> Overabundance of high quality material and so little time to watch them all.
If a tree falls down in a forest, and there is no one there to hear it. Does it make a sound?
If you can generate infinite material, how do you judge quality?
You're extrapolating an idea based on what movies are, fundamentally. But you don't take in consideration what movies are not. Watching a movie is also a social experience. Going to the movie theater, waiting years for a big blockbuster title, watching something with friends. Word of mouth recommendation is a very big thing. If a close friend recommends me something (be it a movie or a book), I'm much more inclined to like it just for the human connection it provides (reading or watching something other people enjoyed is a means of accessing someone else's psyche).
If every time you watch a movie you have the knowledge that there is a movie that is slightly better a prompt away, why bother finishing this one? If you know you probably won't finish the movie you generated, why bother starting one? So what do you do? You end up rewatching The Office.
Sure, if you tell me this will be possible in a couple of years, I won't object. The point is: will you pay for it on a recurring basis? Because if you don't, this will be no more than a very cool tech project.
----
I've recently had this idea for a sci-fi book: in a future not so distant, society is divided between tech and non-tech people. Tech people created pretty much everything they said they would create. AGI, smarter-than-human robots, you name it. But, it didn't change society at all. Companies still employ regular humans, people still watch regular made-by-human movies and eat handmade pizzas and drink their human-made lattes in hipster coffeshops. So tech people are naturally very frustrated at non-tech people, because they're not using optmizing their lives and business enough. And then you have this awkward situation where you have all these robots with brains of size of a galaxy lying around, doing nothing. And then some of them start developing depression, for spending too much time idle. And then the tech people have to rush to develop psychiatric robots. And then some robots decide to unionize, and others start writing books about how humans are taking jobs that were supposed to be automated.
If a tree falls down in a forest, and there is no one there to hear it. Does it make a sound?
If you can generate infinite material, how do you judge quality?
You're extrapolating an idea based on what movies are, fundamentally. But you don't take in consideration what movies are not. Watching a movie is also a social experience. Going to the movie theater, waiting years for a big blockbuster title, watching something with friends. Word of mouth recommendation is a very big thing. If a close friend recommends me something (be it a movie or a book), I'm much more inclined to like it just for the human connection it provides (reading or watching something other people enjoyed is a means of accessing someone else's psyche).
If every time you watch a movie you have the knowledge that there is a movie that is slightly better a prompt away, why bother finishing this one? If you know you probably won't finish the movie you generated, why bother starting one? So what do you do? You end up rewatching The Office.
Sure, if you tell me this will be possible in a couple of years, I won't object. The point is: will you pay for it on a recurring basis? Because if you don't, this will be no more than a very cool tech project.
----
I've recently had this idea for a sci-fi book: in a future not so distant, society is divided between tech and non-tech people. Tech people created pretty much everything they said they would create. AGI, smarter-than-human robots, you name it. But, it didn't change society at all. Companies still employ regular humans, people still watch regular made-by-human movies and eat handmade pizzas and drink their human-made lattes in hipster coffeshops. So tech people are naturally very frustrated at non-tech people, because they're not using optmizing their lives and business enough. And then you have this awkward situation where you have all these robots with brains of size of a galaxy lying around, doing nothing. And then some of them start developing depression, for spending too much time idle. And then the tech people have to rush to develop psychiatric robots. And then some robots decide to unionize, and others start writing books about how humans are taking jobs that were supposed to be automated.