The Walt Disney Company and OpenAI Partner on Sora
openai.com90 points by inesranzo 8 hours ago
90 points by inesranzo 8 hours ago
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/11/disney-openai-sora-character...
buried the lede: > As part of the agreement, Disney will make a $1 billion equity investment in OpenAI, and receive warrants to purchase additional equity. I say this with no snark or disdain: Sam has mastered the art of the flywheel. Re licensed ai videos, if anyone wants to see the perspective the C-suites are being sold on, check out this episode of Belloni's The Town, in which they discuss the vision for AI + IP
https://overcast.fm/+AA4DU9JreIE >I say this with no snark or disdain: Sam has mastered the art of the flywheel. It's been his entire career. Guy has made billions of dollars from talking. I never thought this could happen, especially after the "Ghibli scandal".
OpenAI has pulled a majestic business move. They got to allow people to generate Disney characters without issue AND will give 1 billion dollars to OpenAI? Now the internet will be flooded by Disney character's videos, and since they don't have to pretend they didn't train on their intellectual property anymore I'm really curious to see where this will bring us. We should rethink copyright btw. >Now the internet will be flooded by Disney character's videos How is Disney okay with this anyway? They've sent their lawyers after daycare centers who dared to paint a picture of a Disney character on their walls. Why are they suddenly going to ignore me prompting a video of Winnie the Pooh hitting the bong? As an aside: Winnie the Pooh is public domain, so he can do drugs if he wants. But he shouldn't wear a red shirt while he does. Sora is a heavily censored model so presumably they believe they can stop that sort of content being generated. Because they didn't get any money from the daycare and they will get money from OpenAI when you make your Sora video. That's all there is to it. The brand rot will be disgusting here. I thought "family" companies like Nintendo and Disney hit so hard, against their best interests, because they didn't want the next pregnant Elsa or Nazi Mario to cause a storm on their carefully tailored brands. Seems like Nintendo still has that long term thinking. Disney was just waiting for the right price. I have a feeling that the long-term economics of this don't really work. OpenAI is burning money and Altman has already gone out in public saying how Sora-generated content is being made in large volumes for little audience. >People are generating much more than we expected per user, and a lot of videos are being generated for very small audiences. If OpenAI is going to pay Disney money for Winnie the Pooh smoking crack, I get the feeling that the money is going to come not from Sora profits but from companies that invested in OpenAI. Companies like Disney. Not that Sora is going to generate any profit if I can generate a video for free and I then post it on Discord instead. >People are generating much more than we expected per user, and a lot of videos are being generated for very small audiences. That was the issue even the biggest Ai fans pointed out from day one. People aren't gonna post their videos on Sora. They are gonna make it on Sora and post on TikTok. A watermark won't change that reality (and I don't think ClosedAI is worried about brand recognition and taking a hit for that). Likenthr rest of the scene, it's so utterly tone deaf. Yes, that's what makes Disney investing in OpenAI as part of this so confusing to me. Sign a licensing deal that means OpenAI pays you every time someone uses your character? Absolutely. Who cares if they're burning cash, as long as you get your payday it's all good. But investing in the company means their cash burning is your problem too. I don't know why you'd do it. The only explanation is if they think they can juice their stock by 2 billion and then whoever is on the ship jumps before the crash. Sounds like Iger has his finger on the eject button. How much stock has he announced to be cashing out over 2026? I read this as "Disney approached OpenAI and threatened to sue them into oblivion --> OpenAI negotiated that Disney will use OpenAI internally for free, and will buy $1B of equity to have an ownership stake in the company". Disney comes out pretty good from this one; they're going to have a ton of people using the service to create all sorts of stuff that will—on the whole—increase brand awareness and engagement with Disney. OpenAI comes out pretty good from this, with a customer who's probably not paying much (if anything), $1B additional runway, but reduced ownership of the company. I think Disney is the winner here. >they're going to have a ton of people using the service to create all sorts of stuff that will—on the whole—increase brand awareness and engagement with Disney. In the same way making a bunch of porn of a character increases brand awareness and engagement with an IP, sure. OpenAI got away scot free here in avoiding a billion dollar lawsuit. Disney is gonna further melt away a century dynasty of art and culture. They're both gonna lose long term but I guess they both win for next quarter. This will not end well for Disney, there were certain historical characters removed from Sora 2 because people kept making racist videos that are hard to censor, and it became increasingly unhinged. This feels like another circular investment where Disney is hoping to make money back I'm sure. On the other hand, assuming they do the freemium stuff, I look forward to making a few videos of my daughters favorite Disney princesses "talking" to her. I actually straight up don't think they give a shit anymore. I think decorum works in an environment where decorum is the norm, but we have entered a political moment where that is no longer the case. And I think that this kind of thing bleeds so heavily into culture that they no longer give a shit about having their characters next to it. They have enough plausible deniability; they did not create the content. I think that's enough for them, in this moment. When I became a parent I was really surprised at how much crap Disney puts out. My previous exposure had just been their blockbuster movies which showed a close attention to detail. But you scratch under the surface and it's an endless pile of awful quality clothing, crappy lunchboxes, that kind of thing. To the point where you assume it's an unauthorized rip off until you discover they license to anyone. And to say nothing of the shoddy quality of their TV shows. Mickey Mouse Clubhouse's lazy CG animation and unimaginative storytelling is shocking given Mickey is supposed to be their signature character. They just don't care. And I think it does have an impact: my kids tired of Clubhouse very quickly and have little connection to Mickey and friends. Compare that to say, Dreamworks’ Gabby’s Dollhouse which they loved. Disney is propped up by its tentpole features but their bench is incredibly weak. There are only so many Blueys you can buy to make up the difference. Krusty the clown was a parody of Disney and the simpsons authors nailed it. [1] Disney has basically always been like this. Overpriced goods powered by the brand alone. It's been there for at least 40 years or so. Like, direct to DVD shows how they'll crank things down for a quick buck. So this isn't surprising in the grand scheme of things. But this past 5-10 years has indeed been quite the drastic dip. You'll have little bits of nuggets here and there because they still have some amazing artists (the '20's mickey mouse shorts are amazing). But you know we're in for a vast decline when they are starting to make even their premier content take shortcuts, play safe, and stifle creativity. > Mickey Mouse Clubhouse's lazy CG animation and unimaginative storytelling I think it’s important to remember that you probably aren’t their target audience. Their audience expects to see simple characters with simple stories. The CG doesn’t need to be advanced, so having it fast to produce is the goal. It has to hold the interest of a toddler for 25 min without annoying the parents too much. Shiny and simple rendering is probably what they are going for. You can certainly argue about the educational qualities of the show, but I think entertaining was their primary goal for Mickey Mouse Clubhouse. Also, this show hasn’t been made for years, has it? You’re looking at a show that was produced from 2006-2016. The oldest shows would be almost 20 year old CG. The newest is still nearly 10 years old. At the time it was fresh, the CG was pretty good, compared to similar kids shows. My kids were young right in this window, and we watched a lot of Disney. Disney definitely hit a CG valley though that you can see with some of their shows that switched from a 2D look to a more 3D rendering. Thankfully we aged out of those shows around 2015, so it has been a while. Disney has always been a content shop where quantity has its own quality, so I’m sure I’d have similar opinions as you if I was looking at the shows now. But at the time, it wasn’t bad. I’m not sure how the OpenAI integration will work. I can see all sorts of red flags here. I think y'all are thinking about this wrong. Right now the deal is structured as Disney pays OpenAI. That's going to invert. Once OpenAI pays Disney $3B/yr for Elsa, Disney is going to go to Google and say, "Gee, it sure would suck if you lost all your Disney content." Google will have to pay $5B/yr for Star Wars. And then TikTok, and then Meta... door to door licensing. Nintendo, Marvel, all of the IP giants will start licensing their IPs to platforms. This has never happened before, but we're at a significant and unprecedented changing of the tides. IP holders weren't able to do this before because content creation was hard and the distribution channels were 1% creation, 99% distribution. One guy would make a fan animation and his output was a single 5 minute video once every other month. Now everyone has exposure to creation. Now that the creation/consumption funnel inverts or becomes combined, the IP holders can charge a shit ton of money to these platforms. Everyone is a creator, and IP enablement is a massive money making opportunity. In five years, Disney, Warner, and Nintendo will be making absolute bank on YouTube, TikTok, Meta platforms, Sora, etc. They'll threaten to pull IP just like sports and linear TV channels did to cable back in the day. This will look a lot like cable. Also: the RIAA is doing exactly this with Suno and Udio. They've got them in a stranglehold and are forcing them to remove models that don't feature RIAA artists. And they'll charge a premium for you to use Taylor Swift®. Anyone can make generic AI cats or bigfoot - it's pretty bland and doesn't speak to people. But everyone wants to make Storm Troopers and Elsa and Pikachu. Not only do teenagers willfully immerse themselves in IP, but they're far more likely to consume well-known IP than original content. Creators will target IP over OC. We already know this. We have decades of data at this point that mass audiences want mass media franchises. The "normies" will eat this up and add fuel to the fire. Disney revenues are $90B a year. I would not be surprised if they could pull a brand new $30B a year off of social media IP licensing alone. Same for Nintendo and the rest of the big media brands. (WBD has a lot more value than they're priced at.) This is the end game. Do you see it now? >Now that the creation/consumption funnel inverts or becomes combined, the IP holders can charge a shit ton of money to these platforms. Everyone is a creator, and IP enablement is a massive money making opportunity. This would be worrying if the content was 1) actually good or 2) not freely available. Trying to charge premiums for slop never works. Just ask McDonald's 2-3 years back. The damage to the Star Wars brand shows this isn't a long term strategy. The 2nd issue on animation slop is the human element. We already made it very cheap for people to make content. No amount of Mickey or Star wars is gonna undo the fact that people like looking at other people. Animation slop will find its audience, but it's not gonna overthrow TikTok with real(ish) people making people slop. If Disney tries to pull out of Google, they will double down on Shorts. This won't work on most companies. It's a best a nice hook into Disney+. > And to say nothing of the shoddy quality of their TV shows. Mickey Mouse Clubhouse's lazy CG animation and unimaginative storytelling is shocking given Mickey is supposed to be their signature character. ≤4-year-olds do not care: there's bright colours and motion, and some semblance of story. The point is not to give some kind of lesson, but to distract/entertain (and probably release dopamine). See also Paw Patrol, Spidey Amazing Friends, PJ Masks, etc. None of these seem to have made any attempt at having a 'layer' that appeals to adults. In some ways I equate this animation style with the algorithmic social media system: meant for 'quick hits'. Contrast with (e.g.) Bluey. Bluey is just one show. Disney has an entire network and platform to fill with content. There's not a lot of producers making Bluey level content, yet the vacuum still needs to be filled. Bluey level content also costs more to create than the one step above AI slop to fill that void. Just like not every song on an album will be a banger, there will always be fluff/fill/padding. Fluff/filler on a banger album will still be decent. And it may even be someone's favorite. The point is that quality is fairly consistent. Not that everything is "peak". The only real bastion of hope in an ocean of slop is that demand for curwtion will be better than ever. People who want quality will tire of swimming and pay larger premiums for someone to pick out thr nuggets in the rough. Basicslly, the new HBO. It’s in too short supply. That level of humor, thoughtfulness, just human care put me into a show parents and kids can relate to. On a foreign language scale, Bluey and Peppa Pig are around B1- or A2+. Or in other words: a typical adult needs about one year of self study (or nearly 6 months of more focused intensive study) before they can fully understand a show like Bluey or Peppa Pig. And maybe half that for substantial understanding. (3 months intensive, 6 months typical self study to reach A2+ / watch Bluey with substantial understanding but not complete understanding). If I were to guess at Mickey Mouse clubhouse, it's damn near A1 or A0+, it's so repetive and slow that you can learn some words from it. Yeah, that's a lot more boring than the 'advanced' shows like Bluey or Peppa Pig. Also note that children are not aware of tools (ie hammers or screwdrivers) yet. So simple learning exercises to know that hammer hammers nail but not screws is the kind of thing needed at pre-school level. I'd imagine that the appropriate age for Mickey Mouse clubhouse is under 3. Bluey/Peppa Pig are closer to 6 or 7+ year old material. Or in foreign language levels: B1-ish / 2+ on the American scale. ------ Seriously. Just switch the shows to a different language and the level gap becomes blatantly clear. In perhaps more Techie terms: Mickey Mouse Clubhouse level of understanding is achievable with Duolingo. Peppa Pig / Bluey (and similar level shows) are so far beyond Duolingo that I bet most Duolingo users will NEVER be able to achieve Bluey-level understanding in a foreign language (and that deep textbook + 1000ish vocab study memorization needs to be done before Bluey can be understood). ------ Maybe the vocab estimate is easiest to understand. Bluey feels like a show that uses 1000 words with mastery (and maybe 2000 hard words as learning exercises in the show). Mickey Mouse clubhouse uses maybe 250 words with mastery and maybe uses the top1000 list as learning/teaching words. How (and why??) does Mickey Mouse clubhouse make an ENTIRE song consisting of a single word? (hotdog?) Because it's written for people where 'Hot dog' is a difficult word and needs repetition. If I never hear the theme to "Mickey Mouse Clubhouse" again, it will be too soon. We don't let our kid watch TV at home, barely watching it ourselves, and have no streaming subscriptions. My American niece, on the other hand, a mere two years my son's senior, has had a TV in her room since at least age 5 with access to Disney+, and my brother and sister-in-law let her fall asleep to it. She was a good little hostess, putting on something she thought her younger cousin would like, and she was, sadly, correct. However, while she had spent her life with constant AV stimulation, my kid couldn't sleep. I eventually had to tell her that if she wanted her cousin to sleep in her room, she had to turn off the TV at bedtime. This was very, very hard for her, and she couldn't understand why he couldn't sleep. > To the point where you assume it's an unauthorized rip off until you discover they license to anyone. That explains the surprisingly mediocre Darth Vader toy I saw over the weekend, and the "the only Star Wars part of this trailer is the lightsaber"-ness on the ads for the new Star Wars game. Fond-ish memories of Disney's direct-to-vhs push in the 90s https://www.businessinsider.com/disney-straight-to-video-seq... The animation quality of mickey mouse clubhouse was appalling when I first had kids. They seem to have decided to care about that, as the animation on mickey mouse clubhouse + is a marked improvement. Apropos of nothing, I watched some Gabby's Dollhouse with some children recently, and that show is absolutely unhinged. Cats everywhere. > Mickey Mouse Clubhouse's lazy CG animation and unimaginative storytelling Yes, this show is absolute dogshit, pure slop and yet it ended in 2016. The dialog is completely braindead, episodes barely make sense. The ancient Mickey Mouse cartoons are so good! Just a few I loved which are still very funny and I bet a few people remember: - 1940: Mr. Mouse Takes a Trip ("Tickets please!") - 1959: Donald in Mathmagic Land > To the point where you assume it's an unauthorized rip off until you discover they license to anyone. That's because people consider Disney an entertainment company whereas in fact its the biggest licensing company in the world. Yeah, basically Disney invested a billion dollar in Pregnant Elsa Spider-Man Beach Castle. You need to realize more children in the world interact with Disney IP through Pregnant Elsa Spider-Man than through actual Disney real IP. Perhaps this is a play to own and monetize that vector in the future. They may be viewing this as an inevitable outcome with open models/fly-by-night providers/providers in more liberal copy-right jurisdictions. They can either invest in mass classification and enforcement operations or gain some revenue share from it. True, those videos were probably going to happen regardless. At least this way Diseny gets to give OpenAI a billion dollars at the same time. They are likely making informed decisions. Disney/Pixar are players, not bystanders. Besides, the character they built their empire on is in the public domain now. No he’s not. Disney still owns the trademark on the signature mouse. What’s in the public domain is Steamboat Willy. I agree. It would be hilarious if we weren’t all strapped to the hood of the same car. "there were certain historical characters removed from Sora 2 because people kept making racist videos that are hard to censor, and it became increasingly unhinged" Also Google "Elsagate" to see what sorts of things people would like to do with Disney characters. Or a YouTube search for Elsagate. The other thing I'd point out is that people kind of seem to forget this, but it isn't a requirement that AI video be generated, then shoveled straight out without modification. Elsagate shows the level of effort that people are willing to put into this (a strange combination of laziness, but extreme effort poured into enabling that laziness). You can use the blessed Disney video generator to generate something, then feed it into another less controlled AI system to modify it into something Disney wouldn't want. Or a video of a Disney character doing something innocent can be easily turned into something else; it's not hard to ask the AI systems to put something "against a green screen", or with a bit more sophistication, something that can be motion tracked with some success and extracted. "A front camera shot of Cinderella crouching down, repeatedly putting a cucumber in and out of her mouth. She is against a green screen." - where ever that video is going, Disney isn't going to like it. And that's just a particularly obvious example, not the totality of all the possibilities. Just putting controls on the AI video output itself isn't going to be enough for Disney. > Also Google "Elsagate" to see what sorts of things people would like to do with Disney characters. Or a YouTube search for Elsagate.... Elsagate shows the level of effort that people are willing to put into this (a strange combination of laziness, but extreme effort poured into enabling that laziness). I still wonder what motivates the people behind that sort of thing. It'd be easy to understand if it were just porn, but what's been described to me is just... bizarre. I always figured it was an engagement optimization thing—there were people mass producing content using popular characters and just throwing tons of stuff at the wall, and the ones that veered unsettling/bizarre wound up getting lots of engagement so they kept doubling down on it. That kind of feedback loop is certainly responsible for many other curious traits of online content that is circulated in algorithmically-curated feeds. The tighter the loop between content creation (e.g. when you can generate unlimited content essentially for free) and the ability to measure its success (engagement), the more social media becomes a sort of genetic algorithm for optimizing content to be the most addictive possible at the expense of any other attribute. There won't be one single reason. For some it is a dark sense of humour perhaps twisted a little too far off track, that perhaps they should keep in their own head or at least just between very close friends. For some it is simply money without caring that it might upset people: get enough engagement and ad impressions and it is worthwhile if you can ignore the moral aspect. Money might not be the objective at all, there are people who just want the attention, or the appearance of attention, and fake internet points (youtube views and such) sate their need at least temporarily. For some it is simply deliberate griefing, for all the reasons that is a thing generally. Or some mix of the above. None of it healthy IMO, but explainable. In a few cases it is a dark in-joke between a small set of people that just happened to have used a public host for distribution, that unexpectedly went more viral. There's an instinct in many of us to destroy and pervert, and it can lead to very dark places. This is silly. They aren't trying to pervert the children. This isn't some cabal. It's just money. It's just people trying to get children's eyeballs to collect minuscule ad revenue. It's the same as the people who abuse their kids for a Youtube channel, or the russian companies that put out 10 """DIY""" shorts a day which are just fake. Youtube rewards constant churning content creation, so that's what is done Yes, spiderman and Elsa on YouTube is a prime example. It's just slop for kids, they're not even in the same universe. But kids like spiderman, and they also like Elsa, so... here we are. They do it because it actually works. There are people in this world who will do anything for money. They will destroy your children mentally if it makes them a single dollar, they will traumatize them and cause lasting damage. We have created a world in which these people have free access to our children. Generative AI and getting everyone on the planet online is going to contribute massively to this. You’re already seeing a massive rise in sextortion scams, pig butchering scams, scams of all kinds. Whatever the reason is (maybe online doesn’t feel “real” to people or something), a person with an internet connection where $100 is a great monthly income will do anything to make that money, even if that means endangering someone else’s children or mentally scarring them. Combined with poor enforcement in places like Nigeria and India, we’re already in the midst of a scam epidemic. I'd like to give those people the benefit of the doubt, and state that I believe they don't start out intentionally trying to damage children. They're simply trying to maximise their own earnings, and don't give a shit about what collateral damage occurs in response to their actions, as long as earnings go up. They'll optimise for whatever causes numbers to increase. Children just happen to sometimes be what makes that happen. Well, bizarre is the point. Surely you do understand that this is the content to gather kids views, because there is a ton of kids on the internet, and they can be monetized. I don't know what kind of research they do on their audience and if they purposefully want to traumatize kids as much as possible, but I suppose all this shit does capture kid's attention more than just Disney characters fucking. It's probably a lot of kids just being silly. Sure there are plenty of adult trolls, but whenever I see people bewildered at unruly online behavior, I think it's because they cannot see the age/maturity level of the troll. I can absolutely see why people would find this funny. Don't use a cucumber if you're going to be subtracting the green screen I think the idea is you want the cucumber also removed so it can be replaced with something else… Oh my. I feel like we’re corrupting an innocent mind by explaining this to you. They want the cucumber to be removed too buddy. Don’t worry about it OK. Sora has good enough controls it is basically impossible to make it do a dirty video like that. > Also Google "Elsagate" <snip> Or a YouTube search for Elsagate. Isn't that essentially the same thing now? Disney is not the same company it was 20 years ago. 2025 Disney encourages children to gamble and gives Pat McAfee significant visibility. Disney is the same company as it was 20 years ago. In fact, it's the same company as it was 100 years ago. They only care about profit. They do just enough brand management to preserve the profit motive. To be fair to Walt Disney, he cared about a lot beyond profit and believed in advancing technology and society in a way modern corporate leaders absolutely do not. He was no saint but he's a far cry from modern CEO's. To be fair, Walt Disney partnered with his brother Roy Disney, and they co-founded and ran the Walt Disney Company (and the iterations before it). These iterations of the Disney Company were never just Walt Disney. Yes, but if you watch any documentaries about early Disney and listen to those people talk everything was about Walt's vision even after death they would ask "What would Walt want or do?" He was a figure whose influence and vision is on another level in American History (both good and bad) and early Disney was Walt no matter who was in charge on paper or even if Walt was still alive. That only started to change under Eisner. Roy was the one who kept Walt grounded so ambition shrunk but they stayed the course Walt set. Walt grew up in an era when there was still a sense that wealth and power brought with it strong moral obligations to serve the community and nation. We lost that somewhere along the way. I think that, given the times, we might rate him a little bit above "no saint". Perhaps slightly below or at par with the norms of his time, which we could now look back on as the peak of some rather nasty tendencies in society. https://www.vulture.com/2013/12/walt-disney-anti-semitism-ra... Companies can have additional motives to profit, and they’re more likely to when control is concentrated just because individual people have multiple desires. This was certainly the case with early Disney because Walt Disney was a megalomaniac utopian. I don’t think the original Epcot plans ever had a reasonable chance of being profitable, but Walt pushed them because he believed he was the saviour of urbanism in America. Yes, perhaps if we deflated Disney’s moral rot by a diversified basket of other morally-rotted goods, I suppose we’d be able to conclude that Disney is perhaps the same company. Outside that effort, I see a company once famous for its prudishness now unafraid of shame. I firmly disagree and think this shallow take dishonors a pretty great man. While not perfect, Disney gave us the bedrock of American children's culture which has been a soft tool for the US for generations. Not to mention technology and other advancements. I'm not a Disney nut, but the man was one-of-a-kind and an impressive industrialist who instilled a great culture of innovation and a deep love of children and play. All things I value. > While not perfect Yep, Disney was also a leading producer of racist tropes and content during Jim Crow. Historical clips of Mickey Mouse characters putting on minstrel shows with blackface alongside other racist stereotypes like crows can easily be found online[0]. Not to mention Song of the South[1], a film Disney produced based on Uncle Remus stories following slaves who happily live on a Georgia plantation. Disney has, of course, done their best to scrub these entries from history, but they played a major role in depicting racist tropes to kids for decades. We all acknowledge that Walt Disney was a flawed person, I don't think anybody here disagrees. To me, what sets him apart from other corporate leaders isn't Walt's moral character, but rather his ambition to influence the direction of humanities development, both culturally and technologically. He was about a lot more than just making number go up. One could argue that the company reoriented itself so purely towards children's art and kitsch because they needed to get themselves into a market segment where they could completely sanitize their output of these kinds of embarrassments. Amen. Blaming Disney for bad content is like blaming politicians. Who asked for the content? Who elected the politicians? **[Jiminy] crickets** Fwiw I think the all US presidents since Clinton were elected on a non interventionist/pacifist campaign. Blaming the voters when every one of them (less so with Biden) violated those promises is a bit unfair, if you still believe in democracy. Almost every one of them was elected again, often by wider margins (the only exception losing to another one of them) after deatroying any illusion innthat direction you might argue was produced by their campaign positions, so I don't think you can absolved the American electorate here, even if one agrees that their campaign before taking office met your description. The parent's claim is effortlessly debunked. Bush sure wasn't anti-interventionist for the second term after entering the Iraq War 2.0. Even Obama campaigned to persist the "necessary" Afghanistan war. I don't recall George W. Bush ever actually promising to stay out of wars and interventions. It's been standard for the two parties to criticize each-other on grounds of doing interventionism badly or going too far towards one extreme regarding foreign policy, but nobody has run as a real pacifist or isolationist because they would lose in a landslide. It especially doesn't help that pacifism and isolationism are associated with activist fringes in both parties who often lean into crank theories or make friends publicly with adversarial states. Blaming the voters seems completely sensible when they reelected W in 2004. The man's Vice President was Dick freakin' Cheney. You can't seriously tell me the people voted for pacifism and got screwed over. We can acknowledge that people are terrible, while also wanting people not to cater to the lowest common denominator. You appear to be lost. Who said and where's the "false dichotomy" you allude to in the discussion above? I read your comment as saying that we should blame the people who create the demand for Disney's products, and the voters who elect the politicians, instead of Disney and the politicians. Not so? No, comparative blame is fair for all parties. The context is messy, but my comment's in the context of rejecting blame on Disney alone for "losing their way" when they have had the same way (read: $$$) as before and they're delivering products people want. What has Pat Mcafee got to do with anything, is he somehow a controversial figure now? I think its just that people either love him or hate him and it seems like OP is part of the latter group I don’t have an opinion on him, despite the suggestiveness of my comment. He’s more illustrative of a spirit that Disney at a time did not have an appetite for. Pat Mcafee catching strays (He has had his show for ~6 years) but Screamin' A Smith gets a pass? Your bias is showing. Stephen A Smith has done as much to harm ESPN's brand than any other figure. Please don't assume my biases from whom I failed to mention – I could have used SAS instead of Pat and my point would have been the same. Perhaps I should have expected that the conversation would get pulled this way but it's not where I wanted it to go. But this was also just a short-lived political environment as well, where companies pretended to care about the current thing because it was politically expedient. How long did it take for them to do a 180? I mean they didn't believe in any of that stuff even a little. Grok create already lets you make 6 second videos, though sometimes you have to say "Italian plumber" or "famous princesses". It's definitely not a war you're going to win simply via copyright claims to the big chat interfaces. This stuff will happen regardless. Especially as more open high quality LLMs role out. They might as well have some direct say in the matter with the big companies by creating relationships and profiting via licensing. The AI IP lines are being drawn now. The IP holders will sue or DMCA the platforms, not the users. First Grok, then eventually YouTube. Then they'll charge licensing fees. Are also: RIAA wrt Suno, Udio. They will be DMCA'ing the social media posts which is nothing new. The big models will and already have copyright filters on, people are just working around them which will always be a battle. They also don't host the videos they create themselves on OpenAI/Grok. As I said in my comment these videos are not all going to be via the mainline Grok/ChatGPT interfaces and alternative video generators will eventually become widely accessible to the public. It won't move the needle if users have access to unfiltered Wan, Comfy, local, etc. as that's unlikely to be how most users will create content. The majority of creation will happen directly through the powerful platforms themselves - YouTube, Meta, TikTok, and Sora. This is the first time where platforms will be able to embed extremely powerful creation tools directly into the platform, and this will undoubtedly begin to take over for the majority of content produced. Platforms and IP rights holders won't police the 1% of external user uploads. They'll negotiate deals with the platforms in bulk. If they don't license Elsa, Marvel, Pokemon, etc. then the platform wholesale will lose access to the IPs. Platforms will have to pay. These are probably billion dollar deals. YouTube getting Pokemon exclusively for the next three years? Easily billions. Why even chase random internet users when you can just collect the gigantic platform check from one deal? It'll look kind of like the cable tv / network model with occasional renegotiations. Or gaming consoles and exclusives. Or networks and sports. Pretty sure Youtube is constantly being sued for copyright violation by now. The question is what will happen when "the platform" is a model downloaded on torrent sites and just generates movies from a prompt. On the plus side: excellent compression ratio. On the down side: discussion with your kids about how at the end Snow White did not transform into a gigantic mech and blew up the Evil Queen with rockets. Must be your old memory, dad! I understand that Disney might care about this, but I don't see why they should. What exactly does “fanart” (no matter how distasteful and controversial) change? Let people generate whatever fictional character they want. It only works until Mickey Mouse shows up on your Tiktok feed lynching an African American and doing a sieg heil salute. Are you sure Disney wants that or would not care about that?? There are clearly plenty of people who feel the same way as you, and for those people what I’m about to ask might have such an obvious answer that it could feel like I’m being rhetorical or feigning ignorance to provoke an emotional response, but it’s truly honest: Why should Disney care? To which you might say “because people care”, so: Why should people care? Back when I was a spud I used futuristic text-to-speech synthesis to make my computer say “Eye am Bill Gaytes my farts go FERT FERT FERT” - Should Bill Gates be offended? What about the people who like him? What about the Intel processor I used to create it? Or the company behind the TTS software? Would anyone think they’re involved and endorsed it? I guess the real question is: are we catering the world to people who can’t make that distinction? People care because it's entirely unconscious. Even if you choose not to care, you can't, because you've already seen it. The way advertisement works is that it's brain hacking - it's just associations. Over time your brain associates a brand with a product or products, and then simply by having this association in your brain you're more likely to buy the product. This also works for negative advertisement. Think about it. Suppose you did see mickey mouse saluting Hitler, or maybe you saw mickey mouse stick a jar up his little rat ass. When you see mickey mouse, undoubtedly, even if just for a second, your mind will think about what you saw before. You might discount it immediately, but the damage is done. You still feel that emotion, even if only for a split second, and you have been influenced by it. The question is why it shows up on your Tiktok feed. This used to be a "zing", but don't think it is anymore. Try to make a new profile somewhere and select a few topics of interest. You will get suggested the most engaging "relevant" content. For me, I made a cycling Instagram and my feed instantly got filled with girls showing of cleavage in lycra with cycling hashtags. It was not meant as an attack on GP; it was meant as exactly this opportunity to question "the algorithm". I swear to god Instagram is like the patriarchy speedrun. If it finds out you're a woman, within mere minutes it's 100% "you're fat" "try this diet" "you've GOT to buy this viral dress on shein!!" And if you're a man, it's boobs, ass, objectification, and products to make you feel more like a man. The sheer velocity at which Instagram will shovel you into capitalist-patriachy++ is shocking. This is a good point. Instead of policing what trolls will use it for, the same AI should be able to detect racist content and prevent it from spreading I thought it was well known and generally accepted that the social medial companies push controversial click/rage bait to keep people “engaged”? Look, I've gotten cartel beheadings and beatings on a YouTube search query for Jack Russell terriers. Don't throw shade. If you haven't gotten "How the fuck did that get there?", consider yourself lucky I guess. Best I can figure, terriers have some unintentional shared vector space with much more unpleasant content. People saying this have not worked with Sora before. I challenge you to generate anything even close to that. Tiktok has AI moderation tools that you are highly underestimating. The people making these are good at more subtle forms of hate with coded language and indirect references. So what? Similar videos and pictures have existed since the dawn of web. Yes, AI enables people to produce these in higher fidelity, but I don't see how it is any different to Dolan MS Paint comics. No one is going to think that Mickey doing lynching is official art, nor will they think that Mickey is a real person who has done that. I guess it will depend on how good their security is, because I'm assuming Disney is entering this deal with hard guidelines on what will be allowed. AI with hard guidelines? I don't think that will work. Not necessarily AI with 'hard guidelines' AI tools that pass output to a filter with 'hard guidelines' is definitely feasible. Take the input as normal, pass it into Sora 2 and execute it as you would, pass the output through a filtering process that adheres to hard guidelines. Of course, when talking about images, what is a 'hard guideline' here? Do you take the output and pass it through AI to identify if there's x y or z categorys of content here and then reject it? "Hard guidelines" is making me think of the Pirate Code from Disney's Pirates of The Caribbean. This. Don't believe for a second that Sora will allow you to make racist content with Disney characters. That said, there are a lot of other models out there that care about neither licensing nor alignment. So those will allow you to make racist content. Then you can do whatever you like with that generated content. A lot of IP owners will learn that there is more than one way to skin a cat. It's easier than people think to turn children's characters, like say, Hermoine, into a raging racist. And there's very little technically speaking that they can do to stop it. But yes, on OpenAI specific properties, they can definitely stop it dead in its tracks. They can even get better at stopping it over time. In fact, the more users try to generate it, the better the system will get at stopping it. I'm sure that's what Disney's lawyers specified in the contracts and what their execs expect. However, judging by how LLM controls have gone in the past, I'm fully expecting to see a slew of awful content featuring Disney's characters in the days after this launches. OpenAI also probably won't ever be able to actually stop people from generating harmful content with the characters, but the volume of awful stuff will probably eventually slow down as people get bored and move onto the next controversial thing. > Don't believe for a second that Sora will allow you to make racist content with Disney characters. Don’t believe for a minute that whatever filters it uses will be sensitive enough to the way racist content is constructed to stop people from doing just that. "Don't let the user do racist shit" is literally AGI Hard territory of problem solving. It's right up there with "Let kids communicate anonymously but not to perverts" and "Is this porn or educational?" > Don't believe for a second that Sora will allow you to make racist content with Disney characters. Yes, because AI's so far have been oh so resilient to jailbreaks and oh so great at picking out the potentially "not aligned with corporate values" content... How can you prevent it from making that content? People will find a way to combine certain words together to make it happen. I don't think that you will ever be able to generate Disney characters with the Sora app. Sora is both a model and an app. Instead I think that there will be a heavily guardrailed specialized app where you can do some highly restricted things for the opportunity for the content to show up on Disney+. Think of it as "Disney art! Powered by Sora". Given the creativity of the jailbreaking community I will be very impressed if OpenAI manage to reliably prevent Sora from creating disagreeable content with Disney characters. If they’re jail breaking it, they should already be able to get it to create Disney characters without this deal. Almost like this is not about the value of the deal, but the payoff to both sides from the headlines? How are they going to stop it? A certain combination of nonstandard characters will make an AI character drop an n-word no problem I guess they could chuck the output through whisper or something to see if it transcribes back to anything dodgy? LLM security feels very ball of sand held together with duct tape haha > Don't believe for a second that Sora will allow you to make racist content with Disney characters. It's not racist, it's an historically accurate depiction of 1930s Germany under the authority of a significant leader who may or may not be controversial today Once you make the content it's just content, no? How the hell are you going to ban racism? A lot of racism is "dog whistle" stuff anyway -- it's designed to convey a message to people who already know what is being suggested while seeming innocuous to any enforceable standards of decency... The racists will surely have no trouble bending the models to produce Disney content that is in practice used to promote and celebrate racism. Based on what I’ve seen on Sora, it’s likely possible but only for a day or a few hours. They’ve been getting better and faster at censoring. I agree. Those characters are likely safe on Sora That's still whack-a-mole though, just because they're rolling out new virus definitions quicker doesn't do anything to prevent zero day exploits I had the same thought. Finally, Sora will be teaming up with all your favorite Disney characters! Didn't that happen already? It's just a funny coincidence. >This will not end well for Disney I have faith that the Parks Imagineers will soon be installing Sora Stalls in and around every attraction in Disney World. The upside is personalized content that kids will love; the downside is the internet doing what it always does >This feels like another circular investment where Disney is hoping to make money back I'm sure. How is that circular? I assume that they mean that OpenAI will now be obligated to pay a lot of that money back to Disney as some kind of licensing fee. No idea if it's true, but that's the only way his comment makes sense. I look forward to making a few videos of my daughters favorite Disney princesses "talking" to her. I look forward to chatting with Pluto and Goofy and asking why one has to wear pants when both of them are dogs. Given that only one of the dogs can talk, you're set to get only one answer. Though I suspect that the ability to talk bestows bodily shame, based on this anecdotal evidence. My impulse is to agree, and I'm almost wondering whether Disney figured that they'd have more restraining influence by getting in legitimately than by having generative AI companies wink and look away from rampant trademark violations because Disney won't pay them to care. There is a lot of YouTube content that is basically people playing with toys like Paw Patrol and having them interact in doll houses. I'm not a fan of this for my kids, and there will be a ton more of it. And yes, there will be political slop as well. On the other hand there was a video about what happened to Mickey and Goofy in Vietnam... I'm probably okay with an updated version of that. reposting what i said in the other thread: > There is no way the character licensing survives an hour of contact with the public, unless it is _extremely_ restricted. I can't imagine a worse job than trying to "curate" the torrent of sewage that is going to get created. Deadpool is pretty much the only Disney-owned property this makes sense for.
And I say this as someone who _likes_ using Sora. >This will not end well for Disney [...] Guy on the internet knows more about businesses than a 200 billion century-old corporation. A classic. This might end well for Disney. This provides a different marketing angle to bring in younger people to Disney. The filters will block a lot of the sexual violence content. The original cartoons are deemed racist by some so this won't open a door already opened. But it is another circular investment to throw on the AI bubble pile. Is it circular, though? Is an AI company giving Disney $1B? If just the news of the deal boosts Disney stock enough to pay for the deal, then yes. Or if it boosts OpenAI valuation because they now have Disney IP enough to pay off on Disney's investment, it is basically Disney producing content indirectly. The "original cartoons" are super tame compared to the heinous shit you can easily find on Sora. Maybe the point is for it to not end well, like instead of waiting around they’re taking the helm and driving it into the ground early. People are already doing whatever clips they want to using open source models. Why is this a problem with Disney? Who cares? Online trolls make inappropriate videos with characters. Rule 34: If it exists, there is porn of it. It's so exhausting that companies are overly cautious about everything and let a tiny niche of internet culture drive these decisions. If you get obscene material in your social media feeds, you will continue to see this kind of stuff except maybe with some Disney IP. If not, it will have no impact to your life. But practical things that affect 99% of people like you mentioned will be better, like your child wants to hear Mickey wish him happy birthday. So I applaud this. Thank you. Sad I had to scroll this far to find a comment that wasn't pro-censorship of Fan Art because a character they saw on the internet offended someone's Protestant values. I agree with you completely but I'm absolutely shocked that Disney would agree to this. They are extremely protective of how their IP is used. Famously so. Not anymore. Just like every other business on the planet it is being run by people focused solely on wealth extraction now And, don't forget to figure in that OpenAI has indicated they're getting into porn. Is this about when Sam mentioned they want to continue/start letting people do lewd texting with LLMs? Or are you talking about actual pornography? The “lewd texting with LLM” will be a tool for writing actual pornography, and in workflows for image and video pornography, even if the image and video generation doesn’t happen on OpenAI’s platform (in fact, people are using ChatGPT and other major AI engines as tools in that already, but loosening the filters were facilitate that even more on OpenAI’s platform.) OpenAI knows that, and the people interested in that capability know that, even if many of the other people seeing the marketing about it don't. > The “lewd texting with LLM” will be a tool for writing actual pornography Sure, but does that mean "OpenAI has indicated they're getting into porn"? A bit like saying W3C is getting into porn because the web is used for porn, together with other things. Even when I try to think of parent's comment in the most charitable way, I don't think that's what they meant. Personally I prefer if my tools stay as tools, and let me do professional work with them regardless of what that profession is. > Sure, but does that mean "OpenAI has indicated they're getting into porn"? Yes, it literally means they have indicated to the customer base that is looking into making porn. It may not mean they have indicated it to some other audiences. > A bit like saying W3C is getting into porn because the web is used for porn, together with other things. No, its a bit like saying the W3C is getting into porn if the W3C had announced changes in the platform whose main market appeal was to people making porn, but announced it in a way that glossed over and minimized that. If, on the other hand, the web had a steady state of being used for porn, you wouldn't say the W3C is getting into anything, you’d just say “the internet is for porn” (which has, of course, rather famously been said, and even sung.) The initial claim was "OpenAI has indicated they're getting into porn", letting writers write the scripts, story-lines or dialogue for pornography does not mean OpenAI suddenly "does porn". In that case Google and Microsoft with their Docs and Office are also "getting into porn", which would be a ridiculous claim. > The initial claim was "OpenAI has indicated they're getting into porn", letting writers write the scripts, story-lines or dialogue for pornography does not mean OpenAI suddenly "does porn". In that case Google and Microsoft with their Docs and Office are also "getting into porn", which would be a ridiculous claim. Actively announcing a change of policy whose marketable function is to facilitate porn production is only the case for the OpenAI action and you have presented nothing analogous for the entities you are trying to hold up as comparable. > Actively announcing a change of policy whose marketable function is to facilitate porn production Where exactly did this happen though? And how am I supposed to prove a negative? It's up to you to present evidence that this is something OpenAI actively promote as a use case for their tools, something I personally haven't seen, but I'm open to changing what I think is happening if proof can be presented that this is the case. AI has driven the corporate suites of these companies insane. > As part of the agreement, Disney will make a $1 billion equity investment in OpenAI, and receive warrants to purchase additional equity. I don't know what kind of hypnosis tricks Sam Altman pulls on these people but the fact that Disney is giving money to OpenAI as part of a deal to give over the rights to its characters is absolutely baffling. OpenAI and ChatGPT have been pioneering but they're absolutely going to be commoditized. IMO there is at least a 50:50 chance OpenAI equity is going to be next to worthless in the future. That Disney would give over so much value and so much cash for it... insane. Afaict it might be another circular deal? They buy equity (at what evaluation?) and options, and license some IP (is this the billion flowing straight back?) to OpenAI (not to SORA users?) for very restricted use cases, with a commitment from OpenAI to support Disney's copyright racketeering. Disney only exists now to exploit the IP it has bought. They just want to join the circle of OpenAI, Nvidia, Microsoft et al making meaningless deals with each other. If OpenAI has exclusive rights to AI generation for Disney and other IP rights holders, that would create the kind of moat they've been missing so far. All the more reason it's insane for Disney to be the one giving money! Disney is buying equity from OpenAI. You frame it as "giving OpenAI money" because you hold a (quite insane) assumption that OpenAI's equity is worth nothing. > Disney is buying equity from OpenAI. Can you buy equity from OpenAI without also giving OpenAI a license to use your IP? Even if the equity is worth $1 billion, how much is Disney's IP license worth? > commoditized not for disney content. Disney can pick OpenAI as the winner for this by not signing deals and suing anyone else. These kinds of equity deals tend to include MFN clauses around inference pricing. Ik Anthropic did something similar a couple years ago. Thats a business agreement not a moat.
And you might have rights to generate the characters but they still need to do something. You only have to look at the repeated Disney flops to see they themselves have no ideas. And if you're the only company with that business agreement. As long as you still have it, it's a...moat. Well that’s the thing with moats - they don’t just disappear one day. These kinds of parternships also throw in free inference with MFN clauses, which make a mutual moat. A moat doesn't have to be a feature, and equity stakes have been fairly successful moats (eg. Much of AWS's ML services being powered by Anthropic models due to their equity stake in Anthropic). A moat is a permanent feature protecting a castle against attack. That’s the metaphor. If it’s not their own device intrinsically protecting them then it’s not a moat in my book. That is not how we use the term "moat" in this context, because competitors eventually converge on offerings within 1-2 years. I don't need some stuck up HNer telling me about stuff I deal with in my day-to-day job. Edit: can't reply > a business deal that can be transferred to a new partner the second it expires is much more temporary Generally, these kinds of equity deals include an MFN clause. > That is not how we use the term "moat" in this context, because competitors eventually converge on offerings within 1-2 years. Then I guess we need a new term because that's not how I interpret the term moat either. To me, ChatGPT chat history is a moat. It allows them to differentiate their product and competitors cannot copy it. If someone switches to a new AI service they will have to build their chat history from scratch. By comparison a business deal that can be transferred to a new partner the second it expires is much more temporary.
postalcoder - 7 hours ago
ramesh31 - 7 hours ago
gekoxyz - 7 hours ago
Hamuko - 7 hours ago
crumpled - 16 minutes ago
onion2k - 25 minutes ago
afavour - 7 hours ago
johnnyanmac - 35 minutes ago
Hamuko - 7 hours ago
johnnyanmac - 30 minutes ago
afavour - 6 hours ago
johnnyanmac - 33 minutes ago
eykanal - 7 hours ago
johnnyanmac - 27 minutes ago
giancarlostoro - 7 hours ago
podgietaru - 6 hours ago
afavour - 5 hours ago
cogman10 - 9 minutes ago
johnnyanmac - 22 minutes ago
mbreese - 2 hours ago
echelon - an hour ago
johnnyanmac - 13 minutes ago
throw0101d - 4 hours ago
dylan604 - 4 hours ago
johnnyanmac - 7 minutes ago
tietjens - 3 hours ago
dragontamer - an hour ago
MandieD - 3 hours ago
ben_w - 3 hours ago
roywiggins - 5 hours ago
scrumbledober - 5 hours ago
mkehrt - 4 hours ago
tehwebguy - 4 hours ago
dvfjsdhgfv - 4 hours ago
philistine - 6 hours ago
whywhywhywhy - 39 minutes ago
lumost - 6 hours ago
soupfordummies - 2 hours ago
startupsfail - 4 hours ago
reactordev - 4 hours ago
colejohnson66 - 3 hours ago
apercu - 4 hours ago
jerf - 6 hours ago
zahlman - 6 hours ago
macNchz - 5 hours ago
dspillett - 3 hours ago
littlecorner - 4 hours ago
mrguyorama - 4 hours ago
array_key_first - 3 hours ago
lossolo - 5 hours ago
radicaldreamer - 4 hours ago
oarsinsync - 4 hours ago
krick - 5 hours ago
gosub100 - 5 hours ago
Y_Y - 6 hours ago
iamacyborg - 6 hours ago
Zenbit_UX - 5 hours ago
cm2012 - 6 hours ago
dylan604 - 4 hours ago
postalcoder - 7 hours ago
godzillabrennus - 7 hours ago
jeffwask - 6 hours ago
godzillabrennus - 6 hours ago
jeffwask - 6 hours ago
macintux - 5 hours ago
eli_gottlieb - an hour ago
DoughnutHole - 6 hours ago
postalcoder - 6 hours ago
meesles - 6 hours ago
CodingJeebus - 5 hours ago
mikkupikku - 5 hours ago
eli_gottlieb - an hour ago
caminante - 6 hours ago
armenarmen - 6 hours ago
dragonwriter - 6 hours ago
caminante - 3 hours ago
eli_gottlieb - an hour ago
wat10000 - 3 hours ago
wat10000 - 5 hours ago
caminante - 3 hours ago
wat10000 - 2 hours ago
caminante - 4 minutes ago
wooger - 6 hours ago
jairuhme - 6 hours ago
postalcoder - 6 hours ago
irishcoffee - 6 hours ago
postalcoder - 6 hours ago
thevillagechief - 6 hours ago
bombcar - 7 hours ago
dmix - 6 hours ago
echelon - 6 hours ago
dmix - 6 hours ago
echelon - 5 hours ago
spwa4 - 5 hours ago
yreg - 6 hours ago
notyourwork - 6 hours ago
docjay - 5 hours ago
array_key_first - 3 hours ago
zahlman - 6 hours ago
matsemann - 5 hours ago
zahlman - 3 hours ago
array_key_first - 3 hours ago
gosub100 - 5 hours ago
lp0_on_fire - 5 hours ago
salawat - 5 hours ago
cm2012 - 3 hours ago
ojr - 3 hours ago
kevin_thibedeau - 3 hours ago
yreg - 4 hours ago
impulser_ - 7 hours ago
edoceo - 6 hours ago
forgotaccount3 - 6 hours ago
pjc50 - 5 hours ago
bilbo0s - 7 hours ago
zrobotics - 7 hours ago
dragonwriter - 5 hours ago
mrguyorama - 3 hours ago
PunchyHamster - 6 hours ago
dagmx - 7 hours ago
doug_durham - 5 hours ago
simonw - 7 hours ago
sarchertech - 6 hours ago
andrew_lettuce - 6 hours ago
corobo - 5 hours ago
lm28469 - 6 hours ago
conartist6 - 7 hours ago
chaostheory - 7 hours ago
andrew_lettuce - 6 hours ago
qmr - 7 hours ago
throw4847285 - 6 hours ago
hbosch - 6 hours ago
RataNova - 3 hours ago
tr45872267 - 6 hours ago
sebzim4500 - 6 hours ago
reaperducer - 6 hours ago
baggachipz - 5 hours ago
eli_gottlieb - an hour ago
havblue - 7 hours ago
empath75 - 7 hours ago
moralestapia - 4 hours ago
ipaddr - 7 hours ago
smith7018 - 7 hours ago
andrew_lettuce - 6 hours ago
thrance - 6 hours ago
luxuryballs - 5 hours ago
DeathArrow - 6 hours ago
bko - 7 hours ago
oceanplexian - 5 hours ago
nonethewiser - 5 hours ago
bluefirebrand - 2 hours ago
tiahura - 7 hours ago
embedding-shape - 7 hours ago
dragonwriter - 5 hours ago
embedding-shape - 5 hours ago
dragonwriter - 5 hours ago
embedding-shape - 5 hours ago
dragonwriter - 5 hours ago
embedding-shape - 4 hours ago
afavour - 7 hours ago
PeterStuer - 7 hours ago
herbturbo - 7 hours ago
jimbokun - 7 hours ago
afavour - 7 hours ago
raincole - 7 hours ago
mcphage - 7 hours ago
mritchie712 - 7 hours ago
alephnerd - 7 hours ago
herbturbo - 7 hours ago
jklinger410 - 7 hours ago
herbturbo - 7 hours ago
alephnerd - 7 hours ago
herbturbo - 7 hours ago
alephnerd - 7 hours ago
afavour - 6 hours ago