×
I Flew Insta360’s First Drone With a 360-Degree Camera, and It’s DJI’s Worst Nightmare

I Flew Insta360’s First Drone With a 360-Degree Camera, and It’s DJI’s Worst Nightmare

Screw merely flying a drone; what if you were the drone? You’re a nimble robot buzzing over those rooted pedestrians far below. Above you is blue sky, below the dry ground, and all around you open expanse and a curving horizon. You can see it all, as if you were a head in a jar looking through an impossible dome. Insta360, a company that’s spearheaded 360-degree cameras as an alternative to today’s GoPros, got into drones the only way it knew how—by sticking twin, fish-eye lenses on an unmanned aerial vehicle. Yes, this lets you record all your surroundings at once, rather than just a single 16:9 box. The actual experience of flying the drone is more like you’re in a transparent globe, gliding over all.

Antigravity, a new subbrand of Insta360, let me take its prototype A1 drone for a spin at a high-speed go-kart track a few hours outside of Los Angeles. The best way to describe the company’s strange product is to break it up into three distinct parts. If I were to sum it up, it’s a 360-degree camera strapped to a drone, combined with an altered reality headset, and controlled via an old-school arcade light gun. The camera is closest in specs to Insta360’s own X5.

The Antigravity A1 offers an aerial experience unlike any I’ve tried. There’s nothing that comes close to the feeling of real-time video hitting my eyeballs whichever direction I look. There’s no pricing information yet, though Antigravity claims customers will have it in hand in January next year.

A Consumer Drone Like No Other

Insta360 Antigravity A1 360-degree drone
© Kyle Barr / Gizmodo

First off, there’s the A1 drone itself. It’s about the size of a DJI Air 3S with four propellers and automatic fold-out landing gear. It also weighs about the same as DJI’s drone at 249g, or 0.54 pounds, plus the arms fold in to make it slightly easier to carry around. If it weren’t for the two cameras on the top and on the bottom of the A1 drone, it would look like many similar products of its kind. What’s special about this design is that Antigravity managed to make the A1 “invisible” to both lenses. It means you won’t see any hint of the quadcopter itself, unless you catch a hint of your own shadow.

The controls are even more unique. The A1 uses a headset akin to DJI’s Goggles 3, but Antigravity placed a circular screen on the outside of the left lens that allows any onlookers to glimpse what you’re looking at. The first time I showed my colleagues the headset, they exclaimed I looked like the bug-faced Japanese superhero Kamen Rider. Inside the headset, you can freely look around 360 degrees and still see information pertaining to your speed, altitude, battery, and whether you’re currently recording.

If you’re filming, the device is capturing the full experience around you, so you don’t have to be looking in any one direction as you buzz around. There’s a small picture-in-picture display that pops up in your view if you’re not looking in the direction you’re flying. It’s helpful if you ever get distracted while in “Sport” mode and you forget that setting turns off automatic obstacle detection.

The missing piece is the controls, and it’s even more out of the box than the rest of the A1. Instead of a two-handed RC control with sticks, you’re given a handle with a few buttons on its face and a trigger to control speed. Inside the headset you’ll see a reticule that’s centered where you point the controls. Flying the A1 is strange, though; you’ll end up sticking the controller over your shoulder—as if you were blind firing—in order to fly backwards but keep looking forwards.

The combination of a pair of VR goggles on a drone isn’t completely unique. FPV, aka first-person view drones like the DJI Avata 2 combined with the DJI RC Motion 3, let you see your environment as you’re recording. These are nimble machines that you can spin, dive, or loop for those intense shots you can only get from an aerial vehicle. They’re also more difficult to use than your typical, straight-flying drone. A drone with a 360 camera could offer some of the same versatility without needing to put your expensive aerial device into perilous circumstances.

Still Working Out the Kinks

Insta360 Antigravity A1 360-degree drone
© Kyle Barr / Gizmodo

Flying around with such a bird’s-eye view also isn’t quite as picture-perfect. My time in LA was my second experience flying the A1. I previously ran it through Brooklyn, NY, on a misty afternoon where the streaming quality wasn’t quite good enough to make up for the droplets muddying my view. On the second time out, having multiple drones flying at once in such close proximity resulted in lag and a pixelated video quality. The third attempt was closest to seamless, though I shot all my footage at 5.2K resolution, rather than the max 8K. The image quality at this resolution isn’t detailed enough for a YouTube video beyond 1080p. Though let’s be honest, even 8K image quality still won’t look as clear and crisp coming from an action camera as what you’ll see in an Apple Vision Pro without extra time and attention.

It takes time to get used to the twin sticks of most drone controllers, and it takes more effort to get good enough to pilot aerial vehicles. The Antigravity A1 is more intuitive. You point in the direction you want to go, and the drone starts flying. That doesn’t mean it’s easy. The controller has a number of buttons that can start and stop recording, reset your view, and even control your orientation. The issue is you can’t see those controls when flying with the headset. After a few turns around the track, I had a general impression of where each button was, but I would still misclick on occasion. If you want to change the drone to Sports mode to unlock faster speeds, you’ll just have to feel around the controller’s handle until you can find it.

Even in Sports mode, the flight wasn’t as fast as you may expect from high-end FPV drones. Antigravity declined to offer specific specs about flight speed and max altitude, and all the team said was that they would be instituting flight zone limitations based on local regulations (DJI has taken flak for unblocking its geofencing tech in the past). Excusing the odd controller, the in-air experience was closest to flying a DJI Air 3S. You’re not exactly nimble, but you’re more than capable of flying in straight lines and hovering near the action. I could duck into relatively tight spaces, though even flying through a narrow tent felt harrowing with the pointer controls. This early version of the A1 is also much slower to turn than other drones. At various speeds, the drone would halt in the air as I turned my hand in a new direction. The issue was most noticeable when trying to bank when flying at top speed. Antigravity is still finagling the A1’s controls, and it has more than enough time to smooth out the feel and flight.

Traditionalists who would rather fly with twin thumbsticks are likely white-knuckling their traditional controllers looking at the A1’s flight stick. After receiving some feedback, Antigravity intimated it was working on a more traditional controller for launch after the A1 hits the scene. However, the company later clarified that plans for various control options at a later date are tenuous. So no matter what, users should expect they’ll need to go the full “immersive” route when the A1 hits the scene in January of next year. Additionally, Antigravity said it will get more feedback through a “co-creation project.” Drone fans can apply to check out the A1 and offer feedback. You can apply to the program through the company’s website.

So You Think You’re a 360 Footage Editor?

Insta360 Antigravity A1 360-degree drone
© Kyle Barr / Gizmodo

The Antigravity A1 can help you pull off shots that would be close to impossible on any other drone, even an FPV. A novice like myself could use keyframes to have the camera look upside down as you’re flying forward. You can easily tilt the footage to whatever orientation. The Insta360 Studio software makes it easy to add those 360 camera transitions to create a “tiny planet” effect made possible by the fish-eye lenses. Without that sense of rocking you find on other drone footage, the 360 camera shots may look odd until you create that sense of movement through eliminating the warping effect from the fish-eye lenses and adding keyframes to follow your subject or set up interesting shots.

I wouldn’t ever claim I’m anywhere close to a professional at editing footage, but spooling through 360 aerial shots is damn fun, especially knowing that it took very little effort to achieve it. The issue you’ll inevitably run up against is how to deal with the warped effect stemming from the unique camera sensor shape. Most modern 360 cameras can shoot in 8K resolution, but the raw footage still won’t be as crisp as you imagine it should be without some post-processing and professional editing. The studio software is still a work in progress, but in the end you should be able to take the A1’s footage into your favorite editing suite after you set up the keyframes in the Insta360 Studio.

The A1 drone is unique, and novelty often comes at a cost. Antigravity isn’t going to sell its parts piecemeal. The drone, controller, and headset will all come in the box together, and we can’t imagine it will be cheap. Insta360 wanted its drone brand’s first product to appeal to novices, amateurs, and enthusiasts alike. Beginners may not want to spend so much on their first drone, while experts may be disappointed by the control options. But let’s be frank, there’s nothing else like the Antigravity A1, at least until DJI inevitably sticks its new Osmo 360 camera onto a drone as well, whether or not you’ll be able to buy one in the U.S. with ongoing sanctions.

Full disclosure: Travel and lodging were paid by Insta360. Gizmodo did not guarantee any coverage as a condition of accepting the trip.

Source link
#Flew #Insta360s #Drone #360Degree #Camera #DJIs #Worst #Nightmare

Imagine you are the parent of an inquisitive seven-year-old who loves his family, playing baseball, and hanging out with his friends. It’s the life you’ve always wanted. And then the worst thing that ever could happen happens: A freak accident takes your son away. But as it turns out, you don’t have to live with the grief for long, because now there’s an AI company that can bring your kid back in the form of a robotic double that looks indistinguishable from a human.

This is the world that acclaimed director Hirokazu Kore-eda, who won the Palme d’Or for his 2018 feature Shoplifters, has created with his latest sci-fi drama, Sheep in the Box. It’s the type of story that might have seemed far-fetched a few years ago but feels less so as AI encroaches on every aspect of our lives. This is a tension Kore-eda is acutely aware of — so much so that he sat down with a robotics expert while he was writing the script to get some answers of his own. They told him that because of the robots overheating, “we would sooner have clones of humans than we would humanoid robots,” Kore-eda recounted.

But don’t let the robots fool you into thinking this isn’t a human film. Grief work is a common theme in Kore-eda’s vast filmography. Though it might be set in a near future, the core of Sheep in the Box is still a family learning how to move through their loss. And if we give ourselves permission to suspend disbelief and go on this journey, we might see ourselves in it too.

The Verge sat down with Hirokazu Kore-eda at Neon’s offices days before Sheep in the Box’s US debut. Speaking through an interpreter, Kore-eda tells all about writing and directing this picture, including what happened when he fed the script through ChatGPT.

This interview has been edited and condensed.

You’ve made so many films about grief. What have you learned about processing grief through making all this work?

What have I learned about grief? I think it’s that everyone experiences it differently. It’s very diverse. And when I made my first film, Maborosi, that was exactly about grief. And that was around the time that I read books by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, books on grief work. And I learned about the process of grief work and used that as a kind of framework for the film. However, it’s not as if grief linearly follows a specific process. So I would say that I’ve learned that it varies from person to person.

In Sheep in the Box, memories become information. There was something about that that felt a little unsettling or cold for me. How did it fit for you? How did it work for you?

I’m not sure I’ve been able to arrive at this fact through this film, but as I was filming, one thing that I was thinking about was that the memories that are input into the humanoid Kakeru are preselected by his parents. So it’s not really the same as memory as we experience it. It’s preselected data. I think that once memory is severed from our physical form, what we experience inside as memory, it’s not the same. It’s not the same when it’s input as data. It’s not the same as the things that we recall that stir up the emotions that make us human.

There’s so much noise about AI in our world right now. What made this theme feel so urgent for you to tackle?

In Japan, there’s a tremendous increase in various initiatives involving AI. When you get in the taxi, there’s a screen that’s constantly telling you of all these commercials for raising your rate of productivity through AI. But I was interested in the rise of AI used toward a kind of grief work. Just a few years ago in Japan, a famous singer who had died was re-created through AI and then was singing a new song. I also heard about in Korea a young girl who had passed away being re-created through AI for processing the grief of the parents.

And then in the film, what started as a seed for the film was the businesses that are being generated in places like China where AI is being used to re-create people who have passed. I wouldn’t call myself an expert on grief, but as a person who’s made many films around grief, one thing that I thought about was how the shape of grief would change through this use of AI in both good and bad ways. That’s what drew me to this idea of how new technologies impact this married couple who is trying to restart or redo their family life through the use of AI.

One of the big conversations around AI is about the resources that it uses. I thought it was really interesting that the humanoids don’t drink water or eat food. Can you talk about that decision?

You thought it was kind of ironic, right?

I actually spoke to an expert on these types of technologies and when I talked to them, they were saying that the big obstacle to creating these humanoid robots would be the fact that they generate so much heat in having to move very smoothly, in processing information, and that there would be no way to release or process that heat.

In order for me to write this story, I needed to clear that obstacle of the fact that they would be generating so much heat that perhaps it wouldn’t even be possible. So I decided to shelve that one issue for the sake of the story. They don’t consume resources. It’s more of a means for them to become independent, that they don’t depend on these resources in order to live.

A still from Sheep in the Box

Neon

Because it’s set in the near future, I had a hard time discerning between fiction and a possible reality. When it was fiction, I loved it. But when it was reality, I was a little afraid. What is it for you?

It’s difficult to say, and I don’t want to talk about it in a roundabout way, but I spoke to a robotics expert and I showed them the outline of this story and they said, “Well, this isn’t possible. There’s no way that we’ll make humanoid robots because of the difference in the physicality and the construction of just bodies that humans have internal organs and bone structure inside whereas robots are built from the outside.”

So that there would be no way that we could achieve humanlike movements or that you could touch a humanoid robot and they would feel like a human. But if we were to put ethics aside, they said that we would sooner have clones of humans than we would humanoid robots. And that sounded way scarier to me.

A robot is a robot no matter what way you think about it. But I think that as long as we don’t live in a world full of clones, there’s still a sense of hope there. We’re already in an era where we can clone our pets. I think that’s already happening. So when you think about it from an ethical standpoint, even nations are dealing with it in this ethical way in different ways. So now that if cloning is possible, the way that we manipulate life is becoming more advanced and strange. And that to me is a much scarier prospect.

This film has a lot of blue in it, especially with the wardrobe. That felt intentional.

As far as the costumes and the use of blue, that might just be the decision of Sachiko Ito, who did the costuming. One of the concepts that I brought up to her was that I wanted to use earth tones for the people, the leads in the film. And also one of her concerns was that 10 years into the future, climate change would mean that we live in a hotter climate. So there were a lot of things around thinking through the materials and the construction of the clothing, that perhaps there would be fewer buttons and drawstrings and zippers and fasteners and things like this.

I’m really curious to hear you talk about how AI has permeated your daily life.

I don’t think I’ve incorporated AI intentionally outside of the use of translation AI. I think that it has become so skillful that I often use AI in order to translate my Japanese into English in order to send messages and communicate.

This came up in the Q&A yesterday at Japan Society. I described how it was my first time using ChatGPT in a way where I fed it the script for this film and said, “Give me feedback.” And we did a few exchanges between myself and AI and every time I would make edits to the script, they would say that it’s great. They said, “You’re going to get into Cannes.” But first ChatGPT said, “I think you’ll get into the Un Certain Regard section.” And I said, “Only Un Certain Regard?” Then my producer said, “Well, the director of this film is a person named Hirokazu Kore-eda.” It said, “Well, in that case, you’re getting into the competition.”

And I did get into the competition, so AI is not wrong, but I think that any person could tell me as much. So I don’t think that I found any utility in that exchange. And the fact that there’s no humanness in the background to this exchange is what makes it mostly unattractive to me.

I think that the more that you train an AI, for instance, on a person who is maybe known for giving romantic advice, then that advice also becomes more normalized. So I think that I’m not personally sold on it and I don’t find that AI is all that useful to me. What I find more problematic is that human beings are becoming so geared towards a kind of productivity mindset that this is even affecting activities on set for filmmaking. I think that safety is important, but for instance, we’re no longer filming driving scenes on the road. We’re doing it in studios by compositing backgrounds. I think that stunt work is also going to maybe fall to the side and then slowly be subsumed by AI or VFX.

It’s really not about us excluding AI from our day to day. Already we’re using things that we would have used our imagination for and then offloading that onto computers. For instance, with this film, I shot a driving scene at a studio and we composited the background.

But I don’t find it all that interesting. I’m going to stop writing scenes that require this type of VFX or compositing because I think that the more that we are being subsumed by productivity, it’s actually the antithesis of creativity.

Sheep in the Box is in select theaters Friday, July 24.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#scifi #movie #imagines #isnt #dystopianColumn,Entertainment,Film,Q&A">The sci-fi movie that imagines AI isn’t so dystopian after allImagine you are the parent of an inquisitive seven-year-old who loves his family, playing baseball, and hanging out with his friends. It’s the life you’ve always wanted. And then the worst thing that ever could happen happens: A freak accident takes your son away. But as it turns out, you don’t have to live with the grief for long, because now there’s an AI company that can bring your kid back in the form of a robotic double that looks indistinguishable from a human.This is the world that acclaimed director Hirokazu Kore-eda, who won the Palme d’Or for his 2018 feature Shoplifters, has created with his latest sci-fi drama, Sheep in the Box. It’s the type of story that might have seemed far-fetched a few years ago but feels less so as AI encroaches on every aspect of our lives. This is a tension Kore-eda is acutely aware of — so much so that he sat down with a robotics expert while he was writing the script to get some answers of his own. They told him that because of the robots overheating, “we would sooner have clones of humans than we would humanoid robots,” Kore-eda recounted.But don’t let the robots fool you into thinking this isn’t a human film. Grief work is a common theme in Kore-eda’s vast filmography. Though it might be set in a near future, the core of Sheep in the Box is still a family learning how to move through their loss. And if we give ourselves permission to suspend disbelief and go on this journey, we might see ourselves in it too.The Verge sat down with Hirokazu Kore-eda at Neon’s offices days before Sheep in the Box’s US debut. Speaking through an interpreter, Kore-eda tells all about writing and directing this picture, including what happened when he fed the script through ChatGPT.Robyn KannerThis interview has been edited and condensed.You’ve made so many films about grief. What have you learned about processing grief through making all this work?What have I learned about grief? I think it’s that everyone experiences it differently. It’s very diverse. And when I made my first film, Maborosi, that was exactly about grief. And that was around the time that I read books by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, books on grief work. And I learned about the process of grief work and used that as a kind of framework for the film. However, it’s not as if grief linearly follows a specific process. So I would say that I’ve learned that it varies from person to person.In Sheep in the Box, memories become information. There was something about that that felt a little unsettling or cold for me. How did it fit for you? How did it work for you?I’m not sure I’ve been able to arrive at this fact through this film, but as I was filming, one thing that I was thinking about was that the memories that are input into the humanoid Kakeru are preselected by his parents. So it’s not really the same as memory as we experience it. It’s preselected data. I think that once memory is severed from our physical form, what we experience inside as memory, it’s not the same. It’s not the same when it’s input as data. It’s not the same as the things that we recall that stir up the emotions that make us human.There’s so much noise about AI in our world right now. What made this theme feel so urgent for you to tackle?In Japan, there’s a tremendous increase in various initiatives involving AI. When you get in the taxi, there’s a screen that’s constantly telling you of all these commercials for raising your rate of productivity through AI. But I was interested in the rise of AI used toward a kind of grief work. Just a few years ago in Japan, a famous singer who had died was re-created through AI and then was singing a new song. I also heard about in Korea a young girl who had passed away being re-created through AI for processing the grief of the parents.And then in the film, what started as a seed for the film was the businesses that are being generated in places like China where AI is being used to re-create people who have passed. I wouldn’t call myself an expert on grief, but as a person who’s made many films around grief, one thing that I thought about was how the shape of grief would change through this use of AI in both good and bad ways. That’s what drew me to this idea of how new technologies impact this married couple who is trying to restart or redo their family life through the use of AI.One of the big conversations around AI is about the resources that it uses. I thought it was really interesting that the humanoids don’t drink water or eat food. Can you talk about that decision?You thought it was kind of ironic, right?I actually spoke to an expert on these types of technologies and when I talked to them, they were saying that the big obstacle to creating these humanoid robots would be the fact that they generate so much heat in having to move very smoothly, in processing information, and that there would be no way to release or process that heat.In order for me to write this story, I needed to clear that obstacle of the fact that they would be generating so much heat that perhaps it wouldn’t even be possible. So I decided to shelve that one issue for the sake of the story. They don’t consume resources. It’s more of a means for them to become independent, that they don’t depend on these resources in order to live.NeonBecause it’s set in the near future, I had a hard time discerning between fiction and a possible reality. When it was fiction, I loved it. But when it was reality, I was a little afraid. What is it for you?It’s difficult to say, and I don’t want to talk about it in a roundabout way, but I spoke to a robotics expert and I showed them the outline of this story and they said, “Well, this isn’t possible. There’s no way that we’ll make humanoid robots because of the difference in the physicality and the construction of just bodies that humans have internal organs and bone structure inside whereas robots are built from the outside.”So that there would be no way that we could achieve humanlike movements or that you could touch a humanoid robot and they would feel like a human. But if we were to put ethics aside, they said that we would sooner have clones of humans than we would humanoid robots. And that sounded way scarier to me.A robot is a robot no matter what way you think about it. But I think that as long as we don’t live in a world full of clones, there’s still a sense of hope there. We’re already in an era where we can clone our pets. I think that’s already happening. So when you think about it from an ethical standpoint, even nations are dealing with it in this ethical way in different ways. So now that if cloning is possible, the way that we manipulate life is becoming more advanced and strange. And that to me is a much scarier prospect.This film has a lot of blue in it, especially with the wardrobe. That felt intentional.As far as the costumes and the use of blue, that might just be the decision of Sachiko Ito, who did the costuming. One of the concepts that I brought up to her was that I wanted to use earth tones for the people, the leads in the film. And also one of her concerns was that 10 years into the future, climate change would mean that we live in a hotter climate. So there were a lot of things around thinking through the materials and the construction of the clothing, that perhaps there would be fewer buttons and drawstrings and zippers and fasteners and things like this.I’m really curious to hear you talk about how AI has permeated your daily life.I don’t think I’ve incorporated AI intentionally outside of the use of translation AI. I think that it has become so skillful that I often use AI in order to translate my Japanese into English in order to send messages and communicate.This came up in the Q&A yesterday at Japan Society. I described how it was my first time using ChatGPT in a way where I fed it the script for this film and said, “Give me feedback.” And we did a few exchanges between myself and AI and every time I would make edits to the script, they would say that it’s great. They said, “You’re going to get into Cannes.” But first ChatGPT said, “I think you’ll get into the Un Certain Regard section.” And I said, “Only Un Certain Regard?” Then my producer said, “Well, the director of this film is a person named Hirokazu Kore-eda.” It said, “Well, in that case, you’re getting into the competition.”And I did get into the competition, so AI is not wrong, but I think that any person could tell me as much. So I don’t think that I found any utility in that exchange. And the fact that there’s no humanness in the background to this exchange is what makes it mostly unattractive to me.I think that the more that you train an AI, for instance, on a person who is maybe known for giving romantic advice, then that advice also becomes more normalized. So I think that I’m not personally sold on it and I don’t find that AI is all that useful to me. What I find more problematic is that human beings are becoming so geared towards a kind of productivity mindset that this is even affecting activities on set for filmmaking. I think that safety is important, but for instance, we’re no longer filming driving scenes on the road. We’re doing it in studios by compositing backgrounds. I think that stunt work is also going to maybe fall to the side and then slowly be subsumed by AI or VFX.It’s really not about us excluding AI from our day to day. Already we’re using things that we would have used our imagination for and then offloading that onto computers. For instance, with this film, I shot a driving scene at a studio and we composited the background.But I don’t find it all that interesting. I’m going to stop writing scenes that require this type of VFX or compositing because I think that the more that we are being subsumed by productivity, it’s actually the antithesis of creativity.Sheep in the Box is in select theaters Friday, July 24.Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.Robyn KannerCloseRobyn KannerPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Robyn KannerColumnCloseColumnPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All ColumnEntertainmentCloseEntertainmentPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All EntertainmentFilmCloseFilmPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All FilmQ&ACloseQ&APosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All Q&A#scifi #movie #imagines #isnt #dystopianColumn,Entertainment,Film,Q&A

This interview has been edited and condensed.

You’ve made so many films about grief. What have you learned about processing grief through making all this work?

What have I learned about grief? I think it’s that everyone experiences it differently. It’s very diverse. And when I made my first film, Maborosi, that was exactly about grief. And that was around the time that I read books by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, books on grief work. And I learned about the process of grief work and used that as a kind of framework for the film. However, it’s not as if grief linearly follows a specific process. So I would say that I’ve learned that it varies from person to person.

In Sheep in the Box, memories become information. There was something about that that felt a little unsettling or cold for me. How did it fit for you? How did it work for you?

I’m not sure I’ve been able to arrive at this fact through this film, but as I was filming, one thing that I was thinking about was that the memories that are input into the humanoid Kakeru are preselected by his parents. So it’s not really the same as memory as we experience it. It’s preselected data. I think that once memory is severed from our physical form, what we experience inside as memory, it’s not the same. It’s not the same when it’s input as data. It’s not the same as the things that we recall that stir up the emotions that make us human.

There’s so much noise about AI in our world right now. What made this theme feel so urgent for you to tackle?

In Japan, there’s a tremendous increase in various initiatives involving AI. When you get in the taxi, there’s a screen that’s constantly telling you of all these commercials for raising your rate of productivity through AI. But I was interested in the rise of AI used toward a kind of grief work. Just a few years ago in Japan, a famous singer who had died was re-created through AI and then was singing a new song. I also heard about in Korea a young girl who had passed away being re-created through AI for processing the grief of the parents.

And then in the film, what started as a seed for the film was the businesses that are being generated in places like China where AI is being used to re-create people who have passed. I wouldn’t call myself an expert on grief, but as a person who’s made many films around grief, one thing that I thought about was how the shape of grief would change through this use of AI in both good and bad ways. That’s what drew me to this idea of how new technologies impact this married couple who is trying to restart or redo their family life through the use of AI.

One of the big conversations around AI is about the resources that it uses. I thought it was really interesting that the humanoids don’t drink water or eat food. Can you talk about that decision?

You thought it was kind of ironic, right?

I actually spoke to an expert on these types of technologies and when I talked to them, they were saying that the big obstacle to creating these humanoid robots would be the fact that they generate so much heat in having to move very smoothly, in processing information, and that there would be no way to release or process that heat.

In order for me to write this story, I needed to clear that obstacle of the fact that they would be generating so much heat that perhaps it wouldn’t even be possible. So I decided to shelve that one issue for the sake of the story. They don’t consume resources. It’s more of a means for them to become independent, that they don’t depend on these resources in order to live.

A still from Sheep in the Box

Neon

Because it’s set in the near future, I had a hard time discerning between fiction and a possible reality. When it was fiction, I loved it. But when it was reality, I was a little afraid. What is it for you?

It’s difficult to say, and I don’t want to talk about it in a roundabout way, but I spoke to a robotics expert and I showed them the outline of this story and they said, “Well, this isn’t possible. There’s no way that we’ll make humanoid robots because of the difference in the physicality and the construction of just bodies that humans have internal organs and bone structure inside whereas robots are built from the outside.”

So that there would be no way that we could achieve humanlike movements or that you could touch a humanoid robot and they would feel like a human. But if we were to put ethics aside, they said that we would sooner have clones of humans than we would humanoid robots. And that sounded way scarier to me.

A robot is a robot no matter what way you think about it. But I think that as long as we don’t live in a world full of clones, there’s still a sense of hope there. We’re already in an era where we can clone our pets. I think that’s already happening. So when you think about it from an ethical standpoint, even nations are dealing with it in this ethical way in different ways. So now that if cloning is possible, the way that we manipulate life is becoming more advanced and strange. And that to me is a much scarier prospect.

This film has a lot of blue in it, especially with the wardrobe. That felt intentional.

As far as the costumes and the use of blue, that might just be the decision of Sachiko Ito, who did the costuming. One of the concepts that I brought up to her was that I wanted to use earth tones for the people, the leads in the film. And also one of her concerns was that 10 years into the future, climate change would mean that we live in a hotter climate. So there were a lot of things around thinking through the materials and the construction of the clothing, that perhaps there would be fewer buttons and drawstrings and zippers and fasteners and things like this.

I’m really curious to hear you talk about how AI has permeated your daily life.

I don’t think I’ve incorporated AI intentionally outside of the use of translation AI. I think that it has become so skillful that I often use AI in order to translate my Japanese into English in order to send messages and communicate.

This came up in the Q&A yesterday at Japan Society. I described how it was my first time using ChatGPT in a way where I fed it the script for this film and said, “Give me feedback.” And we did a few exchanges between myself and AI and every time I would make edits to the script, they would say that it’s great. They said, “You’re going to get into Cannes.” But first ChatGPT said, “I think you’ll get into the Un Certain Regard section.” And I said, “Only Un Certain Regard?” Then my producer said, “Well, the director of this film is a person named Hirokazu Kore-eda.” It said, “Well, in that case, you’re getting into the competition.”

And I did get into the competition, so AI is not wrong, but I think that any person could tell me as much. So I don’t think that I found any utility in that exchange. And the fact that there’s no humanness in the background to this exchange is what makes it mostly unattractive to me.

I think that the more that you train an AI, for instance, on a person who is maybe known for giving romantic advice, then that advice also becomes more normalized. So I think that I’m not personally sold on it and I don’t find that AI is all that useful to me. What I find more problematic is that human beings are becoming so geared towards a kind of productivity mindset that this is even affecting activities on set for filmmaking. I think that safety is important, but for instance, we’re no longer filming driving scenes on the road. We’re doing it in studios by compositing backgrounds. I think that stunt work is also going to maybe fall to the side and then slowly be subsumed by AI or VFX.

It’s really not about us excluding AI from our day to day. Already we’re using things that we would have used our imagination for and then offloading that onto computers. For instance, with this film, I shot a driving scene at a studio and we composited the background.

But I don’t find it all that interesting. I’m going to stop writing scenes that require this type of VFX or compositing because I think that the more that we are being subsumed by productivity, it’s actually the antithesis of creativity.

Sheep in the Box is in select theaters Friday, July 24.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

#scifi #movie #imagines #isnt #dystopianColumn,Entertainment,Film,Q&A">The sci-fi movie that imagines AI isn’t so dystopian after all

Imagine you are the parent of an inquisitive seven-year-old who loves his family, playing baseball, and hanging out with his friends. It’s the life you’ve always wanted. And then the worst thing that ever could happen happens: A freak accident takes your son away. But as it turns out, you don’t have to live with the grief for long, because now there’s an AI company that can bring your kid back in the form of a robotic double that looks indistinguishable from a human.

This is the world that acclaimed director Hirokazu Kore-eda, who won the Palme d’Or for his 2018 feature Shoplifters, has created with his latest sci-fi drama, Sheep in the Box. It’s the type of story that might have seemed far-fetched a few years ago but feels less so as AI encroaches on every aspect of our lives. This is a tension Kore-eda is acutely aware of — so much so that he sat down with a robotics expert while he was writing the script to get some answers of his own. They told him that because of the robots overheating, “we would sooner have clones of humans than we would humanoid robots,” Kore-eda recounted.

But don’t let the robots fool you into thinking this isn’t a human film. Grief work is a common theme in Kore-eda’s vast filmography. Though it might be set in a near future, the core of Sheep in the Box is still a family learning how to move through their loss. And if we give ourselves permission to suspend disbelief and go on this journey, we might see ourselves in it too.

The Verge sat down with Hirokazu Kore-eda at Neon’s offices days before Sheep in the Box’s US debut. Speaking through an interpreter, Kore-eda tells all about writing and directing this picture, including what happened when he fed the script through ChatGPT.

Robyn Kanner

This interview has been edited and condensed.

You’ve made so many films about grief. What have you learned about processing grief through making all this work?

What have I learned about grief? I think it’s that everyone experiences it differently. It’s very diverse. And when I made my first film, Maborosi, that was exactly about grief. And that was around the time that I read books by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, books on grief work. And I learned about the process of grief work and used that as a kind of framework for the film. However, it’s not as if grief linearly follows a specific process. So I would say that I’ve learned that it varies from person to person.

In Sheep in the Box, memories become information. There was something about that that felt a little unsettling or cold for me. How did it fit for you? How did it work for you?

I’m not sure I’ve been able to arrive at this fact through this film, but as I was filming, one thing that I was thinking about was that the memories that are input into the humanoid Kakeru are preselected by his parents. So it’s not really the same as memory as we experience it. It’s preselected data. I think that once memory is severed from our physical form, what we experience inside as memory, it’s not the same. It’s not the same when it’s input as data. It’s not the same as the things that we recall that stir up the emotions that make us human.

There’s so much noise about AI in our world right now. What made this theme feel so urgent for you to tackle?

In Japan, there’s a tremendous increase in various initiatives involving AI. When you get in the taxi, there’s a screen that’s constantly telling you of all these commercials for raising your rate of productivity through AI. But I was interested in the rise of AI used toward a kind of grief work. Just a few years ago in Japan, a famous singer who had died was re-created through AI and then was singing a new song. I also heard about in Korea a young girl who had passed away being re-created through AI for processing the grief of the parents.

And then in the film, what started as a seed for the film was the businesses that are being generated in places like China where AI is being used to re-create people who have passed. I wouldn’t call myself an expert on grief, but as a person who’s made many films around grief, one thing that I thought about was how the shape of grief would change through this use of AI in both good and bad ways. That’s what drew me to this idea of how new technologies impact this married couple who is trying to restart or redo their family life through the use of AI.

One of the big conversations around AI is about the resources that it uses. I thought it was really interesting that the humanoids don’t drink water or eat food. Can you talk about that decision?

You thought it was kind of ironic, right?

I actually spoke to an expert on these types of technologies and when I talked to them, they were saying that the big obstacle to creating these humanoid robots would be the fact that they generate so much heat in having to move very smoothly, in processing information, and that there would be no way to release or process that heat.

In order for me to write this story, I needed to clear that obstacle of the fact that they would be generating so much heat that perhaps it wouldn’t even be possible. So I decided to shelve that one issue for the sake of the story. They don’t consume resources. It’s more of a means for them to become independent, that they don’t depend on these resources in order to live.

A still from Sheep in the Box

Neon

Because it’s set in the near future, I had a hard time discerning between fiction and a possible reality. When it was fiction, I loved it. But when it was reality, I was a little afraid. What is it for you?

It’s difficult to say, and I don’t want to talk about it in a roundabout way, but I spoke to a robotics expert and I showed them the outline of this story and they said, “Well, this isn’t possible. There’s no way that we’ll make humanoid robots because of the difference in the physicality and the construction of just bodies that humans have internal organs and bone structure inside whereas robots are built from the outside.”

So that there would be no way that we could achieve humanlike movements or that you could touch a humanoid robot and they would feel like a human. But if we were to put ethics aside, they said that we would sooner have clones of humans than we would humanoid robots. And that sounded way scarier to me.

A robot is a robot no matter what way you think about it. But I think that as long as we don’t live in a world full of clones, there’s still a sense of hope there. We’re already in an era where we can clone our pets. I think that’s already happening. So when you think about it from an ethical standpoint, even nations are dealing with it in this ethical way in different ways. So now that if cloning is possible, the way that we manipulate life is becoming more advanced and strange. And that to me is a much scarier prospect.

This film has a lot of blue in it, especially with the wardrobe. That felt intentional.

As far as the costumes and the use of blue, that might just be the decision of Sachiko Ito, who did the costuming. One of the concepts that I brought up to her was that I wanted to use earth tones for the people, the leads in the film. And also one of her concerns was that 10 years into the future, climate change would mean that we live in a hotter climate. So there were a lot of things around thinking through the materials and the construction of the clothing, that perhaps there would be fewer buttons and drawstrings and zippers and fasteners and things like this.

I’m really curious to hear you talk about how AI has permeated your daily life.

I don’t think I’ve incorporated AI intentionally outside of the use of translation AI. I think that it has become so skillful that I often use AI in order to translate my Japanese into English in order to send messages and communicate.

This came up in the Q&A yesterday at Japan Society. I described how it was my first time using ChatGPT in a way where I fed it the script for this film and said, “Give me feedback.” And we did a few exchanges between myself and AI and every time I would make edits to the script, they would say that it’s great. They said, “You’re going to get into Cannes.” But first ChatGPT said, “I think you’ll get into the Un Certain Regard section.” And I said, “Only Un Certain Regard?” Then my producer said, “Well, the director of this film is a person named Hirokazu Kore-eda.” It said, “Well, in that case, you’re getting into the competition.”

And I did get into the competition, so AI is not wrong, but I think that any person could tell me as much. So I don’t think that I found any utility in that exchange. And the fact that there’s no humanness in the background to this exchange is what makes it mostly unattractive to me.

I think that the more that you train an AI, for instance, on a person who is maybe known for giving romantic advice, then that advice also becomes more normalized. So I think that I’m not personally sold on it and I don’t find that AI is all that useful to me. What I find more problematic is that human beings are becoming so geared towards a kind of productivity mindset that this is even affecting activities on set for filmmaking. I think that safety is important, but for instance, we’re no longer filming driving scenes on the road. We’re doing it in studios by compositing backgrounds. I think that stunt work is also going to maybe fall to the side and then slowly be subsumed by AI or VFX.

It’s really not about us excluding AI from our day to day. Already we’re using things that we would have used our imagination for and then offloading that onto computers. For instance, with this film, I shot a driving scene at a studio and we composited the background.

But I don’t find it all that interesting. I’m going to stop writing scenes that require this type of VFX or compositing because I think that the more that we are being subsumed by productivity, it’s actually the antithesis of creativity.

Sheep in the Box is in select theaters Friday, July 24.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#scifi #movie #imagines #isnt #dystopianColumn,Entertainment,Film,Q&A
ServiceNow, the U.S. enterprise software company known for automating workflows like IT service management and HR operations, is betting on an Indian banking software specialist to deepen its push into global financial services.

The company has invested $40 million in BusinessNext, valuing the 24-year-old Indian firm at $700 million and taking a roughly 5% stake. The deal gives BusinessNext access to ServiceNow’s global sales network as the companies expand their partnership in AI for financial services.

ServiceNow’s investment reflects BusinessNext’s growing profile beyond India. The profitable, Noida-based company, which generated about $32 million in revenue in its latest financial year, serves more than 70 banks across India, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and the U.S. Its customers include the Reserve Bank of India, the country’s central bank, and State Bank of India and HDFC Bank, which are India’s largest public- and private-sector lenders, respectively.

About half of BusinessNext’s revenue comes from outside India, with overseas markets expected to drive much of its future growth, founder and CEO Nishant Singh said in an interview.

The company chose ServiceNow over potential financial investors to accelerate its expansion by tapping the U.S. software group’s global reach. Singh told TechCrunch that the partnership would help BusinessNext “borrow” its go-to-marker “machinery” — referring to ServiceNow’s sales infrastructure — in markets where it has a limited presence.

“Think of it as a strategic partnership, which is cemented with funding,” he said.

BusinessNext’s software, Singh said, manages customer-facing banking workflows, while ServiceNow is stronger in workflow automation and back-office systems, a combination the two companies plan to sell jointly to financial institutions.

“India’s financial services sector is at an inflection point — institutions are moving from digital experimentation to full-scale AI-led operations,” Kulmeet Bawa, ServiceNow’s group vice president and managing director for India and SAARC, said. He added that the partnership combines ServiceNow’s enterprise workflow platform with BusinessNext’s banking expertise.

Founded in 2002, BusinessNext — known as CRMNext until 2022 — has spent several years building what Singh calls an “autonomous banking” platform, using AI agents to automate banking workflows while keeping sensitive customer data on private AI infrastructure to meet regulatory and privacy requirements.

Singh told TechCrunch that AI was built into the company’s platform from the outset rather than added later. “We actually renamed our company and we kind of rewrote our stack to put that fundamentally at the core,” he said.

BusinessNext employs more than 1,300 people across its operations and was last valued at $181 million in 2021, per private market intelligence platform Tracxn. It has raised more than $60 million in external funding and counts Avataar Ventures, Norwest Venture Partners, and Ascent Capital among its existing investors.

The deal comes as established enterprise software vendors face pressure from customers who are questioning whether traditional SaaS tools are worth paying for when AI-native alternatives are emerging. For ServiceNow, the deal builds out its position in banking by partnering with a company focused on AI-driven banking software, as it expands its enterprise software portfolio through acquisitions, investments, and partnerships.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#ServiceNow #bets #million #Indian #banking #software #specialist #expand #financial #services #push #TechCrunchServiceNow">ServiceNow bets  million on Indian banking software specialist to expand its financial services push | TechCrunch
ServiceNow, the U.S. enterprise software company known for automating workflows like IT service management and HR operations, is betting on an Indian banking software specialist to deepen its push into global financial services.

The company has invested  million in BusinessNext, valuing the 24-year-old Indian firm at 0 million and taking a roughly 5% stake. The deal gives BusinessNext access to ServiceNow’s global sales network as the companies expand their partnership in AI for financial services.







ServiceNow’s investment reflects BusinessNext’s growing profile beyond India. The profitable, Noida-based company, which generated about  million in revenue in its latest financial year, serves more than 70 banks across India, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and the U.S. Its customers include the Reserve Bank of India, the country’s central bank, and State Bank of India and HDFC Bank, which are India’s largest public- and private-sector lenders, respectively.

About half of BusinessNext’s revenue comes from outside India, with overseas markets expected to drive much of its future growth, founder and CEO Nishant Singh said in an interview.

The company chose ServiceNow over potential financial investors to accelerate its expansion by tapping the U.S. software group’s global reach. Singh told TechCrunch that the partnership would help BusinessNext “borrow” its go-to-marker “machinery” — referring to ServiceNow’s sales infrastructure — in markets where it has a limited presence.

“Think of it as a strategic partnership, which is cemented with funding,” he said.

BusinessNext’s software, Singh said, manages customer-facing banking workflows, while ServiceNow is stronger in workflow automation and back-office systems, a combination the two companies plan to sell jointly to financial institutions.


“India’s financial services sector is at an inflection point — institutions are moving from digital experimentation to full-scale AI-led operations,” Kulmeet Bawa, ServiceNow’s group vice president and managing director for India and SAARC, said. He added that the partnership combines ServiceNow’s enterprise workflow platform with BusinessNext’s banking expertise.

Founded in 2002, BusinessNext — known as CRMNext until 2022 — has spent several years building what Singh calls an “autonomous banking” platform, using AI agents to automate banking workflows while keeping sensitive customer data on private AI infrastructure to meet regulatory and privacy requirements.

Singh told TechCrunch that AI was built into the company’s platform from the outset rather than added later. “We actually renamed our company and we kind of rewrote our stack to put that fundamentally at the core,” he said.







BusinessNext employs more than 1,300 people across its operations and was last valued at 1 million in 2021, per private market intelligence platform Tracxn. It has raised more than  million in external funding and counts Avataar Ventures, Norwest Venture Partners, and Ascent Capital among its existing investors.

The deal comes as established enterprise software vendors face pressure from customers who are questioning whether traditional SaaS tools are worth paying for when AI-native alternatives are emerging. For ServiceNow, the deal builds out its position in banking by partnering with a company focused on AI-driven banking software, as it expands its enterprise software portfolio through acquisitions, investments, and partnerships.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#ServiceNow #bets #million #Indian #banking #software #specialist #expand #financial #services #push #TechCrunchServiceNow

BusinessNext, valuing the 24-year-old Indian firm at $700 million and taking a roughly 5% stake. The deal gives BusinessNext access to ServiceNow’s global sales network as the companies expand their partnership in AI for financial services.

ServiceNow’s investment reflects BusinessNext’s growing profile beyond India. The profitable, Noida-based company, which generated about $32 million in revenue in its latest financial year, serves more than 70 banks across India, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and the U.S. Its customers include the Reserve Bank of India, the country’s central bank, and State Bank of India and HDFC Bank, which are India’s largest public- and private-sector lenders, respectively.

About half of BusinessNext’s revenue comes from outside India, with overseas markets expected to drive much of its future growth, founder and CEO Nishant Singh said in an interview.

The company chose ServiceNow over potential financial investors to accelerate its expansion by tapping the U.S. software group’s global reach. Singh told TechCrunch that the partnership would help BusinessNext “borrow” its go-to-marker “machinery” — referring to ServiceNow’s sales infrastructure — in markets where it has a limited presence.

“Think of it as a strategic partnership, which is cemented with funding,” he said.

BusinessNext’s software, Singh said, manages customer-facing banking workflows, while ServiceNow is stronger in workflow automation and back-office systems, a combination the two companies plan to sell jointly to financial institutions.

“India’s financial services sector is at an inflection point — institutions are moving from digital experimentation to full-scale AI-led operations,” Kulmeet Bawa, ServiceNow’s group vice president and managing director for India and SAARC, said. He added that the partnership combines ServiceNow’s enterprise workflow platform with BusinessNext’s banking expertise.

Founded in 2002, BusinessNext — known as CRMNext until 2022 — has spent several years building what Singh calls an “autonomous banking” platform, using AI agents to automate banking workflows while keeping sensitive customer data on private AI infrastructure to meet regulatory and privacy requirements.

Singh told TechCrunch that AI was built into the company’s platform from the outset rather than added later. “We actually renamed our company and we kind of rewrote our stack to put that fundamentally at the core,” he said.

BusinessNext employs more than 1,300 people across its operations and was last valued at $181 million in 2021, per private market intelligence platform Tracxn. It has raised more than $60 million in external funding and counts Avataar Ventures, Norwest Venture Partners, and Ascent Capital among its existing investors.

The deal comes as established enterprise software vendors face pressure from customers who are questioning whether traditional SaaS tools are worth paying for when AI-native alternatives are emerging. For ServiceNow, the deal builds out its position in banking by partnering with a company focused on AI-driven banking software, as it expands its enterprise software portfolio through acquisitions, investments, and partnerships.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#ServiceNow #bets #million #Indian #banking #software #specialist #expand #financial #services #push #TechCrunchServiceNow">ServiceNow bets $40 million on Indian banking software specialist to expand its financial services push | TechCrunch

ServiceNow, the U.S. enterprise software company known for automating workflows like IT service management and HR operations, is betting on an Indian banking software specialist to deepen its push into global financial services.

The company has invested $40 million in BusinessNext, valuing the 24-year-old Indian firm at $700 million and taking a roughly 5% stake. The deal gives BusinessNext access to ServiceNow’s global sales network as the companies expand their partnership in AI for financial services.

ServiceNow’s investment reflects BusinessNext’s growing profile beyond India. The profitable, Noida-based company, which generated about $32 million in revenue in its latest financial year, serves more than 70 banks across India, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and the U.S. Its customers include the Reserve Bank of India, the country’s central bank, and State Bank of India and HDFC Bank, which are India’s largest public- and private-sector lenders, respectively.

About half of BusinessNext’s revenue comes from outside India, with overseas markets expected to drive much of its future growth, founder and CEO Nishant Singh said in an interview.

The company chose ServiceNow over potential financial investors to accelerate its expansion by tapping the U.S. software group’s global reach. Singh told TechCrunch that the partnership would help BusinessNext “borrow” its go-to-marker “machinery” — referring to ServiceNow’s sales infrastructure — in markets where it has a limited presence.

“Think of it as a strategic partnership, which is cemented with funding,” he said.

BusinessNext’s software, Singh said, manages customer-facing banking workflows, while ServiceNow is stronger in workflow automation and back-office systems, a combination the two companies plan to sell jointly to financial institutions.

“India’s financial services sector is at an inflection point — institutions are moving from digital experimentation to full-scale AI-led operations,” Kulmeet Bawa, ServiceNow’s group vice president and managing director for India and SAARC, said. He added that the partnership combines ServiceNow’s enterprise workflow platform with BusinessNext’s banking expertise.

Founded in 2002, BusinessNext — known as CRMNext until 2022 — has spent several years building what Singh calls an “autonomous banking” platform, using AI agents to automate banking workflows while keeping sensitive customer data on private AI infrastructure to meet regulatory and privacy requirements.

Singh told TechCrunch that AI was built into the company’s platform from the outset rather than added later. “We actually renamed our company and we kind of rewrote our stack to put that fundamentally at the core,” he said.

BusinessNext employs more than 1,300 people across its operations and was last valued at $181 million in 2021, per private market intelligence platform Tracxn. It has raised more than $60 million in external funding and counts Avataar Ventures, Norwest Venture Partners, and Ascent Capital among its existing investors.

The deal comes as established enterprise software vendors face pressure from customers who are questioning whether traditional SaaS tools are worth paying for when AI-native alternatives are emerging. For ServiceNow, the deal builds out its position in banking by partnering with a company focused on AI-driven banking software, as it expands its enterprise software portfolio through acquisitions, investments, and partnerships.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#ServiceNow #bets #million #Indian #banking #software #specialist #expand #financial #services #push #TechCrunchServiceNow

Post Comment