I hope they get in legal trouble for it, though I doubt it's more than a misdemeanor. Those poor innocent trees...
writers' strike and Trek
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
I hope they get in legal trouble for it, though I doubt it's more than a misdemeanor. Those poor innocent trees...
Here's a source
https://twitter.com/ChrisStephensMD/status/1681005154609545216
Apparently the land those trees are on might be LA City property, not Universal.
https://twitter.com/KonstantineinCA/status/1681339726920581122
https://twitter.com/ChrisStephensMD/status/1681005154609545216
Apparently the land those trees are on might be LA City property, not Universal.
https://twitter.com/KonstantineinCA/status/1681339726920581122
That is truly pissy and childish.
So, is it City or Universal?
I don't do the Twitter thing so no clue how the conversation went.
I don't do the Twitter thing so no clue how the conversation went.
The LA City Controller posted on Twitter confirming that they're "LA City managed street trees." A private business can obtain a permit to trim them, but can be fined if it doesn't have a permit. The incident is being investigated. https://twitter.com/lacontroller/status/1681456457936687104
Is there a general thread for these strikes somewhere? as this one is specifically about how it effects trek. Until I find one, I'll post this here.
https://twitter.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1681422349449543680
'SAG and WGA have filed a labor grievance against NBCUniversal after they blocked off the sidewalk where picketers were protesting.
The WGA say this has “forced picketers to patrol in busy streets where 2 picketers have been struck by a car”'
https://twitter.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1681422349449543680
'SAG and WGA have filed a labor grievance against NBCUniversal after they blocked off the sidewalk where picketers were protesting.
The WGA say this has “forced picketers to patrol in busy streets where 2 picketers have been struck by a car”'
Struck by a car? Jeez I hope they're okay!
The sidewalks aren't public property and thus protected by #1?
thanks
I saw late yesterday that it was confirmed Universal didn't file a permit to trim the trees and they'll be subject to fines. I go through that area quite a bit and I swear Universal is trying to make it as inhospitable as possible in the midst of this awful heat wave we've been enduring in the Valley.
Rather interesting article in the NYT today, worth reading, comparing TV writing as moving away from artisanal master craftsperson creation to a production line blue collar approach, like cars before and after the Ford factory or other examples. (Non-paywall at https://archive.ph/SCVLp)
Which is a completely incompetent analogy and the reason the system has gotten so screwed up. Writers aren't the equivalent of the assembly-line workers who build the cars, they're the equivalent of the people who design the cars. But the execs don't understand that. Studio executives have never really understood how the creative process worked, but the current breed of vulture tech capitalists who've bought up all the studios are far, far worse at understanding it.
From the article:
As mentioned earlier (and in the article), rewriting chatbot-generated drafts does seem like it's going to be the future. And at some point a rewrite will no longer be needed.
How will that affect Star Trek?
I imagine you can use AI to come up with Star Trek scrips rather easily. So Paramount may not need writers. And I guess that's one of the reasons why there's a strike.
It would be interesting to see a comparison of the two: an AI-written Star Trek script and one written by a writer.
Would we be able to tell the difference?
Obviously for the studios the AI-written one would be more cost-effective. And if the viewer can't tell the difference, then, well...
No, it's just that the idiot tech execs who've taken over an industry they have no comprehension of believe it's going to be the future, because they're too stupid to understand the profound category difference between creative writing and coding software. It cannot be allowed to become the future, because that would be the death of worthwhile entertainment.
Basically, this is the future where the Borg assimilate Earth -- or where Skynet conquers it. This is the future so existentially untenable that you need to send time travelers back to make sure it doesn't stick.
Hell, yes, if the writer is any good and the viewer has a shred of taste. All the so-called "AI" can do (which is not actually AI at all, just a fancy predictive-text algorithm) is sample pre-existing material and mathematically predict the probability that a similar text will have certain words and phrases in it. It's not creativity, just a mathematical averaging of previous acts of creativity. And anything that is averaged out like that will be ordinary, generic, and uninteresting.
Granted, there's already a wealth of shlocky entertainment out there that just rehashes familiar formulas and tropes and doesn't try anything challenging. AI might be capable of approximating that kind of lifeless hackwork. But good fiction transcends that mediocrity, and AI will never be capable of that. All AI can do is mathematically predict what an average script or story will look like. But good fiction defies average expectations.
Well yeah, I don't think the executives care to understand the difference, I think they only really care about making money.
So whether the entertainment is worthwhile or not seems to be immaterial. The only thing that seems to matter is does it make money.
If it's worthwhile and makes money, great. More will come. If it's worthwhile and doesn't make money though, then that's it.
Yes, and some of those people creating that "schlock" are asking for more money, and the studios are saying, no, we can just have AI do this...
This is kind of the gist of one of the reasons for striking, yes.
I wonder, in the final outcome, will the studios just have AI-created content for the vast majority of what they produce, and just have select creators for their "vanity projects."
Basically what I'm saying is, things like summer blockbuster and large IP's like Star Trek... that's all going to be created by AI. And the projects that are Oscar-caliber, those will still be created by actual creators.
I wonder if that's the balance that's going to be struck. Because I don't know if things are going to go back to how there are now, it's unsustainable in the long run.
Also, yes, in this solution a lot of people will be out of jobs. But again, that would happen anyway if things continue on as they are with studios losing millions of dollars every quarter.
Curious times ahead...
The independent market may be in for a boom.
The studios will have their AI-created content, and the independents will be for most everything else.
I think it goes without saying than an unbroken field of mediocre, uninspiring, generic pablum will not be as profitable as works of real creativity and emotional power.
They're not asking for more money, they're asking the studios to stop cheating them out of the money they used to make when the system was actually functional, and to stop dismantling the system by which new writers were trained and allowed to rise through the ranks to become the next generation of producers and showrunners.
I don't think the strikes will ever end until the studios abandon their plans to replace artists with AI. This is an existential question, one the writers and actors are unlikely to compromise on, because it would destroy their ability to make a living in the profession.
No. That will never work. It's ignorant to assume you can divide it in terms of how classy or prestigious the output is. Both kinds of film still require the same fundamentals to be of any worth at all.
And my god, what a horrible insult to Star Trek. The very thing that made Trek such a successful franchise was that it wasn't just mindless schlock, that it was smarter and more innovative than its contemporaries.
Not to mention that AI output is intrinsically plagiaristic, trained on material programmed into it without the consent of its creators. So it shouldn't be legal for studios to use AI in that way.
Yes, exactly. The current system has been broken by the executives. The goal is to restore the functional, sustainable kind of system that used to exist, when writers actually got enough residuals to make a viable living and the pipeline for training new writer-producers still existed.
Studios aren't "losing" millions. The executives are hoarding those millions into their own pockets instead of paying their workers what they're worth or investing the money in the future of the industry. Don't make it sound like the studio execs are hapless victims here. It's their own incompetence, greed, and outright evil (we're talking people who literally want to leave the writers homeless and starving) that created this mess in the first place.
Similar threads
