WGA/SAGAFTRA Strike Discussion Thread | SAG Ratifies Contract

[Porthos]

Because I hate myself I just real allllll of the pages made over night and while there's too many posts and points to cover I do want to address one thing about language based AI.

 

I'm not sure that @MysteryMovieMogul has covered this part of their argument as well as they could, but as I understand it one of the more persistent complaints about current language based AI programs is how they were created in the first place and the sources that were used to "train" them.

 

If intellectual property was used to "train" various models of AI without permission/compensation (again as I understand it is one of the charges, but I haven't looked deeply enough to repeat uncritically hence this proviso) then I can see MMM's position about wanting to be against it as a tool at all, including by writers.

 

At least I presume this was what MMM was alluding to when they made posts like this one [and similar ones]:

 

1 hour ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

To clarify my position. If the WGA wants to ban studios from using AI, the WGA needs to place an AI ban on their own members, too. It's not like writers are using an AI that only trains off their own scripts. I don't like exploitation of writers by any force, be it executives at Warner Brothers and Disney or by an individual writer of a network series.

But the WGA only wants to ban Studios from using AI, and that is a gross double standard. 

[ChipDerby]

I'm definitely also on that side. I do not think people should be using AI for things like this. Because what AI is using to train is other artists/writers works. Those people are not being compensated for this, and will probably never be. It's unethical, IMO, to use AI for things like this. 

[grim22]

7 minutes ago, Porthos said:

Because I hate myself I just real allllll of the pages made over night and while there's too many posts and points to cover I do want to address one thing about language based AI.

 

I'm not sure that @MysteryMovieMogul has covered this part of their argument as well as they could, but as I understand it one of the more persistent complaints about current language based AI programs is how they were created in the first place and the sources that were used to "train" them.

 

If intellectual property was used to "train" various models of AI without permission/compensation (again as I understand it is one of the charges, but I haven't looked deeply enough to repeat uncritically hence this proviso) then I can see MMM's position about wanting to be against it as a tool at all, including by writers.

 

At least I presume this was what MMM was alluding to when they made posts like this one [and similar ones]:

 

I read a funny article the other day which said that there's so much AI art out there now that new AI is learning from existing AI art now and it's just getting weird instead of more refined.

[Cap]

2 hours ago, Water Bottle said:

(although why, I don't know? I guess if a writer isn't confident in their own ability).

Sidebar, when I was in college and film school, I almost failed out because of my inability to write a paper. I understood all the topics; I could orally give you a presentation; I could in my mind, draft the paper, and then the second I got to started writing it I had overwhelming and complete anxiety about writing a draft. Seriously. I failed at college because of it. (Finished after sixteen years).

 

So having a tool where I could spit out every single one of my thoughts, and my complete treatment, and then give me some type of a draft that I could edit on my own, and work with, would be very tempting. 
 

Granted, nowadays, talk to text is much more accurate and easily accessible, so you can just do that instead. But, From a disability point of view, I kind of see the appeal. I just morally don’t think I’ve ever use it. 

 

[MysteryMovieMogul]

11 minutes ago, Porthos said:

Because I hate myself I just real allllll of the pages made over night and while there's too many posts and points to cover I do want to address one thing about language based AI.

 

I'm not sure that @MysteryMovieMogul has covered this part of their argument as well as they could, but as I understand it one of the more persistent complaints about current language based AI programs is how they were created in the first place and the sources that were used to "train" them.

 

If intellectual property was used to "train" various models of AI without permission/compensation (again as I understand it is one of the charges, but I haven't looked deeply enough to repeat uncritically hence this proviso) then I can see MMM's position about wanting to be against it as a tool at all, including by writers.

 

At least I presume this was what MMM was alluding to when they made posts like this one [and similar ones]:

 

Correct. The WGA and many others are calling AI unethical because it scrapes copywritten material. So that means any writers using it are doing something equally unethical in that regard.

[Kon]

So, Cody Ziglar has mentioned his residuals for an episode of She-Hulk:

 

 

One question, are residuals yearly or monthly?

Edited July 13, 2023 by Kon

[WittyUsername]

1 hour ago, Bob Train said:

I’ve always wondered why everyone on here meatrides Iger and bitches about Zaslav, despite the fact that Zaslav has been shown to care more about the theatrical experience and done more to improve his company.

They both suck. Zaslav is just more obnoxious about it. 

[Dementeleus]

1 hour ago, scytheavatar said:

it's a powerful tool which has the potential to radically change and improve filmmaking. 

 

lmao, absolutely not. Stop believing the swill the tech bros are shilling. 

[FunkMiller]

Nolan just came out in support of the strikes at the Oppenheimer premiere. Not unexpected, but still nice to see.

 

All the actors have walked out.

[MCKillswitch123]

1 hour ago, scytheavatar said:

 

 

Cause AI is like CGI, it's a powerful tool which has the potential to radically change and improve filmmaking. People complain that CGI sucks and practical effects is better, but ultimately if you say you want your movie to not have CGI forever then I must come to the conclusion that you are a dinosaur who will probably get squeezed out of the industry eventually.

 

 

Dinosaurs produce better cinema than those who revolutionize the industry, according to you.

 

Off with that AI chilling nonsense, it will not change Hollywood for the better in almost, if not pretty much any way.

[DInky]

 

Deadline is desperately trying to spin this.

 

 

[DAR]

Uh oh

 

 

[dudalb]

6 hours ago, Jonwo said:

It's not going to collapse, that's just hyperbole by the bunch of nerds on the internet. Box office is not the only source of revenue for one. The industry has been many ups and downs and adapted and anyone who thinks these multi billion dollar corporation will suddenly go under is either stupid or doesn't know how business works. 

 

 

I think that currently it is "cool" to be violently anti business and anti capitalist has a lot to do with this. That they never come up with a replacement for private business and the marketplace that would actually work is indicitive.

And I think one of the most damaging criticisms of AMPTP is that what they are doing is just plain stupid from a business point of view.

Some fools think if Hollywood collapses, you will get some magical system where anbody who wants to make a film will be ablt to do so...which is idiotic. Resources for making movies is always limited; only question is how do you choose who gets the resources. IMHO Private business, for all it;s may flaws, works better here then a government bureaucracy would.

[MysteryMovieMogul]

Time to watch Redditors start trying to defend studios!

[Water Bottle]

32 minutes ago, Kon said:

So, Cody Ziglar has mentioned his residuals for an episode of She-Hulk:

 

 

One question, are residuals yearly or monthly?

 

It depends. I believe for streaming shows it's every year. 

[DInky]

2 minutes ago, DAR said:

Uh oh

 

 

 

I mean, he hasn't killed anybody since 1994 as far as we know.

[Cmasterclay]

1 minute ago, dudalb said:

I think that currently it is "cool" to be violently anti business and anti capitalist has a lot to do with this. That they never come up with a replacement for private business and the marketplace that would actually work is indicitive.

And I think one of the most damaging criticisms of AMPTP is that what they are doing is just plain stupid from a business point of view.

Some fools think if Hollywood collapses, you will get some magical system where anbody who wants to make a film will be ablt to do so...which is idiotic. Resources for making movies is always limited; only question is how do you choose who gets the resources. IMHO Private business, for all it;s may flaws, works better here then a government bureaucracy would.

Except without actors and writers all these capitalist business moguls literally have zero product and thus they have zero leverage, so fuck em.

[grim22]

4 minutes ago, DAR said:

Uh oh

 

 

 

OJ will negotiate the best deals, because the studios know the real killer is still out there.

[Noctis]

Can someone explain what's going on?

[WorkingonaName]

Send Erza Miller to the picket line.