He just sold his AI company to Netflix. Yes, he had one. And now he's Shitflix's strategic AI consultant. He still has a production/development company.
The amount of required processing power if millions of people start asking AI to create their own sex episode of their tv crush is not something that can be accomplished for at least another 10 years.
Not 1min after the phrase, "I wouldn't like to be in the visual effects business" left his lips. Can you explain what's about to happen to those people, sir, that you don't want to be them?
If you're wondering whether any of these people even understand how much income a normal human has at their disposal, they do not. Not even a concept. Irl friend had a side job explaining to CEOs your avg. person does not make literally $90,000 a year. They didn't like it any of the times they heard it
Yeah, one of the things I heard he nerds out about pretty hard is cocaine. Doesn’t use it though. Talks about it, reads about it, purchases it, uses it sometimes. He is like a scholar of cocaine!
The only arguments I could find talk about "substantial human input" being a requirement - and say nothing about prior copyrights. But that was an argument to a case the supreme court refused to hear, not a ruling.
DemonKysho
Kablooeeey
None of what he just said is ever going to happen.
origosaved
He just sold his AI company to Netflix. Yes, he had one. And now he's Shitflix's strategic AI consultant.
He still has a production/development company.
Conz
The amount of required processing power if millions of people start asking AI to create their own sex episode of their tv crush is not something that can be accomplished for at least another 10 years.
ZoBrightlance
"My hope is, for the consumer, that it will become an additional revenue service..."
MirroredImage
Not 1min after the phrase, "I wouldn't like to be in the visual effects business" left his lips. Can you explain what's about to happen to those people, sir, that you don't want to be them?
If you're wondering whether any of these people even understand how much income a normal human has at their disposal, they do not. Not even a concept. Irl friend had a side job explaining to CEOs your avg. person does not make literally $90,000 a year. They didn't like it any of the times they heard it
morningxafter
Has he been thinking about this for a while now and is just excited he gets to nerd out about it, or is he just on a shitload of coke?
circuspandabear
TexMexHex
I despise people who assume when folks are passionate and informed that they MUST be on drugs.
Stringgeek
He's nerding out. Affleck is weirdly knowledgeable about things that you wouldn't expect.
secondbest
You should listen to him rant on the Spanish Inquisition.
superman0000
Yeah, one of the things I heard he nerds out about pretty hard is cocaine. Doesn’t use it though. Talks about it, reads about it, purchases it, uses it sometimes. He is like a scholar of cocaine!
sevenfingers
Netflix is buying his(Ben afflecks)AI for bookoo amounts of money, he was in on the grift insanely early.
Daraanel
+1 for its use in the wild, but just to clarify, it's 'beaucoup', being a French word.
evilspock
Given the current "AI output can't be copyrighted" status - that seems unlikely. Nobody is more protective of their copyrights than the studios.
backrideup9
They have enough money to rebribe the judiciary and change that ruling.
mrthewhitee
That isn't exactly what that ruling says.
The ruling was saying that simply entering prompts into a generic AI cannot produce a copywritable product.
But AI can still be used ON copywritten content without invalidating the copywrite.
evilspock
You have a citation there?
The only arguments I could find talk about "substantial human input" being a requirement - and say nothing about prior copyrights. But that was an argument to a case the supreme court refused to hear, not a ruling.