The "interview"

Edit: fixed the link

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 191 points 2 weeks ago (22 children)

CNN is a media company that has a lot to gain if it can get its audience to accept AI "personalities".

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 112 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

    Oh god. This is it.

    They are dying for people to gradually accept slop media, and likely their investors as well. They want to normalize a "no human" media feed so they can just skip the camera crew and writers and makeup and all that expensive shit and just pay a cloud ai bill which redirects a stream of video content that you buy.

    They really want to eliminate all the arts and have robots do that while we mine the coal mines.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

    Oh even better. It could be customized through the app, by default. Maybe you like blondes with boobs, maybe your neighbor likes brunettes with tiny titties, maybe your other neighbor wants a big black dude.

    But with this tech, we can MaXiMiZe eNgAgEmEnT with custom talking heads for the 24x7 outrage bull shit machine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    What if I like crochet patterns that work? I don't understand how AI can be capable of so much technical stuff that we are trusting it with little to no oversight, but go ahead, ask it to generate a crochet/knitting pattern and then follow it and tell me what you get. 🤣

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago*

    So here's the thing, generative AI is a technology, and it's created by humans, and I have no doubt that enough smart humans working together will easily be able to develop a technology that can generate a crochet/knitting pattern by feeding it other people's stolen crochet/knitting patterns without paying or crediting them. That's not a hard thing to do. What AI is doing is not actually hard.

    The biggest problem with generative AI is that doing it efficiently is in fact very, very hard, and almost certainly always will be. The reality is that it's an absurdly inefficient way of doing anything, even just for model inference alone, nevermind the training data. Some of that inefficiency is being masked by the fact that they stole all its training data they used to create it. Some of that inefficiency is being masked by the fact that they're giving it away at a loss in order to get people hooked. Some of that inefficiency is being masked by the fact that the entire thing is a game of financial musical chairs that they won't stop playing because none of them want to be left holding the fucking empty bag without a chair when the music stops.

    But none of those things reflect the true cost of generating stuff with generative AI. The wastefulness is the point. Imagine the efficiency if each person looking for a crochet/knitting pattern would be able to download the same pattern as someone else previously already did with only a few handfuls of bytes of internet traffic, not millions of tokens of furiously churning datacenter GPUs. Imagine if we had a simple text search engine where we could search effectively for the crochet/knitting patterns other people, real people, have already made, instead of having thousands of different people ask their own personal slop machine for slop a few dozen times until it gets it sort of right.

    At a time when we are trying to save the fucking planet from burning down, they are very intentionally and very deliberately shoving this garbage, inefficient technology down our throats, replacing older, more sensible technologies, breaking those technologies to make them seem even less sensible, selling it like it's the second coming of god, and powering it with fossil fuels to further destroy the environment. This is not an accident. Hey ChatGPT, can you think of any of the richest industries in the world that would be happy to team up with some of the other richest industries in the world to increase demand for fossil fuels, even though we're not supposed to be using fossil fuels anymore, and can you tell me how much money they all made last year? I bet it's a fucking lot, isn't it? How can they keep making so much money when we're not supposed to be using fossil fuels anymore? Mysterious. /s

    We're being fucked, the planet's being fucked, and the future's being fucked, and the people responsible are laughing all the way to the bank, then jumping on their yachts, and heading somewhere very similar to epstein's island, where they will party and do drugs and plan how they're all going to set up their new mansions on Mars once it gets so bad here on Earth that they have to leave us behind to burn. This is not really about AI, this is about people who don't consider most of humanity worth caring about or in any way consequential to their plans. We do not exist in the future they are building. We should probably find that very upsetting.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    I don't seek them out, but I hear that LLM monstrosity patterns are largely a thing of the past.

    The most plausible theory I've heard is that people realized LLMs are bad at writing patterns and so pivoted to feeding them other people's patterns to reformat or maybe grade for new sizes.

    The new sizes may have stitch counts that don't quite work, but they don't seem to make the same ridiculous infinite increases/decreases that haunted the first generation of LLM-generated patterns.

    Still, I doubt that an LLM could give you a reasonable pattern for any garment without directly ripping off an existing pattern.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 15 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

    It's literally the perfect business model, like the one refined by ad-based mobile game companies, but even easier.

    Agents troll for the news. Agents right up the news. It's fed to a video agent that reads the news. No need for human intervention. No need for any pesky slowdowns. Everything is ready in moments from the moment it happens.

    Unfortunately, we're going to lose integrity, accuracy, and virtually everything else that we need in the news source.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 weeks ago* (2 children)

    It's going to be unwatchable but they will still shove it in our face until they find out they can't really make that much money from it. But they won't hire the real people back again because then they'd have to admit they were wrong so they will just not have serious news anymore and even more people will get informed from podcasts and youtubers and other alternative media. These people in the Entertainment Business would rather destroy a business than pay people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 80 points 2 weeks ago
    [–] 48 points 2 weeks ago (13 children)

    Theoretically, could you feed to some genAI video of this Tilly Norwood and create an exact—or close enough—replica?

    Then, theoretically, make videos of her saying and doing extremely offensive things?

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    No theory needed. You absolutely can, almost trivially so.

    Only real challenge(s) would be either owning the hardware capacity or renting from a neutral host to run the fake AI personality at/or near equivalent levels if you're gonna unleash Titty SouthRisesWood in an autonomous form.

    Maybe a lawyer with a sense of humor on retainer to respond to the frivolous demand letters if they eventually find out you're behind it.

    And that's just if you want to fight AI with AI.

    Anyone could copy the model the good ol' fashioned way in Blender, turn on a voice changer or use non-AI TTS and get to uploading their protected parodies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (5 children)

    FYI this was just a quick test with Minimax H3, locally generated on a RTX 3090/Ryzen 7800 desktop.

    And to answer your question... yep. It's not a prompt box. H3 will take any combination of audio, video, and images as reference, as well as controlnets for poses, masking, character swapping...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 35 points 2 weeks ago

    Because they’re not real journalists

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 2 weeks ago

    "On camera"?

    Wouldn't that just be a camera pointed at a processor in a data centre somewhere?

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 2 weeks ago

    Engagement, ie bait. It works it seems.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 2 weeks ago

    I really hate the cognitive dissonance in seeing a bot avatar pretend to be human when I clearly know it's merely stealimg our likeness and behaviour.

    It's like the demons from Frieren for the weebs amongst us.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    It's not an interview if it's genAI lol

    Literally no intelligence in the answers. Literally pointless questions and answers.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 20 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    Donald Trump was right about cnn he just didn't know why

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Right about CNN? Well we don't know for sure if they would've done this before his buddies bought it. But who knows. Even without this bullshit, it's worth boycotting CNN now. They bought Warner Bros knowing full well it would make for a great extension to their propaganda machine.

    What saddens me is Warner Bros also owns HBO, which makes Last Week Tonight. I doubt John Oliver would cave in, but they can just cancel his show.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 20 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    The CNN anchors are training their replacements

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 19 points 2 weeks ago

    To obtain money. I remember cnn airing bits about "the secret" without disclosing that it was an ad.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 17 points 2 weeks ago

    Ya know that scens from The Thing where Macready pours his scotch into the chess computer, I want to do that to AI data center server racks. Sadly I am not nearly as handsome as a young or even current Kurt Russell.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 2 weeks ago*

    This gives "calling the house phone from the living room using the new-fangle cell phone because hahaha that's so cool" vibes. My father did that and freaked out my idiot brother.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 2 weeks ago

    Sweet, i will add this to my Roomba’s playlist.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 2 weeks ago
    [–] 9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    This when society should drop cnn as a legitimate source of worthy news.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 7 points 2 weeks ago

    Max Headroom and the new Pepsi generation 2026

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    This is the problem with AI that is so marketable, valuable and potentially unstoppable: people thinking and behaving like it is human. They are trying to take the human out of the equation for everything. When there are so few many human roles left there will no longer be empathy, compassion or reasoning from entertainers, customer service, management or eventually potentially law.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago

    Reminds me of that Al Pacino movie.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago

    They are destroying any confidence left in the truth of digital records.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago

    paid to by its creators most likely.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago

    I only want to see some geriatric from CNN interview Neuro-sama.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago

    Same reason they give shitty people like trump airtime.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago

    Errrmm.... what?

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›