<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>comex</author><text>Google is hardly a good actor here.  They just announced Gemini 1.5 along with a &amp;quot;technical report&amp;quot; [1] whose entire description of the model architecture is: &amp;quot;Gemini 1.5 Pro is a sparse mixture-of-expert (MoE) Transformer-based model&amp;quot;.  Followed by a list of papers that it &amp;quot;builds on&amp;quot;, followed by a definition of MoE.  I suppose that&amp;#x27;s more than OpenAI gave in their GPT-4 technical report.  But not by much!&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;storage.googleapis.com&amp;#x2F;deepmind-media&amp;#x2F;gemini&amp;#x2F;gemini_v1_5_report.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;storage.googleapis.com&amp;#x2F;deepmind-media&amp;#x2F;gemini&amp;#x2F;gemini_...&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>gerash</author><text>When others create text to video systems (eg. Lumiere from Google) they publish the research (eg. &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;arxiv.org&amp;#x2F;pdf&amp;#x2F;2401.12945.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;arxiv.org&amp;#x2F;pdf&amp;#x2F;2401.12945.pdf&lt;/a&gt;). Open AI is all about commercialization. I don&amp;#x27;t like their attitude</text></item><item><author>crazygringo</author><text>This is insane. But I&amp;#x27;m impressed most of all by the quality of &lt;i&gt;motion&lt;/i&gt;. I&amp;#x27;ve quite simply &lt;i&gt;never seen convincing computer-generated motion before&lt;/i&gt;. Just look at the way the wooly mammoths connect with the ground, and their lumbering mass feels real.&lt;p&gt;Motion-capture works fine because that&amp;#x27;s real motion, but every time people try to animate humans and animals, even in big-budget CGI movies, it&amp;#x27;s always ultimately obviously fake. There are so many subtle things that happen in terms of acceleration and deceleration of all of the different parts of an organism, that no animator ever gets it 100% right. No animation &lt;i&gt;algorithm&lt;/i&gt; gets it to a point where it&amp;#x27;s believable, just where it&amp;#x27;s &amp;quot;less bad&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;But these videos seem to be getting it entirely believable for both people and animals. Which is &lt;i&gt;wild&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;p&gt;And then of course, not to mention that these are entirely believable 3D spaces, with seemingly full object permanence. As opposed to other efforts I&amp;#x27;ve seen which are basically briefly animating a 2D scene to make it seem vaguely 3D.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Sora: Creating video from text</title><url>https://openai.com/sora</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>jstummbillig</author><text>Not to be overly cute, but if the cutting edge research you do is maybe changing the world fundamentally, forever, guarding that tech should be really, really, really far up your list of priorities and everyone else should be really happy about your priorities.&lt;p&gt;And that should probably take precedence over the semantics of your moniker, every single time (even if hn continues to be super sour about it)</text><parent_chain><item><author>gerash</author><text>When others create text to video systems (eg. Lumiere from Google) they publish the research (eg. &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;arxiv.org&amp;#x2F;pdf&amp;#x2F;2401.12945.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;arxiv.org&amp;#x2F;pdf&amp;#x2F;2401.12945.pdf&lt;/a&gt;). Open AI is all about commercialization. I don&amp;#x27;t like their attitude</text></item><item><author>crazygringo</author><text>This is insane. But I&amp;#x27;m impressed most of all by the quality of &lt;i&gt;motion&lt;/i&gt;. I&amp;#x27;ve quite simply &lt;i&gt;never seen convincing computer-generated motion before&lt;/i&gt;. Just look at the way the wooly mammoths connect with the ground, and their lumbering mass feels real.&lt;p&gt;Motion-capture works fine because that&amp;#x27;s real motion, but every time people try to animate humans and animals, even in big-budget CGI movies, it&amp;#x27;s always ultimately obviously fake. There are so many subtle things that happen in terms of acceleration and deceleration of all of the different parts of an organism, that no animator ever gets it 100% right. No animation &lt;i&gt;algorithm&lt;/i&gt; gets it to a point where it&amp;#x27;s believable, just where it&amp;#x27;s &amp;quot;less bad&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;But these videos seem to be getting it entirely believable for both people and animals. Which is &lt;i&gt;wild&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;p&gt;And then of course, not to mention that these are entirely believable 3D spaces, with seemingly full object permanence. As opposed to other efforts I&amp;#x27;ve seen which are basically briefly animating a 2D scene to make it seem vaguely 3D.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Sora: Creating video from text</title><url>https://openai.com/sora</url></story>