. And honestly, I'm not surprised. That's why companies that really care about the user experience will always steal market share from those that don't.

It’s actually small companies that care about user experience that will often make these trade-offs. Less time managing multi-cloud deployments means more time spent building our core product and talking to users.

On the one hand, yeah it sucks. On the other hand, my local ice-cream shop was closed for 30 minutes last week because the owner was doing something and the staff member who was rostered on was out sick. If your online business is at the same level of profit and necessity as an ice-cream shop, it can probably close for 30 minutes once or twice a year.

And that's why there's room for automation to take a lot of the complexity away.

Granted it's not going to be easy to have a platform where every tool can seamlessly connect, but we can start with baby steps such as services that automate multi-cloud deployments like the article suggests.

I get where you're coming from, but that is the reality in quite a few medium/large companies I've collaborated with over the years.

I don't think the point of the article was to say technically how to automate everything. But rather that the tools to automate are coming and that we should be on the lookout and ready when they come.

I think you're mixing theory with practice; DevOps should not be a role, but it often is...

As for requiring another specialist role, that's not the goal of building an automated system. Or at least, this specialist will not part of the team that's building the product, but rather of the company that's building this automated platform. If you can automate the orchestration and management of Kubernetes or serverless, then developers just need to know how to build a container or upload code on a serverless platform.