It’s just a derpy monster cat who’s a reference to Korean paintings and also indicates that monsters from beyond the Honmoon aren’t necessarily inherently evil.
(Netflix) K-POP DEMON HUNTERS
- Thread starter jian
- Start date
Nothing is just for kids. Not this, not Lego, not ice cream, not cartoons, not video games.
MoonSong
Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
Specially not Lego, not with these prices.
Retros_x
Hero
I watched it with my GF - we liked it and we still catch each other humming the songs, but I thought it was a bit overhyped. It was ok and entertaining, but once the freshness of the premise cooled off it felt like a very traditional tropey story and movie. I liked some of the visual gags especially in the first half a lot (the popcorn eyes were so funny, we laughed our asses off in that scene), but once the story gets "serious" the movie becomes honestly a bit boring to me. I was also a bit sad that the other two members of the band were just side characters, thought they all three were main characters, but they quickly get sent to the sideline.
Ruin Explorer
Legend
I think this is a straightforward case of projecting your experience on to others, especially with the rather bold "top professional" qualifier lol.
IT (particularly support-type IT) is an ideal case where AI is uniquely useful because it's read all the easily-accessible manuals and discussions and fixes and so on, and all of GitHub, and you often need summarized information about unfamiliar products or processes. But even in IT there are many products you can be working with where AI is simply worthless because it's not aware of them, or it's unable to separate information relating to them from information relating to other products. Like, I work with three products that AI simply cannot give helpful answers about. One of them it barely even knows exists, despite it being the biggest product in the field. I'd love it if ChatGPT did have answers on that, but it doesn't (I notice they are modifying how the documentation is available, I think so it will be in future). On the rare occasions I have to come up with a truly novel-to-me Excel query or something it's great! I have colleagues who have products and/or roles where it's useful constantly. Others where it rarely is. It's not generally a reflection on their skill or whether they're "top professionals" lol, it's a reflection on their role.
As for chat queries vs. Google searches, given Google forces AI on you, like it or not, that's hardly a viable claim, and it's obviously not the same thing as using generative AI to create code, let alone images or the like.
kermit4karate
Adventurer
Ha! No. My experience professionally with AI in my circle is expansive, spans dozens of partner companies and literally tens of thousands of individuals working in multiple technical fields across multiple countries.
Software development, business intelligence analysis, cloud computing, network engineering and manufacturing -- if anyone thinks the trillions of dollars of investment globally pouring into AI isn't reflected in its use by regular people in their day-to-day work, they aren't paying attention.
Just one single AI company alone, OpenAI, makers of ChatGPT, has 500 million users per week and earns $300 million per month from paid subscribers at $20/month apiece. They've earned more in one year than the entire TTRPG industry has over the past 50 ($300 billion, 500 million users, and no time to enjoy it: The sharks are circling OpenAI).
That's from ONE company. Five years ago the industry didn't even exist. Now it's multi-trillion-dollar and powering many of the most valuable companies on earth, including Nvidia, the MOST valuable company on the planet with a $4.28 trillion market cap. That makes it worth more than all but a handful of countries on earth -- one company.
Believe me (or choose not to), but yes, a lot of people are using AI professionally now.
Ruin Explorer
Legend
I mean, that's nice but $300m/month is a fraction of their costs, as Altman himself was pointing out recently whilst begging for more investment and muttering darkly about "bubbles". It's also not really that much money given how widely used it is, let alone how much has been poured into it ($3.6bn vs. say, Saleforce's $35bn - and I don't think Saleforce had even 5% of the investment poured into ChatGPT).Ha! No. My experience professionally with AI in my circle is expansive, spans dozens of partner companies and literally tens of thousands of individuals working in multiple technical fields across multiple countries.
Software development, business intelligence analysis, cloud computing, network engineering and manufacturing -- if anyone thinks the trillions of dollars of investment globally pouring into AI isn't reflected in its use by regular people in their day-to-day work, they aren't paying attention.
Just one single AI company alone, OpenAI, makers of ChatGPT, has 500 million users per week and earns $300 million per month from paid subscribers at $20/month apiece. They've earned more in one year than the entire TTRPG industry has over the past 50 ($300 billion, 500 million users, and no time to enjoy it: The sharks are circling OpenAI).
That's from ONE company. Five years ago the industry didn't even exist. Now it's multi-trillion-dollar and powering many of the most valuable companies on earth, including Nvidia, the MOST valuable company on the planet with a $4.28 trillion market cap. That makes it worth more than all but a handful of countries on earth -- one company.
Believe me (or choose not to), but yes, a lot of people are using AI professionally now.
I expect we'll see a bit of divider as costs are ratcheted up very steeply for users making "serious" use of AI where it can have a measurable and significant benefit to the business, and the vast majority of users who are just it as a slight shortcut to looking up how to do simple tasks may be booted to even more simplified versions (indeed part of 5.0's key design was to boot most queries to more simplistic and often kinda-rubbish models, some of which were frankly outperformed by a Google search, especially before they enshittified Google search).
I notice nothing you're saying there actually contradicts what I said either.
As for "more money in 1 year than 50 years of the TTRPG" industry, were you trying to find the lowest possible bar lol? I work for a world top 10 law firm and we have more than 12x $300m revenue lol so that'd also be true of us? At least try and find a boast that doesn't sound like "I HAVE THE STRENGTH OF 10 NEWBORN BABIES!!!".
kermit4karate
Adventurer
We simply don't agree then. I stand behind my statement about the top professionals who worked on the digital side on this film indubitably using AI to help produce it. I do not believe that any top digital creatives of the caliber that worked on this film aren't using AI to enhance their output. No chance, sorry. They'd be fools not to.
I get how someone may not want something like that to be true because AI is unnerving and threatening, but it is what it is IMO.
Ruin Explorer
Legend
I think this is kind of funny, because you appear superficially to know so little about digital animation that you can't even describe how they'd be using beyond "Well maybe they use ChatGPT instead of Googling stuff!" and like, yeah, maybe. Last time I had an argument like this it was about static digital art and it rapidly emerged the person literally did not comprehend how digital art was produced, like they didn't understand the process on the most basic level, a level of understanding you could acquire simply by yourself producing some digital art using GIMP or the like. It's fun to use words like "indubitably" but like, it helps to have a more specific basis when claiming that kind of degree of certainty. They'd be fools not to use it to do what exactly?
If all you're saying is "sometimes people use ChatGPT instead of Google!", well, sure. I certainly do if it's something where ChatGPT has eaten all the manuals and discussions and can regurgitate useful bits on command. But it seems like you think there's more to it than that?
