Discussion in 'Future of Trek' started by F. King Daniel, May 2, 2023.
That's about all that it can construct, in fact. In great detail.
Copyright infringement and plagiarism are two different things. Plagiarism is pretty specific. You can commit one without the other.
Most importantly, in the U.S. plagiarism almost never involves a legal violation while copyright theft does. If there's any way in which the use of this technology might be limited to protect creators of commercial art, it's going to be by enforcing copyright or some adjacent area of law.
These large language models are a great deal more than "predictive text programs." That's a fundamental lack of understanding almost worthy of ChatGPT itself.
Exactly how does it mean "interesting things for what is in development for Trek?" If the writer's strike goes on long enough, there won't be any onscreen Trek content for a while except for Lower Decks. And we won't even get that if the actors and directors go on strike.
Yes.. I'm sure they'll cancel everything, fire Kurtzman and turn everything over to Terry Matalas...
( Yeah right ) If anyone[ believes that, I want a dose of the drug you're obviously on as I could use a good break from reality./SPOILER]
I believe this is wishful thinking at its finest, trying to will it in to existence.
This has me curious about the 80's strike. We know they dug out old Phase II scripts, but who rewrote them to be about the Next Gen casts? And if it was acceptable to do that then, what's stopping them digging out one of their dozens of unmade Trek movie scripts and adapting that?
They did not write or film that episode - "The Child" - during the strike.
The only other such episode was "Devil's Due," which was two seasons after the end of the strike.
The strike ended early enough that they had time to rewrite the script to "The Child" before going into production (since the start of season 2 was delayed by a month). If that hadn't happened, they probably would've just "improvised" the name changes on set.
The same thing happened with the 1988 Mission: Impossible revival. The original intention was to remake original M:I episodes verbatim, with new actors playing the same characters. But the strike ended soon enough that they were able to take the remake scripts already in preproduction and rewrite them for new characters, add more modern technology, etc., and ultimately they ended up only doing four direct remakes (some rewritten more than others) and a couple of very loose semi-remakes.
Well, for one thing, the actors' and directors' contracts expire in a month and one or both guilds are likely to join the writers in striking, which would make any TV/film production impossible.
But you're asking the wrong question. The question shouldn't be "What's stopping the studios from continuing to cheat the writers out of a living wage?" It should be "What's stopping the studios from returning to the negotiating table in good faith and making a reasonable deal with the writers?" Remember, this is not just an inconvenience for viewers. This is an existential fight for the survival of the industry as we know it. If the execs like Zaslav get their way, things will never go back to normal. We'll end up with terrible, cheap TV and movies churned out by mindless text algorithms.
Here's an article that nicely (if snidely at points) explains the foolishness of believing that AI could ever actually do the work of creative people, and how the studio execs investing in it are setting themselves up for a fall:
Mark Cuban confidently predicted that YouTube would never find a buyer because it was an IP lawsuit waiting to happen - any deep-pockets owner would find themselves mired in legal problems.
Google bought it.
Even business people get this kind of thing wrong, and journalists are less well situated to appreciate it.
They see problems and simply don't have the frame of mind or reference to see the ways in which this kind of innovation opens up opportunities for organizations to exploit. They are skeptical of the unfamiliar.
Generative AI has the potential to save studios a tremendous amount of time and money. In a short time it may reduce the demand for writers by more than half, eventually much more than that. The writers intuit this; that's what's motivating the urgency of this strike.
The question at issue in commercial art careers is always "what is the dollar value of my creative contribution to the people buying the kind of work I do, and what is the dollar value of the specific skills I've mastered?" Up until now, those two things have gone together. AI is beginning to separate them.
They'll still need human writers to turn the AI written stories until things that can actually be filmed.
Lower Decks, and Prodigy. Plus season 2 of SNW.
Yes, I was more referring to long term. IE, if the strike isn't resolved in time for next year's programming. Though, I guess Disco S5 should be good to go next year.
Paramount+ goes under, content stalls, life goes on.
The dumber corporates like Zaslav and Chapek threatening to bring down the US entertainment industry as we know it out of petty spite will just create a vacuum for India, Britain, and South Korean entertainment industries to fill.
Corporate America is regressing.
Not for the many people who are in danger of losing their careers.
Oh no, it's a complete travesty of greed. But the summary by the other poster makes it sound like just another day at the beach. It states things with little sympathy. I responded in kind.
That wasn't how it seemed to me. I took TedShatner10's comments as an expression of agreement with my cautionary statement, and of anger toward the self-destructive stupidity of the executives.
Fair enough. I don't see the anger. Just statements of fact.
No doubt @TedShatner10 can clarify and I might be misreading it.
Separate names with a comma.