This is a video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World.
This video is a CreepyPasta story I wrote and narrated myself about a former landlord who continues to carry out his work in Hell. Enjoy!
Have you heard of Tilly Norwood? She’s a beautiful young actress who is just starting to make her presence felt in Hollywood. She hasn’t been in much, but she’s already negotiating with talent agents to get bigger roles.
There’s just one major issue. Tilly Norwood isn’t a real person. She’s an entirely AI-generated persona.
Naturally, that doesn’t sit well with real life actors and unions. There is already a concerted effort to prevent Tilly Norwood from being cast in anything beyond your typical AI slop content. I completely understand this sentiment. I don’t blame anyone who works in Hollywood for being concerned about this. However, having covered the rise in AI for years, I’m comfortable making this prediction.
Tilly Norwood will eventually be cast in major movies and TV shows.
Other AI actors like her will be cast, as well.
Traditional actors and actresses will hate it. A sizable chunk of the audience will hate it as well. But this is going to happen. It was always going to happen the moment generative AI reached a certain level of refinement. A big reason for that involves money, as tends to be the case in Hollywood and most other industries. But there’s another reason that’s worth highlighting.
Dollar for dollar, movies and TV shows are getting more expensive to produce. This isn’t just due to inflation, unions, and the “personalities” that tend to comes with Hollywood. The logistics involved with making media has become bloated and inefficient. We’re no longer in an era in which media can only go through certain channels, be it TV and movie theaters. Thanks to streaming media, as well as online content like YouTube and Tiktok, the competition for eyeballs has never been greater.
Unless you’re a big budget blockbuster with a massive distribution network, such as Disney or Warner Bros., it’s harder to make content that turns a profit. The scale, resources, and personnel required to produce a movie or show is such that it’s limiting. Add to that the general enshitification of streaming media and the current model for producing content just isn’t sustainable.
Generative AI, as much as it is derided, offers a significant cost advantage. On top of that, an AI actor or actress is less likely to get accused of harassment, arrested for public intoxication, or go on some anti-sematic rant during a routine traffic stop. And for certain Hollywood agents, you can’t put a price on that kind of assurance.
But the question remains. Will audiences accept AI actors? Will the content they produce actually be worth watching?
A lot of people will probably refuse to watch anything with Tilly Norwood or anything like her out of principle. But what happens when AI gets to a point where it’s hard to tell if a person is AI generated? There are already AI tools like SORA and Veo3 that make extremely realistic videos of people who look and sound real. This is one element of AI that is not in the distant future. It’s here and it’s evolving fast.
It’s not yet clear what kind of career Tilly Norwood will have. She may never show up in anything mainstream. But like it or not, she marks the first step in a new trend with AI. We don’t know where it will lead. Hollywood is already undergoing significant change. Technology like this is only going to accelerate that change in ways we can’t imagine.
Filed under Artificial Intelligence, movies, technology, television
He’s doing it again! AI Jay Sherman is back and critical as ever. The “The Critic” was cancelled in the mid-90s, but the power of AI keeps his critical spirit alive. So today, I have Jay review “Dragonball Evolution.” Honestly, I feel bad for giving him this one. This is one of the worst movies of the past 30 years. But if ever there was a movie that deserves to be torn to shreds, it’s this one. Enjoy!
Filed under AI Art, Artificial Intelligence, television
When I was a student in high school, the internet was just starting to mature. More and more people were able to access it. Teachers and students alike began using it. Initially, it was a novelty. But once certain sites and programs emerged, namely Wikipedia, it garnered serious concern among teachers and administrators.
I still remember multiple teachers advising us to not use Wikipedia for any assignment. A few even warned us that, if they found out we just copied text from it, then that would result in an immediate failing grade.
As for the administrators, their concern was that it would completely undermine the traditional process for doing research. That usually involved going to a library, searching for the relevant books, sifting through those books, and taking detailed notes on the information within.
Yes, that process was cumbersome and archaic.
Yes, I regularly utilized that process.
Yes, it sucked as much as you think.
Eventually, the attitude shifted. When I was in my second year of college, more and more of my professors changed their attitude towards using sites like Wikipedia. They saw the value in using it to teach a subject. They still advised students to avoid using it as a sole reference point. But they didn’t actively deter or punish students from using it.
I bring this up because it seems a new generation of students and teachers is dealing with a similar situation with AI. And even though I’m not in school anymore, I can already surmise that this will be far more impactful than Wikipedia ever was. AI has already changed the way students and schools approach homework. It’s also changing the way teachers are approaching teaching, in general.
Now, it’s still too early to know whether AI will be a net benefit or a net negative with respect to educating students. But the overall sentiment towards AI, at least among teachers, is mostly negative. The reasons for this attitude vary, but it’s not that different from the reasons my old teachers gave for discouraging Wikipedia.
It’s doing too much of the work for the students. It’s essentially doing the thinking for them in terms summarizing the material, producing essays, or answering questions. The concern is that it’ll hinder students’ ability to develop critical thinking skills. Because if they can just let the AI do the work for them, why bother? The AI can do what they otherwise would’ve done in seconds.
I certainly don’t doubt that this concern is sincere. I have family members and close relatives who work as teachers. This is going to affect them, regardless of their attitudes towards AI. I imagine numerous teachers, schools, and administrators are going to resist utilizing this technology at every turn. Others will embrace it to the utmost because it could potentially make their jobs easier. Given the inherent stresses of teaching children at any age, could you honestly blame them?
To both those groups of educators, as well as the students currently coming of age, I have a message that I’d like to impart. And should I ever have kids of my own, I suspect this message will affect them too.
Embracing AI will ultimately be more productive than resisting it.
It’s not a warning or advice. It’s just a simple statement. I’m not just saying it because I generally support the development of AI. I’m simply speaking from experience.
That experience is heavily influenced by the fact that I was generally miserable in school. I did not care much for middle school or high school. And I certainly wouldn’t say that I learned as much as I’d hoped during that experience. If anything, the way school went about teaching me just didn’t work. The only thing I ever “learned” in school was how to pass tests. That’s not the same as learning something.
In college, things were different. Yes, there were still tests and exams to study for. However, there was more freedom and flexibility to learn about the things that interested me. That helped make college an overall better experience while helping me develop skills that served me well in my adult life.
But in any case, I can also say without reservation that if ChatGPT had been available to me, I definitely would’ve used it. It would’ve been very helpful in terms of summarizing notes, chapters in a textbook, or breaking down certain concepts I didn’t understand. And yes, I probably would’ve used it to help me with my homework, polish my essays, or study for exams. Would that have made me less knowledgeable? Would I have ended up learning less, as a result?
I honestly don’t think so. Because if I’m interested in something, I’ll seek out more information that’s beyond the assignment. I’ll look for things outside the textbook or the syllabus. And if that ends up helping me with an exam or a lecture, then that’s just a bonus.
I suspect there are plenty of other kids like that. Kids, in general, are pretty curious. If they’re interested in something, they’ll pursue it. Sometimes, teachers don’t have the time, energy, or willingness to teach them beyond what the school allows or assigns. Other times, parents aren’t able to teach them because they either don’t know enough about it or just don’t have the time.
AI can fill that gap that will only widen as more schools struggle to find capable teachers. Given how bureaucratic the education system is, especially in America, there aren’t many feasible options outside of AI. Resisting it won’t work in the long run. Resisting technology of any kind rarely works.
It may even get to a point where students primarily learn major skills through AI. It’s already happening on a small scale in some areas. That trend is likely to accelerate as AI continues to improve. The incentives are in place. The need is certainly there. There may be those who don’t like the idea of kids being taught primarily by a non-human AI. They may have concerns that are entirely warranted.
But in the end, AI is here to stay. It’s capable of filling an important need at a time when knowledge, education, and critical thinking skills have never been more important. If the current education system cannot meet that demand, then we’ll need tools like AI. Without it, the students will ultimately pay the price.
Filed under Artificial Intelligence
This is a video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World.
When it comes to romantic sub-plots, certain pairings are obvious. But others are a lot less certain. In King of the Hill, one of the most enduring sub-plots involved Bobby and Connie.
From the original series and into the 2025 revival, these two have shared a unique bond over the years. Sometimes, it’s romantic. Sometimes, it’s pure friendship. But overall, what’s their endgame? Are they destined to be?
I honestly don’t know, but I try to break it down in this video. Enjoy!
Filed under Jack's World, NFL, YouTube
He’s doing it again! AI Jay Sherman is back and critical as ever. The “The Critic” was cancelled in the mid-90s, but the power of AI keeps his critical spirit alive. So today, I decided to give Jay a chance to review “The Purge.” This movie spawned multiple sequels, as well as a TV series. But how does it hold up? Does it stink or was it worthy of so many spin-offs? I’ll let Jay decide. Enjoy!
Filed under AI Art, Artificial Intelligence, television
I remember exactly where I was on September 11th, 2001.
I also remember where I was when I first heard about the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Talk to anyone who was alive on that day and chances are they’ll have a story. They can recount where they were, how they found out, and the plethora of emotions they experienced. There’s no question that this was a historic event that traumatized a generation. Even those born after the events of 9/11 have felt that trauma. And people around my age often agree.
After this day, America was never the same. The world was never the same. Many argue that things have gotten progressively worse since that day. And honestly, I’m inclined to agree.
However, the events of September 11th, 2001, were not America’s first experience with terrorist attacks. There have been others, but none were as destructive or as deadly. That doesn’t negate the tragedy and the loss of human life. But they do tend to get lost in terms of a larger historical context.
But there’s one particular terror attack that has been more overshadowed than most. It was deadly. It was traumatizing. And it scarred countless people for years to come.
On April 19th, 1995, a truck bomb was detonated in downtown Oklahoma City just outside the Alfred P. Murrah building. It ended up killing 168 people and injured nearly 700 more. And some of those deaths were young children who had been at the daycare center operating within the building.
It was, by every measure, a horrific attack. Before 9/11, it was the deadliest terrorist attack on American soil. While I don’t remember exactly where I was on that day, I still remember it being a big deal. Even though I don’t live anywhere near Oklahoma City, my school and my community held vigils. We even had this elaborate tree on which we placed cards commemorating the victims.
For weeks and months after this event, there was a great deal of fear and panic. If one truck bomb could do this kind of damage, what’s to stop other similar attacks? And if it came from some well-funded terror cell operating internationally, how could we possibly feel safe?
But then, the story surrounding Oklahoma City shifted when federal authorities identified the primary suspect. It was not some terrorist group who had trained overseas. It was not an operation conducted by a rogue nation or some anti-American government. It was perpetrated by a white American man named Timothy McVeigh.
He was not Osama Bin Ladin or Saddam Hussain. He was an all-American man born in upstate New York. He’d also served in the military and fought in the first Gulf War. He did not fit the image of a stone-cold terrorist. He did not match the narrative that most Americans surmised from such a devastating attack. The idea that a white male American veteran would commit a terrorist attack against his own country wasn’t just unthinkable. It made no sense.
Now, McVeigh did have his own twisted reasons for carrying out this attack. He was an extreme reactionary, having fallen in with militant right-wing organizations that had been operating in America for decades. They’re anti-government, anti-liberal, pro-gun, and often racist. I won’t delve too much into the details surrounding McVeigh’s ideology. But it’s disturbing in terms of how mainstream it still is in modern right-wing groups.
And I think it’s because of those parallels that the Oklahoma City bombing got completely overshadowed after 9/11. Because that terror attack, in addition to having a higher death toll, better fit the narrative that most Americans assume. The perpetrators weren’t homegrown. They were all foreign born, having embraced a radical religious ideology that is not at all mainstream in the United States.
It’s much easier to frame terrorists like that in a typical good versus evil dynamic. And it was much easier for the recourse that followed to play out. Unlike Oklahoma City, the 9/11 attacks prompted a quick response against the Taliban, who had harbored Al-Quida. It allowed the news media to play endless stories about America striking back against the evil foreign terrorists who dared to strike our country and kill our citizens.
That certainly made for a better narrative. But a better narrative also left little room for nuance. There’s no question that what happened on 9/11 was an atrocity. And that atrocity warranted a response. But whereas American committed themselves to never forgetting the events of that fateful day, they seem all too willing to forget about the Oklahoma City bombing.
One is simple in that it was an outside force who attacked us.
The other is complicated because it came from a fellow American who’d been radicalized by a dangerous, homegrown ideology.
One requires a forceful response on a foreign land. The other requires introspection and a deeper understanding of what’s happening within certain parts of American culture. Naturally, the recourse that requires less thinking is going to win out. That doesn’t make it right or wrong. But it does obscure our collective perceptions.
I don’t doubt that there’s a real threat posed by Islamic terrorists. Subsequent attacks all over the world after 9/11 have demonstrated that. However, in terms of likelihood and proximity, most Americans are far more likely to be attacked by an extremist in the mold of Timothy McVeigh.
I don’t even need to travel very far to encounter people who share his extremism. If I were to drive about an hour from my house into some of the more rural parts of my region, I’ll come across communities that are deeply conservative and extremely reactionary. Get any one of them talking about the government, gun control, or anyone whose political leanings are slightly to the left of Ronald Ragean, and they’ll seethe with a hatred that is neither rational nor justified.
I’ve had to deal with these people when they are agitated. They are dangerous in their own right. And I’m a lot more wary of them than I am of any foreign-born terror threat. But if I were to articulate this to them or even others who share my leanings, and chances are I’ll get some strange looks. I might even be attacked for thinking my fellow Americans are a greater threat than foreign terrorists.
But I still consider myself a proud American. I want my country to succeed. And I want us to confront any and all threats, be they foreign or domestic. The Oklahoma City bombing on April 19th, 1995, proved that the domestic threat is very real, just as September 11th, 2001, proved that the foreign threat is very real.
Yet we always fear one more than the other. And we’ve committed to never forgetting one while eagerly ignoring the other. But we shouldn’t. If we, as Americans, are to truly become the great country we strive to be, we must remember and learn from both traumatic events, especially if the lessons from one are a lot harder to swallow than others.
Filed under Current Events, politics
This is a video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World.
Marvel’s rebooted Ultimate Universe is very distinct from its predecessor, as well as the mainline 616 universe. But as this world has unfolded, those distinctions have evolved in a very particular way.
In a world where the greatest evil are the institutions and authorities set up by the Maker, what are the heroes of this universe to do? They can’t stop at saving the day.
They can’t stop at defeating the bad guys. They must be revolutionaries in a very particular sense. And that’s something we haven’t gotten in superhero comics in quite some time. Enjoy!
Filed under Jack's World, NFL, YouTube