How artificial intelligence is transforming the Metaverse platform and challenging the creators who make a living from it

Above: An encounter with BunnyGPT, one of the first NPCs connected to OpenAI’s LLM.

Read Part 1, ‘Will artificial intelligence completely transform culture and intellectual work?’

After discussing how AI could change movies and music, Adam Frisby and I discussed how AI could change the future of the metaverse. Adam, CEO of Sine Wave Entertainment (creator of metaverse platform Sinespace) and author of Daum, is a topic we’ve both been thinking about for a long time. The birth of Second Life and Creating an important metaverse.

Wagner James Oh: What is the Metaverse platform like? How much will Gen AI change them? Roblox I know is already experimenting with this in graphics, but how much will the overall experience change in the next 10 years?

Adam Frisbee: maybe; A general rule of thumb is whether a large data set exists for the task being replaced. For the Metaverse platform, the main tasks creators perform are:

– 3D modeler

– Animator

– Texture Artist

– Leaguer

– Scripter

– Environment Artist/Level Designer

This is a position in the gaming industry, and it is similar to a virtual world. of them; There are already powerful, high-quality AI tools for animation.

Here are the 2018 tools (see below):

of (continued): In terms of the rest; Most of them are not yet complete. AI-created 3D models are still full of defects. AI texturing mostly produces garbage. AI programming/scripting is certainly almost done, but not quite there yet. Pretty. A lot of investment is being made. co-pilot You often get pretty good results.

So I would say "Don’t panic, yet."  

W.J.A.: Why on earth are you so embarrassed? Wouldn’t metaverse companies want to damage the ecosystem by adding AI programs that displace creative users?

of: 97% of users in virtual worlds do not create content. These are industry statistics from various virtual worlds. Of that 3%, 2% do things like remix content, creating new textures for other people’s models. 1% perform completely original creative work. I’m not making any value judgments here. I need to be very clear about that.

W.J.A.: Do you think AI will replace that 1%?

of: Probably eventually. I think there are two reasons

First, professional creators may end up displacing themselves.

It’s a well-known secret that many of the biggest brands in the virtual world are already outsourcing their 3D modeling to freelancers through sites like Upwork. Why do that if you have enough tools?

Second, once you have the tools and capabilities, how many of the 97% will eventually join the 1%?

CLO 3D (above) is a sister company to Marvelous Designer, a fashion modeling tool used on Sansar and other metaverse platforms.

W.J.A.: So, what advice would you give to creators like SL and Sinespace who now depend on these platforms for their livelihood?

of: 1) You are not alone. Most of the world will have to grapple with this problem. Numerous industries will be affected. This is a societal problem and needs to be resolved at the societal level.

2) I have some time. It will still take some time for AI to reach human levels in 3D. Then these are the tools to adopt. I would say about 2 to 5 years.

3) Think hard about how you can integrate this. The winners will be those who can adapt. Save time, create more, and market better with new workflows. The market is not disappearing, it is changing. Automobiles did not eliminate the transportation industry.

W.J.A.:. My prediction is that Gen AI on the Metaverse platform will mostly be used by casual user-generated content, i.e. regular users who want to create quick scenes, but will not replace the monetization ecosystem. 3D creators use Gen AI tools to save time, starting with the basics and then adding unique embellishments through their own work.

If corporations attempt to displace creative communities in a direct one-to-one manner, an uprising similar to what we saw with the WGA/SAG strike is likely. The best creators have large, passionate user communities supporting them, so this will be a platform-wide revolt. And like Hollywood, corporations will have no choice but to back down and agree to the terms of their human creators.

of: There are a few places I chose. Firstly, I think there is a need to add some glamor or a human touch. I think this is the difference between us, but I don’t see humans engaging beyond that. "request". The idea that AI will always produce fewer products and require a special human touch is a hypothetical conceit.

I think creators will adapt their tools to continue creating styles they like. However, the need to adjust the results will decrease as the underlying technology improves, and eventually it may not be necessary at all.

But it’s true that it’s on the platform. If a platform can’t operate without creators, it won’t bother them. Netflix won’t replace movie studios. Movie studios that use AI will replace those that don’t.

In this case, creators with AI will eventually dominate those without AI. Make it faster and more efficient with fewer resources.

Regular users will also adopt the tool. The platforms will probably support this, and empowering more creators is a big part of the virtual world. Users will appreciate these tools, but I don’t think they will be good enough to replace powerful creators for some time. The reality is that some people are naturally more creative, and people flock to those styles and trends.

See also: Instagram; also Scroll quickly here (That’s right. many It’s junk):

AI image generators have come a long way, and people are finding really creative ways to use them. Results are rarely adjusted after creation. The task is about input and adjusting prompts and weights.

W.J.A.: Especially in the case of avatar fashion, I believe that human elements and brand associations cannot be replaced by AI. For example, Blueberry is huge because her large customer base has a personal connection with her. Take a look at real fashion. There are companies in China and elsewhere knocking down the latest luxury brands with cheap copies. However, the brand still remains popular and successful because it creates and markets trends.

of: I agree. I believe there is a lot of power in running a good brand.

final thoughts

W.J.A.: Grandiose predictions about AI have consistently been proven wrong, and there is still no evidence that will change anytime soon, especially when it comes to human expression.

The SAG strike actually worked in the studio’s favor. Because there is no evidence that consumers actually want to pay for AI-only content.

Gen AI may become an important technology tool like Photoshop and Maya used to be, and that’s great, but there’s no reason to think it will materially replace the culture we cherish.

More importantly, technology is inevitable. Humans ultimately control it, and humans may collectively decide to control the abuse of Gen AI, as is already happening. And any AI prediction that ignores collective human behavior is doomed to failure.

of: take the side of the robot; All the grand AI predictions were premature. It’s not wrong.

Futurists like Asimov have long speculated what form it might take. I would say their biggest mistake was predicting that we would replace physical labor before intellectual labor.

There is nothing special about the human mind. We are a collection of neurons and chemicals. The idea that an algorithm that runs on squishy meat cannot run on silicon requires a true act of faith. The idea that robot creativity can never match human creativity requires a similar belief.

So to me, claims of human superiority ring hollow. What matters is the results. If we cannot distinguish between human-produced work and machine-produced work, is there a difference? Is the distinction important?

AI knows us better than we know ourselves. TikTok’s ability to hyper-target videos to you is better than the best marketing agencies in the world. Humans don’t understand what you want any better. It knows you better than you know yourself, and is at least more honest.

I see a backlash against TikTok, but I don’t see people not using it because of targeting.

AI has the potential to generate content using the same hypertargeting. The ability to create perfect content that will keep you and your friends entertained. We can work much cheaper and faster than the most nimble human production studios. Ultimately, a level of quality that no human can match.

The idea that humans would band together in some kind of boycott would require us to repudiate the entire 19th and 20th centuries. Previously, almost all types of products were produced by hand, but now this is no longer considered.

In the past, clothes were extremely expensive (The shirt is estimated to cost between $250 and $800.) We then automated weaving through looms. Ned Ludd famously opposed it., but in the end we chose cheaper and more accessible clothing. Now we are faced with the problem of producing it so cheaply that there is a surplus. Technology always wins in the long run.

In my opinion, the only valid argument is this: "The technology doesn’t really exist yet."; It’s not like that. But unless its orbit stops abruptly, it’s heading there quickly.

what do you think? Share your thoughts in the comments "Whose opinion do you agree with?" Survey next week!