Hacker News

Thanks for the additional reading. I've often thought about LLMs and their ability to represent the physical world with its laws. And always concluded it is not really possible to do so with "just" text tokens and their relations in a latent space. It looks to me there are different approaches being taken to tackle this:

* You could instruct your LLM to interact with a simulator to run experiments and infer behaviour

* You could edit the transformer model and inject spatially relevant data rather than text as is done in above paper

* You could change the architecture to be more condusive for representating a world state. I.e., LeCun's JEPA world model.

* You could further enhance some of the above by using a differentiable physics engine (eg. NVIDIA Newton) to calculate losses directly.

But at the end of the day if a model has any hope to always produce realistic physics, it HAS to learn the laws of nature in some form or other. It looks to me that the next big leap could be achieved by combining the last two approaches.

P.S.: I like discussing such topics. If anyone knows a forum or discord with like-minded people, please let me know :)

A little too much Michael Bay

The physics engine glitching is very realistic :-P

I think modelling accurate articulated body dynamics is feasible but when you add deformation (muscles) it gets much harder.

Would be similar to the typical simulations of humanoids. If you need to model the deformations of the human body, or get a proper model of tendons that make up humans, it'll be more difficult, but possible.

Proper simulators for those exist, you essentially need an engine with a compliant contact model. MuJoCo is the goto here, see:

https://mujoco.readthedocs.io/en/stable/modeling.html#muscle... https://mujoco.readthedocs.io/en/stable/computation/fluid.ht...

These explicitly model biological muscles. IIRC it was originally created to model human hands (I could be misremembering though).

Really depends on the fidelity you want.

Edit: I also work in rigid body simulation for robotics.

In my experience (from a couple of years ago), Streamable can be great but it's just worth checking what their current retention policy is like.

We were sharing game clips with each other and after a while realised our old clips were just gone, being deleted after 30 or 90 days or something.

it was the first link I got after googling free video hosting sites

The legal risk probably lies solely with those who are selling the properties. They are responsible if the video misrepresents anything.

  > The other problem is Seedance is heavily censored because of copyright concerns.

The genus of the seahorse is _Hippocampus_.

The goblins evolved it seems

Yeah, I'm kinda sad about that one. Most of my friends and family are aware many of these are fake now, but argue that it still invokes the same response in us so it's okay. For me, though, however intangible or irrational it may be, I do feel a sense of loss.

Funny enough, this is actually one of the few things which has bothered me with the AI boom, and I'm mostly pro-acceleration. A lot of what's happening seems inevitable. But surprisingly, knowing that cat or dog or bird or lizard or butterfly or whatever has a strong chance of being generated really does take something out of it to my mind. And I say that also knowing the extreme amount of staging which has long gone on with traditional nature videography. Somehow, knowing the animal is real means something... I'm still trying to figure out how to better understand and express this.

You never needed a crew of people to make videos. This is just outsourcing people's creativity.

>I think the opposite. It allows more people to be creative.

Why are you assuming that a majority of people don't already have the means to make videos? Many people have access to a phone, laptop, and stable internet connection. What else do they really need? What's stopping them from using their phones to shoot home movies, making animations with MS Paint, recording themselves talking about a subject they're genuinely interested in, etc.?

>Now you can have people producing videos without needing a crew of people.

This is conflating production values with creativity. Mr. Beast's videos cost millions of dollars to film and produce, yet they're creatively bankrupt.

The potential for harm is so much greater with video than creating an mp3. You can stoke hate and fear so easily.

>Gotta break out ComfyUI and build yourself a specific workflow, once you dig deep and understand how things are put together, why and so on, you can make really amazing stuff with any generative models.

Where is this amazing stuff? Social media is a marketplace of ideas supposedly, so why haven't we seen a new wave of creators rise up in popularity?

> and the reply was along the lines of "me because I like seeing thieves get what's coming to them".

I really wish a subject matter expert would pitch in to tell us what this is about?

like a totally made up thing that is fake, somehow gives a sense of justice and satisfaction?

is it something about imagining it happening in reality, or what?

for me, if I see that something is AI, it's like I just feel nothing. because there's nothing in it, it has nothing of real value? like it doesn't evoke anything in me, it doesn't make me think "this was a great find!" or make me want to send a link over to my friends, etc.

I tried to watch it, but TikTok kept throwing up a dialog over top asking me to slide a puzzle piece into place. I did three or four before just closing it.

Same in Mobile Safari.

Yeah, during most blockbuster movies lately all I can think is: "All pixels, no plot."

Theres a Steve Jobs quote about this

AI is already in a bunch of creative workflows. Just look at modern Photoshop. Selecting and hitting delete has AI infill for the background replacement.

Creates can these video gen AI in various ways. There are some youtube channels of people using these in creative workflows that are really impressive, from mocap replacement, character insertion, background replacement, changing camera angle in post, animating/inserting characters from character boards, animated between stills generated in traditional methods, etc. It's not just "prompt and generate". It can be, because it's easy, but it also doesn't have to be. It's a tool.

Weirdly phrased, but yes, I would watch a movie generated with an LLM by a person passionate about the movie they're creating.

I think Hollywood's obsession with unnecessary sex scenes[0] is the #1 reason I have been watching less and less movies. So yeah, probably.

[0] e.g. Don't Look Up

Have you seen the past dozen or so Marvel movies?

Sure; why not? It has to be better than some of the absolute garbage that's out on the various streaming services today; right?

Me? No. My kids? I think they already have. I don’t allow YouTube in our house, but they for sure watch slop with friends.

Average shot length is down to something like 3 seconds in modern cinema. That's a pretty low bar.