This is probably the first time I've encountered something where "It's so bad that it's good" makes sense to me. I could not stop laughing. The exterior shot with the Seinfeld-inspired music. The laugh track at inappropriate times. They talk about going to a sushi restaurant, and when they've finally agreed to go, they sit down and don't go anywhere. This is like the alien scientists who want to bring back humans after they've gone extinct, and end up cloning chimps. Bravo!
The crappiness is unexplainably funny. Jerry speaking the cues in the comedy bits and saying "pause for applause", Elaine clipping through Jerry, George talking to the fridge. I lost it when it cut to an indoor shot with nobody in it for 2 minutes and then cut away.
Wow, I thought also the super spammy lol chat is AI generated as well, but it seems people find this really funny? I mean most of the ""jokes"" do not even have a bad punch line. That's the only thing I can lol at now, why wtf?
There was a skit just now where they talked about going to a comedy show. Of course the scene cut and they didn't actually go. Except three skits later they talked about "the comedy show we just went to".
After that Elaine, Kramer, George all talking about a comedy club experience. When they delivered their lines, they each sat on the couch in the exact same spot, models clipping into one another. Then the camera switched to front view of this new comedy chimera and just lingered without a line said.
must be that I am not native English speaker and I've never watched Seinfeld, except for some popular clip over the decades, but this is honestly so bad that is really bad. It's Sierra adventures bad jokes bad.
The unflinching deadpan delivery of the AI just kills me. Reminds me of say Steven Wright, Mitch Hedburg, Norm Macdonald, Harold Ramis. Absolutely slays me.
I'm curious as to why the dialogue is so bad. What AI is this using? When I ask ChatGPT to write a scene, the results are usually somewhat funny:
INT. JERRY'S CAR - DAY
Jerry and George are driving down the road, with Jerry behind the wheel.
Jerry: (gazing at the cup holder) This car is such a piece of junk, it doesn't even have a proper cup holder.
George: What are you talking about? It has a cup holder right there!
Jerry: (skeptical) That's not a cup holder, that's just a little indentation in the dash.
George: It's a cup holder, Jerry! I've used it a million times.
Jerry: (sarcastically) Oh, well if you've used it, then it must be a proper cup holder.
George: (defensive) Hey, I've never had a problem with it.
Jerry: (exasperated) That's because you don't have any standards. A real cup holder should be able to hold a variety of cup sizes, not just the tiny little cups you drink out of.
George: (scoffing) That's ridiculous, Jerry. Who needs a cup holder that big?
Jerry: (serious) I do, George. I like to drink my coffee in a real cup.
George: (rolling his eyes) You and your fancy coffee cups.
Jerry: (smiling) Hey, I have standards, George. What can I say?
George: (laughing) I guess that's what makes you, you.
Jerry: (laughing) And that's what makes you, you.
They both burst into laughter as the car pulls up to a stop light.
That's actually extremely impressive, even for chat GPT. Not only is it a coherent scene, the humour emerges from a disagreement about an incidental detail in the lived environment. While situated in a realistic situation that's typical of the series. With the detail in question being a real environmental detail of that situation. George is irate and Jerry sarcastically winds him up. It literally could be segment from a real episode (bar the ending). So we have (an impersonation of) theory of mind, coherent understanding of setting, a narrative structure etc.
Compared to the infinite Seinfeld, which appears composed of disconnected setup -> response type gags, it's night and day.
> While situated in a realistic situation that's typical of the series.
That's a bit of a low bar.
> With the detail in question being a real environmental detail of that situation. George is irate and Jerry sarcastically winds him up.
And that's what you typically get from trying to replicate statistical data from the series.
It's a very good impersonation of a theory of mind, but it's an impersonation. The most surprising part is that when asked for a Seinfield episode, it actually tries to construct a Seinfield episode. But somehow, that's that part that least impress most people.
I can't find the post I saw from the creator, but apparently this is something they have been working on for years, well before ChatGPT. They created their own script generator.
I thought the dialog was amazing? It's generating conversations and a script for a TV show, are you expecting it to be as good as the original? It's crazy that they can carry out a conversation from start to end about a specific topic.
I wonder how much of a copyright violation this must be. I mean, they obviously fed it a lot of Seinfeld scripts for it to understand the characters and humor. I know HN likes to say "fair use" but I wonder how Hollywood's lawyers feel about that
The rest of the episode continues with Kramer getting a wild streaming setup, Elaine setting up Teams for Peterman and George quite quitting by mounting a picture in front of his webcam
I did the same. But had it specifically set in 2021
Also set in the restaurant.
George gets a job as an "Uber Delivery"* driver and Kramer is excited about VR.
*Is that a thing? I don't think I've seen that where I am
Maybe because mainstream comedy shows all follow canned patterns with lame and unoriginal jokes. To the point that even a machine can write a script that sounds very similar. Stuff like Friends or Big Bang Theory would probably work very well too.
Great. Now I’m going to be haunted by a recurring dystopian vision of the future in which all content (even broadcast TV) is pumped out this way to maximise profits. Humans won’t use their brains for creativity anymore. Instead, new ideas will be seeded deep inside a neural network somewhere, and our reactions will be monitored and used as one constant feedback loop. Until we are ultimately just sat drooling and giggling 24/7 at some optimised computer generated content buffered by lucrative advertising.
The movie "Her"[1] is already here with AI Chatbots. I was recently fooling around with open source 6B parameter AI chatbots. The model is 20GB. That's just for text and that's more text than I could read in my entire life. I could talk to the chatbot for my entire life and never get to the end of it. The amount of raw information that humans can I/O into their brains is very small compared to these chatbots.
Her (2013) is one of the best sci-fi movies ever made. Not only is it heartfelt and the characters are relatable, but the sci-fi future it is set in is a very accurate representation of our near future. This movie predicted AI companions just as Siri was taking off, and it perfectly predicted the alienation between humans that is slowly getting worse. Simply amazing.
I know that I am going to sound pathetic but I may actually like it. It makes me sad when the characters in long running shows get old or die in real life. I also get sad when shows end and the characters that I love just go away. Right now we have cartoons but I don't really connect with these characters. What I would love is an actual good series where the characters never grow old and the series never ends. Now this may not be something that an AI can produce in my lifetime but I am sure that AI generated content will cross the uncanny divide within the next 40 years or so.
That was my immediate reaction to seeing chatGPT. Any digital content, fully customized, can be created with minimal human input.
The quality of the content is still crap, but that will improve with time. And the audience getting dumber to think it’s fine will speed up the process.
This is part a larger “fear” of mine. We never get to actual singularity because along the way AI is either good enough or we mislabel it to thinking we’ve reached the singularity when we haven’t. Or some other allure/consequence that isn’t immanently itself destructive (accidentally creating hostile Skynet is possible but outside this fear, this fear is more insidious). We think may we have the desire to reach AI singularity but I’m not convinced. We’re too selfish.
here's what i think: imagine if this was good, like it generated stuff that felt like a real episode, like you couldn't tell the difference. how uninteresting. the little bit of entertainment value this has is in being so stupid. the entertainment value of an episode of _seinfeld_ is inseparable from the fact it was written by a human.
Just heard something to the effect of "I just heard about this new kind of restaurant where all the food is Chinese. You can order anything you want and it will be Chinese."
This may relate to one of the 170 Seinfeld episodes being entitled "The Chinese Restaurant". They spend almost the whole episode in line waiting for a table which which they're repeatedly told will be ready in "5, 10 minutes". Probably the training data included the scripts and titles.
That early episode is essentially the origin of "a show about nothing." When describing their idea for "Jerry" to the NBC execs, George uses that incident as an example. Summarizing: One of the episodes will just be four of them waiting for a table at a restaurant. Why would people watch that? Because it's on TV! Not yet...
It's very meta because of course when you say it out loud it does sound horribly boring just like the NBC guy says. But the Seinfeld audience is aware that the Seinfeld characters (now the ones writing a sitcom about their personal experiences) actually experienced this situation, and to the Seinfeld audience, it was actually a very funny episode, therefore realizing that the Jerry audience would also find it funny.
People who find this interesting might also find the work being done recently by The Companion--a service that specializes in providing fan service (writers panels, behind the scenes stuff, etc.) for popular science fiction content--with some researchers from Google and the showrunner of Stargate on extended episodes for Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis.
So like, the "obvious problem" with this content for Seinfeld is the "acting" (care of the TTS engine) sucks. Honestly, are the scripts bad? Maybe, sure! But actors actually do a job that can sometimes be ignored by filling in all of the subtle details that make the character the character and even then make awkward interactions suddenly "work".
In the extended work from the Google AI on Stargate, what they did was get some people from the actual cast of the show to be willing to do a table read of the AI-generated scripts (and the AI was then told to limit what it generated to using the actors they had).
And OMG sometimes it was hilarious nonsense and yet it was FUN, because the actors were kind of trying to make it all work, and they were able to lean on their backgrounds doing those characters for a decade and all of the hard-ish stuff of comedic timing but also the easy-ish stuff of how a basic human interaction works.
When we get to the point of being able to have AI actors easily pull off some of those things--having text to speech that infers enough context to know the correct emotions to apply in addition to the appropriate timing and stress as opposed to merely the correct pronunciation (which is always where we seem to be working, practically)--this stuff is going to rock, and it will be scary how well even shitty scripts do (as it isn't like many sitcoms--not saying Seinfeld, but you can easily scrape the bottom of the barrel on formulaic shows people have pumped out--have very good writing to begin with).
One to generate the 3d scene. One for the lighting. Three for cameras. One for each actor acting out the given script along with a set amount of "improvising" and "randomness", one to generate background royalty free music based on the emotional context of the scene, one to serve as a Foley artist for environment sounds.
The equivalent computer power of a medium sized bitcoin farm running everything with the only humans being the writers, the IT people running the systems, a director watching each take as it is rendered live to pick the best ones, and an editor to slap all of the takes together.
That's probably technically possible now, if not actually implemented.
Another 15 years or so and kids will be rendering full movies in the basement and watching them with their friends.
> One to generate the 3d scene. One for the lighting. Three for cameras. One for each actor acting out the given script along with a set amount of "improvising" and "randomness", one to generate background royalty free music based on the emotional context of the scene, one to serve as a Foley artist for environment sounds.
One for each hand to maintain the appropriate number of fingers.
Some TTS, like Tortoise-TTS or 15.ai are decent at timing and stress, though I think they're generally more at "read an audiobook if supervised" level, and not "be a voice actor, unsupervised" level.
It's weirdly compelling - partly because the chat participants are so enthusiastic, but mainly because once I started watching it I didn't want to risk missing the tiny chance that it might actually deliver a good joke!
Readit News
The singularity is now.
The Sims 4 looks like the perfect home for Seinfeld and friends
https://www.pcgamer.com/the-sims-4-looks-like-the-perfect-ho...
Jerry Seinfeld's Apartment [No CC] // Speed Build - The Sims 4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gu2k_e_4mA
The Sims 4 snuck in a little Seinfeld reference
https://www.reddit.com/r/seinfeld/comments/2r7u5i/the_sims_4...
must be that I am not native English speaker and I've never watched Seinfeld, except for some popular clip over the decades, but this is honestly so bad that is really bad. It's Sierra adventures bad jokes bad.
I mean, obviously it's not. And it's a lot more than that.
But it seems like a good place for AI to start. It's also one of the most popular TV shows of all time...
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
INT. JERRY'S CAR - DAY
Jerry and George are driving down the road, with Jerry behind the wheel.
Jerry: (gazing at the cup holder) This car is such a piece of junk, it doesn't even have a proper cup holder.
George: What are you talking about? It has a cup holder right there!
Jerry: (skeptical) That's not a cup holder, that's just a little indentation in the dash.
George: It's a cup holder, Jerry! I've used it a million times.
Jerry: (sarcastically) Oh, well if you've used it, then it must be a proper cup holder.
George: (defensive) Hey, I've never had a problem with it.
Jerry: (exasperated) That's because you don't have any standards. A real cup holder should be able to hold a variety of cup sizes, not just the tiny little cups you drink out of.
George: (scoffing) That's ridiculous, Jerry. Who needs a cup holder that big?
Jerry: (serious) I do, George. I like to drink my coffee in a real cup.
George: (rolling his eyes) You and your fancy coffee cups.
Jerry: (smiling) Hey, I have standards, George. What can I say?
George: (laughing) I guess that's what makes you, you.
Jerry: (laughing) And that's what makes you, you.
They both burst into laughter as the car pulls up to a stop light.
End Scene.
Compared to the infinite Seinfeld, which appears composed of disconnected setup -> response type gags, it's night and day.
> While situated in a realistic situation that's typical of the series.
That's a bit of a low bar.
> With the detail in question being a real environmental detail of that situation. George is irate and Jerry sarcastically winds him up.
And that's what you typically get from trying to replicate statistical data from the series.
It's a very good impersonation of a theory of mind, but it's an impersonation. The most surprising part is that when asked for a Seinfield episode, it actually tries to construct a Seinfield episode. But somehow, that's that part that least impress most people.
Dead Comment
[Scene opens in Jerry's apartment. Kramer bursts in with a big grin on his face.]
Kramer: Jerry, you won't believe what happened to me last night!
Jerry: What is it?
Kramer: I won the lottery!
Jerry: (surprised) What?! That's fantastic! Congratulations!
Kramer: Yeah, I can't believe it myself. I never win anything.
Jerry: (skeptically) How much did you win?
Kramer: (proudly) Fifty bucks!
Jerry: (disappointed) Fifty bucks? That's it?
Kramer: (defensively) Hey, it's not about the amount, it's about the odds. I beat a million-to-one shot!
Jerry: (teasing) Yeah, I guess it's like winning the Olympics of scratch-off tickets.
Kramer: (serious) You know, I've been thinking. With this newfound wealth, I'm going to quit my job and live the life of leisure.
Jerry: (skeptically) You know, Kramer, I'm not sure fifty bucks will sustain that lifestyle for very long.
Kramer: (undeterred) I'll figure something out. Maybe I'll write a book, or start a business.
Jerry: (smiling) What kind of business? The Scratch-Off Emporium?
Kramer: (laughing) Hey, that's not a bad idea!
[Scene closes with Kramer and Jerry laughing as the scene fades to black.]
Dead Comment
There is some sort of intersection between A Show About Nothing and an AI that creates empty responses from everything.
INT. MONK'S CAFE - DAY
Jerry, George, and Elaine are sitting at a table. Kramer enters and sits down.
Kramer: Hey, guys.
Jerry: Hey, what's up, Kramer?
Kramer: I've been having some trouble with this new Microsoft Teams thing at work. I need to use it for a video conference but I don't know how.
George: (sarcastically) Oh no, not Microsoft Teams. That's the end of the world.
Elaine: (laughing) Come on, George. It's not that bad.
Jerry: Yeah, it's not rocket science, Kramer. Just click on the icon, join the meeting, and turn on your webcam.
Kramer: (frustrated) I've tried that, Jerry. But then all these different tabs and options pop up and I don't know what to do.
Elaine: (sympathetically) It can be overwhelming at first. But just take it one step at a time and you'll figure it out.
Kramer: (sighing) I guess you're right.
Jerry: (joking) And if all else fails, just hold up a piece of paper with your face on it to the webcam.
(audience laughs)
George: (serious) Actually, that's not a bad idea.
(audience laughs)
Kramer: (smiling) Thanks for the advice, guys. I'll give it another try.
(Kramer exits the cafe)
Jerry: (to George and Elaine) I think Kramer is going to have a tough time with Microsoft Teams.
Elaine: (laughing) Oh, I have no doubt.
(audience laughs)
(end scene)
(pause for applause)
*Is that a thing? I don't think I've seen that where I am
[1]https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/
https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/10p8yk3/how_patheti...
This is the future for many future lonely people, some may not even realize it (AI).
For anyone else who might be dismissing it for similar reasons: its not about AI, its about relationships, and it is really good.
The quality of the content is still crap, but that will improve with time. And the audience getting dumber to think it’s fine will speed up the process.
Amazing
It's very meta because of course when you say it out loud it does sound horribly boring just like the NBC guy says. But the Seinfeld audience is aware that the Seinfeld characters (now the ones writing a sitcom about their personal experiences) actually experienced this situation, and to the Seinfeld audience, it was actually a very funny episode, therefore realizing that the Jerry audience would also find it funny.
That would really ruffle some feathers.”
So like, the "obvious problem" with this content for Seinfeld is the "acting" (care of the TTS engine) sucks. Honestly, are the scripts bad? Maybe, sure! But actors actually do a job that can sometimes be ignored by filling in all of the subtle details that make the character the character and even then make awkward interactions suddenly "work".
In the extended work from the Google AI on Stargate, what they did was get some people from the actual cast of the show to be willing to do a table read of the AI-generated scripts (and the AI was then told to limit what it generated to using the actors they had).
And OMG sometimes it was hilarious nonsense and yet it was FUN, because the actors were kind of trying to make it all work, and they were able to lean on their backgrounds doing those characters for a decade and all of the hard-ish stuff of comedic timing but also the easy-ish stuff of how a basic human interaction works.
When we get to the point of being able to have AI actors easily pull off some of those things--having text to speech that infers enough context to know the correct emotions to apply in addition to the appropriate timing and stress as opposed to merely the correct pronunciation (which is always where we seem to be working, practically)--this stuff is going to rock, and it will be scary how well even shitty scripts do (as it isn't like many sitcoms--not saying Seinfeld, but you can easily scrape the bottom of the barrel on formulaic shows people have pumped out--have very good writing to begin with).
One to generate the 3d scene. One for the lighting. Three for cameras. One for each actor acting out the given script along with a set amount of "improvising" and "randomness", one to generate background royalty free music based on the emotional context of the scene, one to serve as a Foley artist for environment sounds.
The equivalent computer power of a medium sized bitcoin farm running everything with the only humans being the writers, the IT people running the systems, a director watching each take as it is rendered live to pick the best ones, and an editor to slap all of the takes together.
That's probably technically possible now, if not actually implemented.
Another 15 years or so and kids will be rendering full movies in the basement and watching them with their friends.
One for each hand to maintain the appropriate number of fingers.
The animation style is pretty delightful.
gg, RIP Devil.
[1]: https://thenewstack.io/google-homes-api-spawned-seebotschat-...
RUINED/SAVED
What are your future plans for the project? Are you considering using GPT in your scripts? Any plans to replace the TTS engine?