We’re just replaying the CGI debate from the 2010s. It was popular to hate on CGI because it was obvious and bad and low quality and practical effects were better because of…

We learned two things from this debate:

1. What most people hated was actually just “bad CGI”. Good CGI went entirely unnoticed.

2. A generation of people were raised with CGI present in almost every form of professional media (i.e. not social media). They didn’t have a preference for practical effects because the content they consumed didn’t really use them.

I expect the same thing to happen here. I don’t think many people want to consume AI generated content exlusively (like Sora’s app attempted). However I expect AI generated content to continue to improve in quality until it’s used as a component in most media we consume. You and I will eventually stop noticing it and kids will be raised with it as normal and the anti-AI millennials/GenX crowd will age-out of relevance.

>This is a clear signal that generative video is deeply unpopular.

Or, it's a clear signal that AI video is too expensive as a consumer product and/or not quite yet at a quality bar that the average person finds acceptable.

I think someone could have looked at computer graphics and SFX circa the '80s and decided that they would always pale in comparison to practical effects. And yet..

It's an annoying trope, but this is the worst and most expensive (at this quality level) that these models will ever be.

I think it's inconclusive. All we can know is generative video + social AI slop feed is the incorrect business to be in at this exact moment in time while Claude is running away with the SWE market.

Eventually you won't be able to tell the difference.