|
|
Musings Report 2024-27 7-6-24 Will Hollywood and the Music Industry Survive the Super-Abundance of Original AI Content?
You are receiving this email/post because you are a subscriber/patron of Of Two Minds / Charles Hugh Smith.
Will Hollywood and the Music Industry Survive the Super-Abundance of Original AI Content?
Longtime correspondent / friend Richard M. recently recommended this 24-minute overview of recent advances in AI tools that generate video content based on text / language prompts / instructions such as "handheld shot, man holding a beer in a 4th of July party." Is Runway Gen-3 Worth the Hype? Our AI Video Review (24:51 min)
I haven't followed the development of these technologies, so this was revelatory on multiple levels.
Like ChatGPT and other Large Language Model (LLM) tools, the interface of these video generation tools is something we already know: language. Like the other LLM tools, these tools can "hallucinate," generating images that are not realistic / not based on physics.
The demonstrations use free online versions of the tools, so they're limited to 10 seconds or so of video rendering. But this is enough to see the future of these tools: they'll be capable of generating original programs of a half-hour, hour or full-length movies (2 hours) on a conventional PC. (Faster computers = faster rendering times.)
The quality of the sample videos is remarkable. Yes, experts can quibble, but for the non-expert viewer, it's close enough to film to be useful.
Like any video product, there are editing tools (not shown in this overview) that must be mastered if one is aiming for a film-quality product with soundtrack, dialog and the splicing / editing of scenes to carry the narrative. But the ability of these tools to generate raw "footage" that can be massaged / edited into a final product is impressive.
What strikes me is that this new pathway in the production, distribution and consumption of visual / musical media will enable consumers to create their own content rather than passively buy mass-marketed content created by others.
Let's consider several scenarios of how these AI tools could be used once they reach maturity.
We just watched Babylon Berlin, an absorbing, high-production-value German drama set in the late 1920s and early 1930s in Berlin. (Four completed seasons, a 5th and final to start filming later this year.)
Though Season Five is yet to come, we know the series ends in 1933 with the Nazis taking power. Suppose I wish there were a Season Six, but alas, the series has come to a close. Why not use one of these tools to generate a Sixth series "in the style of" Babylon Berlin?
As for plots, I can ask LLM-AI tools to come up with a dozen ideas and then choose the best few to develop. I can then ask the tools to script the plots I've selected into prompts that I can then feed the AI video tools. All I need to start is some still shots of the characters, period costumes, cars and street scenes, etc.
If I don't like the first results, I can prompt the tools to modify their output until I'm fairly happy with it. The goal isn't perfection, it just has to be good enough to entertain me.
As long as I don't attempt to distribute my own private Season Six, then where's the copyright violation? Nobody will even know I uploaded the characters, scenery, costumes etc., from the original.
You see where this could go. Why pay for streaming content when my laptop can render endless content "in the stye of" for my private viewing? The tools will generate endless plots to choose from, or I can use my own ideas.
Indeed, I don't see any technical barriers to uploading an entire screenplay or treatment and letting the video tools render an entire movie for my private enjoyment.
This would be great fun. Wow, I get to make my own movie! As a writer, it would be magical to type out a screenplay, upload it to an AI tool, and a few hours (or days) later, out comes a fully realized film that had previously only played in my own head.
Instead of being a passive consumer of content created by others and distributed by studios or record labels via the mass market (streaming video, music, etc., then I become an active content creator myself, not for profit but simply for amusement / joy.
The power to create high-quality video, sound or music will become available to virtually anyone willing to type in a few simple commands / prompts.
Suppose I ask an AI tool to generate a new album of original music using Taylor Swift's voice, for my private use only. I don't distribute it, so no one can possibly know I used her voice.
Why pay for pornography when one can generate an essentially endless series of private films?
High-profile movie stars and musicians are rushing to license their faces and voices to generate an income stream from AI-generated content, but suppose some young AI-film director finds an unknown actor with a remarkable resemblance to Brad Pitt? Where is the copyright violation in using a real person who has licensed the use of their face / body in your production? Will the consumer pay more to see the "real Brad Pitt" or will the "close enough" actor be good enough? No doubt some will pay extra to see the "real Brad Pitt," but others won't care enough to pay for the privilege.
In other words, the gatekeepers--the corporations that held the power to make or break talent--will have lost control, in the way that traditional publishers can no longer limit what gets published, now that self-publishing is essentially zero-cost to prepare a manuscript and list it on Amazon.
When it comes to AI's ability to generate limitless content "in the style of"--fiction, non-fiction, scientific papers, music and now video--I wonder what the "scarcity value" or "value proposition" will be when there are thousands--or perhaps tens of thousands--of feature length films being produced around the world on PCs with these tools.
What's to limit the ambitions of any individual who dreams of making a movie, album or TV series, when all one needs is a PC and a few AI tools and some time to learn how to use them? Instead of costing millions of dollars to produce, the cost drops to the hundreds of dollars to produce an extremely high-quality product which, if one is careful, won't violate any copyrights because the "feed stock"--scenery, costumes, actors--are all one's own or under contract for a modest sum or a share of the income / royalties (if any).
What happens to "scarcity value" and the "value proposition" of Hollywood / record label issued creative content?
In a world awash in millions of AI-generated songs and videos, where is the value in paying a studio or record label to distribute your content when it's already freely distributed on YouTube et al.?
Hollywood is already reeling from the demise of cable TV royalties, the high costs of production and the low revenues generated by streaming services. Record labels and artists' income are equally at risk as streaming audio pays a pittance to artists.
Some voice confidence that Hollywood can find a path to newfound riches, as it did when TV decimated its weekly movie-theater attendance. But this path--if it exists-- may be too narrow to support the immense industry that exists today.
The music industry is also vulnerable. Absent the "tentpole" stars such as Beyonce and Taylor Swift, and given the ease of generating original music with AI tools, the music industry may well find it difficult to generate profits on the scale it has become accustomed to.
We can also anticipate a great weariness with this flood of real-looking, real-sounding but inauthentic, nothing more than endless rote variations that are simulacra of authentic performances. What we will hunger for are real performances.
What's scarce and valuable will be live performances of theatre and music, music that is recorded live without effects and films that eschew any computer-generated effects. It seems likely that consumers drowning in limitless AI-generated content will pay for live theatre and music and recorded performances that are live rather than generated.
It's possible nothing much changes. Maybe the Hollywood studios and the record labels maintain their grip on creative content and distribution. But it certainly seems possible that AI video and audio tools could be like Craigslist wiping out the most reliably profitable income stream of the newspaper industry: classified ads. The struggle will then be to persuade consumers to pay prices high enough to support the high production / distribution costs of traditional film and music.
Highlights of the Blog
Living Well on Less Than $30,000 a Year--One American Family's Story 7/5/24
Is It Possible to Live Well Earning $30,000 a Year in America? Yes--With These Conditions 7/3/24
Move Over, Disaster Capitalism--Make Room for Addiction Capitalism 7/1/24
Best Thing That Happened To Me This Week
My friend S.T. kindly produced and arranged my new musical concoction, The La-La Song. He played the bass, rhythm guitar and opening riff, I added the vocals, guitar solo and ending outro. As always, we rehearse the song a few times, I need a few takes due to my inevitable flubs, and so it's basically a live performance. It's less than 2 minutes, give it a listen. Not AI generated!
Honorable Mention goes to my repair of a pathetically low quality (in other words, a name-brand appliance bought at Walmart) toaster. The flimsy plastic handle broke so I turned a 2.25-inch screw into a new handle and wrapped the threads in duct tape for comfort and aesthetics. I much prefer the minimalist look of my repair to the cheap plastic "planned obsolescence" handle.
What's on the Book Shelf
A reader mentioned Less Is More: How Degrowth Will Save the World (2021, Jason Hickel)
For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto (1973, Murray N. Rothbard) Recommended by B.J.; link leads to the full text online.
From Left Field
NOTE TO NEW READERS: This list is not comprised of articles I agree with or that I judge to be correct or of the highest quality. It is representative of the content I find interesting as reflections of the current zeitgeist. The list is intended to be perused with an open, critical, occasionally amused mind.
Many links are behind paywalls. Most paywalled sites allow a few free articles per month if you register. It's the New Normal.
Complex Systems Won’t Survive the Competence Crisis: The core issue is that changing political mores have established the systematic promotion of the unqualified and sidelining of the competent.
Yet another idea to revive San Francisco's downtown gets axed (via Tom D.)
How Debt Ate Chicago: Mounting liabilities are the greatest threat to the city’s survival.
The greatest thinker you’ve never heard of’: expert who explained Hitler’s rise is finally in the spotlight (Karl Polanyi)
Savvy thieves use devious hidden cameras to scope out houses in troubling 'burglary tourism' trend (via Cheryl A.)
Why Traditional Publishing is Dead and Buried and Will Never Return: You're just wasting your time trying to get an agent or a publisher
"It Feels Weird Now": Frustrated People Are Recalling The Once-Normal Things The Pandemic Completely Ruined
ChatGPT is bullshit: The models are in an important way indifferent to the truth of their outputs. We distinguish two ways in which the models can be said to be bullshitters, and argue that they clearly meet at least one of these definitions. We further argue that describing AI misrepresentations as bullshit is both a more useful and more accurate way of predicting and discussing the behavior of these systems.
The 2024 Europe report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: unprecedented warming demands unprecedented action (via Alain M.)
Are Real Wages Catching Up? (Atlanta Federal Reserve) Short answer: no.
RTO Mandates Are Killing the Euphoric Work-Life Balance Some Moms Found: The dream is over or ending, and it’s not entirely clear why. (RTO=return to office)
Inseparable (Natalie Cole 1975)
"The myth of unending consumption has taken the place of the belief in life everlasting." Ivan Illich
Thanks for reading--
charles |
|
|
|
|
|
