Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Hehehe, the industry does not think otherwise, Jeffrey Katzenberg is just trying to sell you AI in that article, he’s raising funds for his AI startup. He wants you to believe you can make your own movie so you buy his startup’s software. Of course he’s exaggerating, his quotes in that article are silly and he knows it, so don’t believe everything you read. I’ve worked for Jeffrey Katzenberg making movies, and you don’t have to believe me, but I’m telling you: they will NEVER get significantly cheaper, regardless of what AI can do. There are several very good reasons why, and one of them is because it doesn’t make sense to spend 1 million on production and 50 million on marketing, another is because the studio next door will make a better movie spending more money. Music licensing and celebrity salaries are yet more reasons. It might take some industry experience to understand this, but people made the exact same claims about CG 30 years ago that effects would cut production budgets, and the exact opposite has happened: they use more effects and higher quality effects, but movie budgets have only gone steadily up, not down.

It’s true not everyone has the skills to make a movie. Why “should” they? You didn’t answer the question. I don’t expect people without any skills and without the will to learn to do anything, and that includes not expecting them to make movies. I don’t follow your point about 640K and the DoD, nobody is talking about making tools artificially difficult. Modern tools still require years of learning to paint or make movies, AI hasn’t changed that yet, and even if it does it will only raise the bar such that people with skills continue to produce things much better than people without skills, low effort art is going to remain crappy, same as it ever was.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: