RuPaul under fire for using AI special effects in new movie

[MountainMonster 2,367]

Just like a general question for the room… is this a battle worth fighting? I mean, it’s happening regardless, unfortunately. 

[elijahfan 27,362]

It's not like the film was trying to be a cinematic masterpiece in the first place? It's purposefully aiming for low-budget 70s disaster movie vibes, so this is one situation where I find the use of AI somehow creatively correct.

[Sepsami 20,521]

Who wouldve thought that the drag queen that twerks her couch cushion booty to a song about peanut butter jelly sandwiches would forsake artistic integrity for some coin 

[Sneaky Oliver 22,863]

I’m really torn about this… i mean if AI is really gonna become a part of the film industry, is it possible that it can be included without infringing copyright laws? Is there a fair restriction? 

[gagzus 21,078]

41 minutes ago, MountainMonster said:

Just like a general question for the room… is this a battle worth fighting? I mean, it’s happening regardless, unfortunately. 

As a creative I can tell you it is, AI is making people lose jobs. Especially in tech and creative industries. And we won’t stop making a fuss until this is properly regulated.

[gagzus 21,078]

40 minutes ago, elijahfan said:

It's not like the film was trying to be a cinematic masterpiece in the first place? It's purposefully aiming for low-budget 70s disaster movie vibes, so this is one situation where I find the use of AI somehow creatively correct.

They could’ve easily made the SFX themselves to look purposefully low budget. If they were really trying to do that it’s not hard.

[Bronco 22,372]

47 minutes ago, MountainMonster said:

Just like a general question for the room… is this a battle worth fighting? I mean, it’s happening regardless, unfortunately. 

I mean why use language like calling it a battle? 

This is just a simple case of saying "what are my personal morals" and acting on that basis. 

[Ziggy 13,647]

The way it would have been better with shitty handmade graphics instead of shitty ai ones

Edited 5 hours ago by Ziggy

[Ziggy 13,647]

49 minutes ago, MountainMonster said:

Just like a general question for the room… is this a battle worth fighting? I mean, it’s happening regardless, unfortunately. 

Yeah bc it’s about valuing craft and artisans and labor. It’s actually a matter of principle, not a battle

Edited 4 hours ago by Ziggy

[elijahfan 27,362]

56 minutes ago, gagzus said:

They could’ve easily made the SFX themselves to look purposefully low budget. If they were really trying to do that it’s not hard.

SFX teams have used softwares powered by all sorts of AI for decades, just so you know. Not saying AI is good news, but it’s also not completely black and white.

[gagzus 21,078]

24 minutes ago, elijahfan said:

SFX teams have used softwares powered by all sorts of AI for decades, just so you know. Not saying AI is good news, but it’s also not completely black and white.

Yes but the AI they’ve used isn’t generative it’s assistive. They’ve used it to make a large crowd by multiplying models and assets. But they’ve never straight up used AI to make something without them either creating something to base it on, or without any input. Which is what these companies do.

[RAMROD 116,045]

First fracking, now AI usage. Oh, Ru Foul

[MountainMonster 2,367]

1 hour ago, gagzus said:

As a creative I can tell you it is, AI is making people lose jobs. Especially in tech and creative industries. And we won’t stop making a fuss until this is properly regulated.

 

1 hour ago, Bronco said:

I mean why use language like calling it a battle? 

This is just a simple case of saying "what are my personal morals" and acting on that basis. 

 

1 hour ago, Ziggy said:

Yeah bc it’s about valuing craft and artisans and labor. It’s actually a matter of principle, not a battle

The Luddites said the same of the automated loom; unfortunately we all know how that story ended. Now even the few actual couturiers still use fabrics made on an automated loom. I suspect the perspective will change with time on this, too - and artists will be lauded for how they use AI. 

I respect the opinions, and agree that there’s a grave loss of respect for artists skills - but I think there’s also a bevy of new opportunities for creatives to take while embracing the use of AI. 

[Bronco 22,372]

59 minutes ago, elijahfan said:

SFX teams have used softwares powered by all sorts of AI for decades, just so you know. Not saying AI is good news, but it’s also not completely black and white.

The umbrella term of AI is different to genAI. 

GenAI is a newer invention and is what the main debates are about in creative fields. 

Not older AI models which were just intelligent automations of pre-existing software functions which improved usability. 

Older AI - or what is essentially AI 1.0 - had no generative rationale, it was pre-programmed to function for a specific purpose. E.g. knowledge bank optimisation. 

[Bronco 22,372]

3 minutes ago, MountainMonster said:

The Luddites said the same of the automated loom; unfortunately we all know how that story ended.

Societal degradation. The shrinking of the working class. The slow erosion of industrial communities through de-skilling and wage deprecation which has in first world nations become a driving factor in hyper partisanship, political radicalisation, political violence, the destruction of the social contract. 

Its a propaganda of history that luddites were against advancement.

The luddite movement was specifically an attack on a ruling class that sought to weaken the working populations. It was an attack on low wages, it was a battle against the deliberate designs by the industrialists to make workers poorer. Luddites of the time weren't attacking technology, they were attacking the wealthy who were seeking to undercut workers. 

The luddites were fighting against a deathmarch to poverty during a period of high unemployment and high inflation caused by the napolenic wars. 

They also campaigned for higher minimum wages and to end child labour exploitation. 

Its a massive oversimplification and bastardisation of history to boil luddites down to being technophobes.

How much longer are those of us who have to work to live going to accept technological advancement making it harder to get well paid work while the owners of it get richer? 

Are we really supposed to just sit still and watch as the few remaining employment opportunities in western societies are increasingly automated and human workers are forced out?