The Oscars just banned AI from winning acting and writing awards

ZZeidJ about 4 hours ago 47 commentsRead Article on gizmodo.com

FR version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

88% Positive

Analyzed from 719 words in the discussion.

Discussion (47 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

Papazsazsa•about 3 hours ago

Good. The intangibles of art are undeniable.

- emotional connection

- aesthetics

- zeitgeist

- lived experience

- artist journey

You're free to fall in love with your sexbot, but it's still just jerking off.

ejje•about 3 hours ago

Shhh you’re going to upset a lot of people on here who are depressed and want others to feel like them!

_alternator_•about 3 hours ago

And what is falling in love with an actor? Not jerking off?

spankibalt•about 3 hours ago

Obvious decision for any institution with at least a modicum of artistic self-respect.

jmp1062•about 3 hours ago

agreed, as AI is more widely adopted in cinematography i assume they will start adding categories specifically for it... hate the idea of them ever competing directly against actual humans performing

dylan604•about 3 hours ago

They already have categories for animation and post visual effects. They just don't necessarily show those awards during the broadcast

jedberg•about 3 hours ago

Given the latest court ruling in March that AI works can't be copyrighted, this makes a lot of sense. The movie itself can't be copyrighted if it uses AI (although there is still some unresolved issues around how much AI).

chungusamongus•about 3 hours ago

Hah, no. Just because AI was employed in the production to some extent doesn't mean it can't be copyrighted. It is not so black and white. You are not describing the situation accurately.

jedberg•about 3 hours ago

I literally said: "although there is still some unresolved issues around how much AI"

Which is really the crux of the issue.

0x3f•about 4 hours ago

Obviously just performative signalling that doesn't really do much. You can't definitively tell if AI was used, so the rule can never realistically be enforced.

Then again, the Oscars are surely almost entirely vibes based anyway. So it's hardly some internally consistent system of merit in the first place.

happytoexplain•about 3 hours ago

I wish we could stop the slide of the term "performative" into meaninglessness.

Just because something is hard or even impossible to enforce, doesn't mean you don't state that it is not allowed and that there are consequences for being caught. That's a common fallacy that overly engineering-minded people fall into.

We're humans. We care about things. There is nothing strange about me asking you not to do something that I can't stop you from doing.

0x3f•about 3 hours ago

How are there consequences for being caught if it's impossible to detect?

Moreover, why stop here? There are many great rules that are impossible to enforce. Why not a rule that the author isn't allowed to have any racist thoughts when writing the material?

We can't read minds, but it sure is a nice thing to care about, don't you think?

chungusamongus•about 3 hours ago

There is absolutely no fallacy in the statement you're responding to. Laws are meaningless if they cannot be consistently enforced.

AndrewDucker•about 3 hours ago

Actually, laws can be really effective even if they are only enforced intermittently.

happytoexplain•about 3 hours ago

That just doesn't follow.

sebastiennight•about 3 hours ago

I guess the Best Visual Effects category is going to be tough to judge, but don't you think it might be quite hard to win the Best Actress Academy Award if your AI-generated heroine can't come get the trophy?

Also, "truth" is a thing that exists, and just because you can't always tell if somebody cheated the rules or not, does not mean the rules are "performative signalling".

frollogaston•about 3 hours ago

It prevents anyone from blatantly using AI. If they want to use it anyway and risk getting found out, sure. That's still a big difference.

0x3f•about 3 hours ago

Can you explain how an Oscar-worthy piece of writing would somehow be able to contain blatant AI-generated content? How would it have already passed the good-enough-for-an-Oscar filter?

userbinator•about 3 hours ago

The younger generation also increasingly pays less attention to traditional mainstream entertainment and media, as now they can create more of it with AI.

Edit: funny to see the anti-AI crowd showing up again, how predictable... you can downvote but you can't stop the truth! Legacy entertainment is dying, and will soon become irrelevant.

NicuCalcea•about 3 hours ago

You can't definitively tell if athletes are doping, or students are cheating, it should then be allowed.

0x3f•about 3 hours ago

It's much easier to tell if athletes are doping than to 'detect' AI in text that's already Oscar-for-writing level good. I would suggest the latter is quite literally impossible.

jedimastert•about 3 hours ago

I would be surprised if it weren't already de facto banned, like how motion capture performances are essentially banned from Best Actor/Actress awards

_aavaa_•about 3 hours ago

Why should motion capture be banned from those awards?

jedimastert•about 3 hours ago

I didn't say should, I said are.

The rationale (which, again, I'm not arguing for or against) is that mocap performances are not strictly speaking totally the actors, because mocap has to be cleaned and can be (and very often is) edited and tweaked after the fact by animators. Not to mention there are often required liberties taken because a model cannot line up one to one with an actor anatomically.

In a sense, mocap performances are done by a team of animators where one animator puppeted a model in real time.

chuckadams•about 3 hours ago

I don't know, but Andy Serkis was robbed of a Best Supporting Actor nomination because Gollum was regarded as "just a CG Character".

guitarlimeo•about 3 hours ago

Half of Andy Serkis' job portraying Gollum was done by animators, even though Serkis provided the basic facial expressions.

I would've given him the best voice acting award though.

andsoitis•about 2 hours ago

Someone should tell Valerie Cherish.

SilverElfin•about 2 hours ago

The Oscars and Hollywood are already quite irrelevant. Looking down on AI and its potential to produce better entertainment is just a sign that they’re scared of its potential.

ekjhgkejhgk•about 3 hours ago

Remember when they tried to ban computers from winning best special effects? Tron, famously.