So, that likely is a studio putting a rumor out there? I guess you will likely have an indication tonight.Lol… no.
We’ll see what happens with SAG tonight.
So, that likely is a studio putting a rumor out there? I guess you will likely have an indication tonight.Lol… no.
We’ll see what happens with SAG tonight.
Without a doubt. That was studio propaganda all the way, especially coming in the heels of the possible SAG strike walkout that might begin in a matter of hours.So, that likely is a studio putting a rumor out there? I guess you will likely have an indication tonight.
It's like learning Spanish. You can literally learn the words, how to say them, even the grammar. But the Spanish you learn in High School is way different than how hispanics actually speak in AZ, which is a world different than just over the boarder in Sonora. It's almost not even the same language from Mexico to Spain. There's so much slang, culture, context, nuance, etc., I don't think a ChatGPT robot could fool a human speaking to them.On another site I visit, someone posted a spec script for the sitcom "The Big Theory" that they had generated using ChatGPT. It had a weird but at least coherent plot. But the craziest thing was that it contained literally no jokes... you know, the things that are the single most important parts of a sitcom.
Apparently, people using AI-based writing algorithms are discovering it doesn't have the capacity to meaningfully create humor. Such a thing requires creativity and intuition that is utterly beyond the capabilities of AI, at least at this point. I suspect that most other aspects of meaningful creativity will also continue to be outside the realm of AI for the near future at minimum, and quite likely a whole lot longer.
Someone made a generative AI program based on Seinfeld that was streaming on Twitch a few months ago, it was interesting but mostly just nonsense about nothing. Eventually got banned for hate speech, similar to what happened with the AI program Microsoft put on twitter 7-8 years ago.On another site I visit, someone posted a spec script for the sitcom "The Big Theory" that they had generated using ChatGPT. It had a weird but at least coherent plot. But the craziest thing was that it contained literally no jokes... you know, the things that are the single most important parts of a sitcom.
Apparently, people using AI-based writing algorithms are discovering it doesn't have the capacity to meaningfully create humor. Such a thing requires creativity and intuition that is utterly beyond the capabilities of AI, at least at this point. I suspect that most other aspects of meaningful creativity will also continue to be outside the realm of AI for the near future at minimum, and quite likely a whole lot longer.
That makes sense - it probably took the idea that Seinfeld was a "show about nothing" as a programming command.Someone made a generative AI program based on Seinfeld that was streaming on Twitch a few months ago, it was interesting but mostly just nonsense about nothing. Eventually got banned for hate speech, similar to what happened with the AI program Microsoft put on twitter 7-8 years ago.
Indeed... like the YouTube videos with AI generated narration. You can pretty much always detect it, even when the subjects are dry and matter of fact. The narration still sounds weird and stilted.It's like learning Spanish. You can literally learn the words, how to say them, even the grammar. But the Spanish you learn in High School is way different than how hispanics actually speak in AZ, which is a world different than just over the boarder in Sonora. It's almost not even the same language from Mexico to Spain. There's so much slang, culture, context, nuance, etc., I don't think a ChatGPT robot could fool a human speaking to them.
this definitely makes things more interesting.Sounds like SAG-AFTRA is going to strike. Talks broke off last night.
Not going to make his bonus this year.xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Yes he will.Not going to make his bonus this year.
Then there's no incentive for these execs to move on the strike. Those bonuses are a joke then.Yes he will.
So f’ing ridiculous.xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Are you just figuring that out now?Then there's no incentive for these execs to move on the strike. Those bonuses are a joke then.
Why the snark?Are you just figuring that out now?
He's being directly affected by this. Cut him a break. I consider myself the typical consumer. I don't know all the details. I assume most people are even less informed than me. Just trying to learn as we go on this topic.Why the snark?
What snark? He was unaware that CEO Bonuses are not consistent with how their big companies pay those lower than them?Why the snark?
I always thought in Hollywood, as portrayed in the movies, that investors and board members pressured execs to make profits. I guess I was naive on that.What snark? He was unaware that CEO Bonuses are not consistent with how their big companies pay those lower than them?
The problem with these big CEOs, is that their bonus structure has nothing to do with anything. He's still going to get millions just for being the CEO, while his company goes through layoffs and not paying writers and actors. Not to mention how they cut corners with below the line production staff.He's being directly affected by this. Cut him a break. I consider myself the typical consumer. I don't know all the details. I assume most people are even less informed than me. Just trying to learn as we go on this topic.
Even without writers and actors, Disney still makes a ton of money and Iger will still get his bonus. Profits don't make a difference. Not making profit affects people a lot lower than the CEO.I always thought in Hollywood, as portrayed in the movies, that investors and board members pressured execs to make profits. I guess I was naive on that.
Are you just figuring that out now? Is definitely snarky whether you see it or not.What snark? He was unaware that CEO Bonuses are not consistent with how their big companies pay those lower than them?