5 ms·
If I’d posted 10 minute videos weekly for 5 years and someone offered me $7500-ish to use them as training data, I’d think that was a pretty good deal. YMMV.
by devoutsalsa 2y ago
If I’d posted 10 minute videos weekly for 5 years and someone offered me $7500-ish to use them as training data, I’d think that was a pretty good deal. YMMV.
- endisneigh 2y agoDepending on the content that’s a terrible deal. Low ball is it takes an hour to produce a single minute of video. You’re being paid 3 bucks an hour. If it’s animation it could take a day to animate a single minute, in which case you’re being screwed even harder. Suckers who don’t properly value their time is why BigCo generally wins.
- altdataseller 2y agoDid they say they’re buying only high quality videos? What if it’s just a video of me talking through my coding sessions? It would be rather low effort and sounds like “free money” to me
- doublerabbit 2y agoWould it though? If they train your video, produced future videos based off that video, charged for the next. That then takes away your next video. So you got paid a low ball amount only to be ripped off.
- replygirl 2y agowould it though? nothing would be stopping them. the idea something would relies on an assumption that we'll soon be able to generate long, coherent, and useful instructional videos with fully resolved text on demand, with such high quality and low cost that no one will be able to compete. but we already have people out there who can do this instruction/review live and off the cuff, and who would certainly be able to make use of this stuff in their own work
- doublerabbit 2y agoYes it would. Because it restricts you from creating such style videos. Your being paid a pittance for a bot to learn your style. Why wouldn't you want more money?
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago> Why wouldn't you want more money? Because that style isn't that unique, so the difference is between getting paid nothing and now there is a bot that can do the same thing, or getting paid something and now there is a bot that can do the same thing. It hasn't even been established that they're required to pay you at all.
- doublerabbit 2y agoMy style is unique. If I'm teaching folks something I'm skilled in I wouldn't want to be learned from $3 especially for a $$$ company that abuses trust. Style is how teachers make learning happen. If teachers follow the general generic book mundaneness, you learn far less than of you apply your own style. Besides, if they were using the content without my permission I should be allowed to seek costs for such.
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago> My style is unique. "You're unique, just like everybody else." It doesn't matter if the thing is using your exact style or one which is enough of a substitute for it that the difference isn't going to make up the difference between your $50 fee and the $0.01 in electricity it takes to have the AI do it. > Besides, if they were using the content without my permission I should be allowed to seek costs for such. On what basis? How is it different than someone teaching their students your style, so the students can make their own original works in the same style? It's directly analogous to classroom use, which is an explicit example of fair use from the copyright statute.
- 2y ago
- devoutsalsa 2y agoYou can sell it more than once.
- replygirl 2y agoi reckon nearly zero of these creators are making videos for a single viewer. and as a film student, or even as a professor, you wouldn't spend $300 per movie just to reference in study. demanding even more than that can only be hedging against the idea that one will be out of a job
- sebzim4500 2y agoYeah but if you have already made the content then you're getting $7500 for free.
- endisneigh 2y agoPer the article you’re paid to make new content. Even if that were not true, releasing the rights for so little is dumb.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 2y agoAs opposed to the Pile where the authors got nothing for the privilege of their content being used to train the LLMs.
- lightedman 2y ago"Low ball is it takes an hour to produce a single minute of video." As some of us like to say, "Fuck it, we'll do it live." As in, that's the only take you get and it goes right to production zero editing and processing. Everything gets set once, fired once, and it gets uploaded immediately.
- sebastiennight 2y agoWell, with AI video editing like what we do at OneTake AI, you can have this cake and eat it too... You shoot it "live" and let the AI deal with the editing and processing for you.
- asah 2y agoPrice is determined by the value to the purchaser, not the cost of production. Particularly for digital products with no per-use COGS.
- rakoo 2y agoIf I learn through the press that Adobe is willing to pay amount A and this information is very peblic, I can at the very least assume they are making 10x more so I'm willing to sell it 20x more and see where this goes
- fennecbutt 2y agoIt takes 1 minute to produce 1 minute of video. It takes an hour to produce 1 minute of scripted content and fancy graphics for a professional YouTube show.
- baobabKoodaa 2y agoThese AI video systems will need huge amounts of random videos showing things like leafs rustling in the wind, car driving, etc. so you don't even need to put in 10 hours of effort to create a 10 minute video, you can just grab your camera and go for a walk and publish that as it is, and it will be valuable training material. $3 per minute would be a pretty high price to pay for "man walks outside" video.
- zingelshuher 2y agoAs you mentioned models need _random_ videos. Just 'walk outside' will produce more or less the same. My guess Adobe is more interested in 'family' sort of videos, with humans. This is what most users will be asking for. Getting them in other ways will be either illegal or really expensive.
- baobabKoodaa 2y agoI'm not suggesting that anyone here will make $3 per minute shooting random videos, whether those videos are "man walking outside", or "family gathers at the fireplace". The distinction between those types of videos was not pertinent. I was pointing out that making videos for the purpose of training AI doesn't require you to put 10 hours of effort into making a 10 minute video, like for example, Youtube creators might do.
- zingelshuher 2y agoYes. And there are many forgotten accounts on youtube, their owners now have another way to monetarize. Not sure why Adobe didn't talk to Youtube directly.
- doublerabbit 2y agoWhy wouldn't you want more?
- ysavir 2y agoIf I was in that situation, the last thing I'd want is to provide an AI video generator the means of creating videos like mine and that would compete with me.