[HN Gopher] Seedance 1.0
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Seedance 1.0
        
       Author : matallo
       Score  : 162 points
       Date   : 2025-06-12 14:26 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (seed.bytedance.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (seed.bytedance.com)
        
       | GaggiX wrote:
       | Very nice being able to read an actual paper on a powerful text-
       | to-video model.
        
         | liuliu wrote:
         | Yeah. It is great. So apparently separating spatial / temporal
         | attention works if you are careful and train with large enough
         | dataset too!
        
       | silverlight wrote:
       | Is this available somewhere to use?
        
         | ivape wrote:
         | This is obviously going straight to TikTok. The big issue is
         | it's going to open the flood gates on their own platform.
         | 
         | Anyway, if everyone wants to be a content creator, why not
         | charge them for the privilege of that desire? A content creator
         | will forever need AI-generated _something_. So now we move from
         | "you get to post your content for free" over to "you get to now
         | pay us through this AI-gateway to post your content".
        
         | Maxious wrote:
         | > Seedance 1.0 will be integrated into multiple platforms in
         | June 2025, including Doubao and Jimeng
         | 
         | > https://www.doubao.com/chat/create-video
         | 
         | > https://jimeng.jianying.com/ai-tool/video/generate
         | 
         | https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.09113
        
       | thebestmoshe wrote:
       | The future is something like the TikTok algorithm, but generated
       | on the fly.
       | 
       | As you scroll, it learns what you like and generates more videos.
        
         | arbll wrote:
         | I think it will also try to influence what you like to maximize
         | engagement unfortunately...
        
           | BizarroLand wrote:
           | There's a cliff though.
           | 
           | It will happen for different people at different times, but
           | at some point the realization that you are looking at people
           | who don't exist living lives that aren't possible to sell you
           | products that won't help you will click for you, and when it
           | does it will cut you off from society in a way we don't
           | currently have words for.
        
             | pmontra wrote:
             | > you are looking at people who don't exist living lives
             | that aren't possible to sell you products that won't help
             | you
             | 
             | That's a description of most TV commercials.
        
         | bemmu wrote:
         | Later on a "live mode" which is realtime generated content,
         | guided by your voice. Netflix could also have this as a
         | feature.
        
           | thebestmoshe wrote:
           | The thing is that people don't know or won't say what they
           | like.
           | 
           | The TikTok algorithm is good at figuring out what you do. Not
           | what you say. So the content will be a lot more engaging.
        
             | gavinray wrote:
             | _" If I had asked people what they want, they would have
             | said 'faster horses'"_
             | 
             | - Henry Ford
        
             | bemmu wrote:
             | Agreed, the TikTok one will be vastly more popular, as it
             | requires no creative input. Also much more near-term. Some
             | version could be shipped within months.
             | 
             | It's already partially that, just with humans still
             | supplying the prompts and doing some cherrypicking before
             | posting their AI-generated videos. I wonder if there will
             | be some "for you (AI)" and "for you (non-AI)", and which
             | one will end up being the default?
        
         | ninetyninenine wrote:
         | That's the near future. Look farther down the line and it's
         | netflix. Keep scrolling and it generates entire movies and
         | shows based on what you like.
         | 
         | Probably before that though we'll see AI movies pre-generated
         | before we see them generated on the fly during scrolling.
        
         | Intralexical wrote:
         | I think this is an unfortunate misunderstanding of why people
         | like and use social media.
         | 
         | ChatGPT can already generate endless "comments". And yet you're
         | here.
        
           | pphysch wrote:
           | HN users that actively engage with comments are probably
           | 0.0001% of overall social media users
        
           | esafak wrote:
           | I agree with you, but the owners and customers of ad-
           | supported communities like Facebook have an incentive to
           | inject clickbait from fake users posing as humans. Facebook
           | is already well along that road, with a captive if aging
           | userbase. Maybe they'd flee if they had an alternative.
        
           | littlestymaar wrote:
           | You must have missed a train or two over the past fifteen
           | years, so called "social media" have very little to do with
           | the social part they used to, they are mostly algorithmically
           | driven dopamine shots to capture user's attention, and TikTok
           | is the purest form of it.
        
           | throwaway290 wrote:
           | Most people on social media don't interact, just consume. You
           | are talking to small self selected minority
           | 
           | If there was an HN clone generated on the fly for you or the
           | guy you replied to then what's the difference? Especially if
           | you imagine you didn't know it was generated. That's the
           | problem with this tech, for you there's no difference. But
           | probably a difference for society.
        
           | Thaxll wrote:
           | No one knows if you're a bot or a human.
        
         | pizzathyme wrote:
         | With enough context fed into the model of what you react to,
         | the content will be so mesmerizing that you won't be able to
         | look away
         | 
         | This is chilling and also seems inevitable long term
        
           | aradox66 wrote:
           | I imagine there are some boundary constraints - mobile video
           | can only be so compelling. I would guess we're already pretty
           | close to that threshold.
        
             | ImHereToVote wrote:
             | It would be something like breaking bad but cut
             | intentionally to you specific responses. A drama you can't
             | look away from.
             | 
             | It will be like wirehacking, but in visual form.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | Will it learn that I don't like ads?
        
           | thebestmoshe wrote:
           | It will figure out how to make ads that you do watch. If a
           | generated video is good enough, people will watch it even
           | though it's an ad.
        
             | layer8 wrote:
             | I remain skeptical that there is enough overlap between
             | videos I'd want to watch and videos that make me buy stuff.
             | Conceivably there could be ads I'd want to watch even
             | though they don't work on me. A subscription model seems
             | more likely in my case, though.
        
               | zerd wrote:
               | The ads will be subliminal so you won't even know that
               | you're watching an ad.
        
               | layer8 wrote:
               | I didn't say I would be aware of it.
        
           | yapyap wrote:
           | It might MAKE you like ads..
        
           | paxys wrote:
           | That's the secret - _everything_ will be an ad
        
       | pointlessone wrote:
       | Some of the shots are impressive but... Even among these hand-
       | picked examples there's a plenty of unnatural movement. And it
       | seems like it was trained on the most hyperactive subset of
       | tiktok as it apparently can't hold a scene for more than 5
       | seconds.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | ByteDance has been testing their model on the Model Arena for
         | weeks. They were covertly calling their model "Unicorn" until
         | just a few days ago.
         | 
         | It's already ranking better than Google Veo 3:
         | 
         | https://artificialanalysis.ai/text-to-video/arena?tab=leader...
        
           | cchance wrote:
           | By a LOT too lol, not even close, wow, that said, i imagine
           | if they enabled veo3's sound... it would win lol
        
         | tecleandor wrote:
         | While it pulls some pretty difficult things, it seems to
         | struggle with other * _seemingly*_ simple ones.
         | 
         | The piano in the beginning or the photo camera used by the
         | photographer has "AI text" written on it. The old man with the
         | beret in the cafe goes through his beret with his hand. The
         | girl on the seaside looking back turns her head too much almost
         | like an owl. The boy-in-a-bike-through-an-ewuropean-city scene
         | ends on a square with an amorphous being in a unicycle under
         | the tree...
        
       | Permik wrote:
       | Only light skinned people on the video examples. Ethnic diversity
       | and accuracy used to be a problem with the models of the past. I
       | wonder how the model would excel at prompts grokking at that.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | This model is from China. It isn't even being made available
         | internationally (yet).
        
         | Leary wrote:
         | 0:10 into the video, that's light skinned to you?!
        
       | bufferoverflow wrote:
       | Decent 1080p quality. Not bluray level, but getting close.
       | Definitely ahead of every other video generator.
       | 
       | Video production just got a lot cheaper and requires very few
       | skills. This is basically destroying the creative video
       | production industry (ads, product videography, youtube content of
       | all kinds) and probably VFX industry as well.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | It's beating Google Veo 3 in the model arena:
         | 
         | https://artificialanalysis.ai/text-to-video/arena?tab=leader...
         | 
         | They've been running tests for weeks under the covert name
         | "Unicorn" and just renamed the model to Seedance a few days
         | ago.
         | 
         | edit: I'm not sure why I'm being downvoted for this, except
         | perhaps not liking the ByteDance angle.
         | 
         | China produces incredibly good video models and have been in
         | the market lead for at least a year now. All of the top video
         | models, save for Veo 3, are from China.
         | 
         | In fact, the only open source video models of note are all non-
         | American (mostly Chinese, and one Israeli model).
        
       | energywut wrote:
       | We're so fucked, as a species.
       | 
       | People are already way too easy to get to believe conspiracy
       | theories. Shit like Pizzagate or whatever is only going to get
       | more common when bad people start making, "and look, here's the
       | video proof!"
       | 
       | And we've already got Tiktok and Youtube Shorts just pumping the
       | dopamine centers in the brain for short form content. Generating
       | shit you like dynamically is going to be an addictive nightmare.
       | The moment it gets monetized we're going to see the equivalent of
       | slot machines pumped at us from every channel -- flashing lights
       | and emotional tugs to get us to part with our valuable money or
       | attention.
       | 
       | And that's to say nothing of the impact these tools have on
       | artists and creative people or the costs to train and deploy
       | these tools.
       | 
       | We're already seeing it today. The amount of 'footage' about LA
       | right now that's showing some sort of war zone that is clearly AI
       | generated, but being consumed as if it was real is staggering.
        
         | jadbox wrote:
         | We can only hope that people become aware that the Internet is
         | a bullshit-machine and will only pull their news information
         | from journalists, but I know this is wishful thinking.
        
         | dachris wrote:
         | Yes, perfect AI content has multiple issues, that need to be
         | addressed differently
         | 
         | - treating certain content in the same way that drugs are
         | treated. Lots of countries are already moving towards age
         | restrictions for social media.
         | 
         | - some kind of hardware-provided signatures for images and
         | video, anything else must be assumed to be generated
         | 
         | Will be interesting for kids growing up - the peer pressure is
         | now already very high to have smartphones, to be on Whatsapp,
         | Instagram, TikTok, this will only get worse.
         | 
         | Maybe if I have kids I will found some Amish-like community
         | with only 90's tech (only half joking).
        
         | Intralexical wrote:
         | We've basically flooded the information space with _r-
         | strategists_.
         | 
         | In evolution, rapid reproduction gives an advantage to spamming
         | low-quality offspring [1], and rapid selection without
         | agglomeration [2,3] incentivizes antisocial behavior.
         | 
         | Ideas spread, mutate, and evolve just like animals [4]. So when
         | the Internet made it free for anyone to transmit information to
         | millions of people instantly, trustworthy information sources
         | [5] and prosocial cultural values started dying [6], as
         | literally the worst and craziest people become dominant
         | [7,8,9,10,11].
         | 
         | ...Presumably "AI" is going to make this even worse, and
         | immeasurably so.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory
         | 
         | 2.
         | https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
         | 
         | 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context_collapse
         | 
         | 4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics
         | 
         | 5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_newspapers
         | 
         | 6. https://theweek.com/culture-life/third-places-disappearing
         | 
         | 7. https://globalnews.ca/news/1157137/internet-trolls-are-
         | sadis...
         | 
         | 8. https://www.engadget.com/2018-03-19-study-shows-
         | distribution...
         | 
         | 9.
         | https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9rvroo/most...
         | 
         | 10. https://www.ipr.northwestern.edu/news/2023/why-are-online-
         | po...
         | 
         | 11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakistocracy
        
         | bobxmax wrote:
         | That's been happening since Photoshop. Describing this as some
         | apocalyptic event is absurd.
        
           | AntonCTO wrote:
           | Photoshop requires skills. The comparison with Photoshop is
           | absurd.
        
             | throwanem wrote:
             | Photoshop requires _time._
        
       | bytesandbots wrote:
       | Has the realism of AI already caught on to that of animated CGI
       | movies?
       | 
       | I assume that an expert in CGI can point out obvious flaws in
       | these outputs. But I wonder if it is possible to fix those
       | details by prompting it to change only specific segments.
       | 
       | There is also the question of how much compute/money they are
       | spending per second of output, compared to a high-budget
       | Hollywood CGI.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | Given how bad regular (non-animated) CGI often is in Hollywood
         | movies nowadays, I don't think the bar is that high.
         | 
         | Change management will indeed be interesting.
        
       | robviren wrote:
       | I look forward to a day when capabilities like this are trivial
       | and boring to the average person. When my phone (locally) will be
       | able to generate a fully voice acted 24 episode series anime on a
       | whim for a meme with my group chat. It's astounding what we can
       | do now, but will be completely ignorable before we know it, which
       | is equally wild.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | More content will be made in a single month than all of human
         | history up to this point.
         | 
         | No more Disney-fication, no more Marvel / Star Wars "mass media
         | slop". We'll have media that caters to people's long-tail
         | interests. If you have a passion for Egyptology and Atlantis,
         | you'll be able to watch a steampunk adventure about the
         | Egyptians waging war with the Atlanteans. But perhaps with the
         | serious tone of "The Wire". That would never have been greenlit
         | before, but it'll soon be possible.
         | 
         | Good creators will arise just like good indie music, indie
         | manga/comic, and indie game creators. Discovery will be the
         | problem to solve for creators. There will be an abundance of
         | talent that is finally able to create their vision rather than
         | nepotism their way into one of 500 limited annual roles of
         | autonomy.
         | 
         | Small creators who grow large like VivziePop [1] and
         | PsychicPebbles [2] will be the model for the future of content.
         | They start small on YouTube, grow large, and eventually have
         | their own large-scale distribution and franchises.
         | 
         | The creative world is about to get orders of magnitude better.
         | Not 2x, not 10x, but easily 1,000x.
         | 
         | I hate most movies and tv shows, but love the medium. The
         | problem is most content produced just isn't my vibe. I like
         | super artsy stuff, but also have particular tastes. That's
         | going to change dramatically. Stuff will start fitting the
         | shape of my interest graph.
         | 
         | I'm so excited.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vivienne_Medrano
         | 
         | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zach_Hadel
        
           | troupo wrote:
           | > No more Disney-fication, no more Marvel / Star Wars "mass
           | media slop". We'll have media that caters to people's long-
           | tail interests.
           | 
           | Lol. Where do you think these models will get the source data
           | for these amazing generations?
           | 
           | Also, an average person's "long tail" is incredibly boring (I
           | know mine is). You will need someone to create a next
           | Breaking Bad, or a next Discworld, or... Your slop-generating
           | machine will not be able to generate it from a "long tail"
        
             | echelon wrote:
             | > Where do you think these models will get the source data
             | for these amazing generations?
             | 
             | Doesn't matter one bit, just like mp3 and torrents didn't
             | stop digital music.
             | 
             | If you care, there are already "ethical models", there are
             | synthetic datasets, and soon rights holders will be
             | licensing training data.
             | 
             | But it literally doesn't matter. The entire world will be
             | on board soon. IP holders included.
             | 
             | > Your slop-generating machine
             | 
             | I'm in the industry. We're not talking about LLMs powering
             | this, but writers and directors and VFX artists.
             | 
             | Hollywood is switching to AI rapidly. The problem for the
             | studios is we don't need them anymore. They only existed
             | because distribution and capital were hard. That isn't the
             | case anymore. A skilled team of five can make content on
             | their own.
        
               | mbesto wrote:
               | > Doesn't matter one bit, just like mp3 and torrents
               | didn't stop digital music.
               | 
               | mp3 and torrents are storage and distributions
               | mechanisms, not production ones. This is an inappropriate
               | analogy.
        
               | troupo wrote:
               | So many words completely failing to address a single word
               | I wrote
        
               | sunrunner wrote:
               | > A skilled team of five can make content on their own
               | 
               | And a skilled team of one can also make good, creative
               | and unique content by themselves (I'm thinking mostly of
               | the kind of things that end up on YouTube, Nebula, etc.)
               | 
               | > Hollywood is switching to AI rapidly.
               | 
               | I'm curious as to what people think the long term
               | prospect for this really is. If it's true that the number
               | of people involved in the creation of this content goes
               | down then does it get cheaper and more available? Faster
               | to create? But to what end? Who's even paying to engage
               | with it? Presumably not the people that used to work in
               | the production of those things, because they've been
               | displaced by the content generation machines. More and
               | more content will be sold to people that are perhaps less
               | able to afford it.
        
           | Barrin92 wrote:
           | >Egyptians waging war with the Atlanteans. But perhaps with
           | the serious tone of "The Wire". That would never have been
           | greenlit before
           | 
           | This is quite literally what the Marvel / Star wars mass
           | media slop is, a sort of syncretistic version of every pop
           | culture phenomenon scientifically engineered down to A/B
           | tested audience taste. It's excatly what you're complaining
           | about, never-ending banal stuff. It'll be Disneyfication on
           | steroids.
           | 
           | It's a sort of media masturbation, hooking your brain up to
           | itself and feeding it its own output, what the large studios
           | are already doing with their franchises, just on an
           | individual level. You'll basically sit in your own never-
           | ending Marvel hell, basically D.F Wallace's Infinite Jest.
           | 
           | Art is obviously the opposite, something external and
           | disruptive, a creative act from someone who isn't you.
        
             | sunrunner wrote:
             | Somehow I've never made the connection before until your
             | comment, but perhaps DFW imagined the contents of the video
             | tape as essentially the combination of YouTube Shorts and
             | TikTok, an endless stream of tiny dopamine-spiking sensory
             | inputs.
             | 
             | I always imagined it as a single media item with one theme
             | that itself was so ridiculously compelling that viewers
             | couldn't look away (more like a film, perhaps something
             | analogous with the size of IJ itself), but now imagining
             | that it was a practically-infinite stream of short-form
             | content that you didn't even find truly valuable but were
             | compelled to keep watching anyway makes it seem much
             | scarier.
        
           | yapyap wrote:
           | Sounds like hell. Yeah let's have everybody live in their own
           | bubble, that'll work out great (not) and let's have that
           | bubble be able to be influenced in the tiniest ways so they
           | will consume more products, amazing!
        
           | DrillShopper wrote:
           | Yay, I can't wait for entertainment to stop being soulless
           | corporate sequels and reboots and derivatives, and now with
           | an LLM I can now get soulless machine generated sequels and
           | reboots and derivatives!
        
           | joshstrange wrote:
           | Maybe we can finally get shows/movies that are faithful to
           | the books instead of whatever slop we normally get (Looking
           | at you WoT). Obviously a book != a script (like script for a
           | show/movie, not a code script) but with LLMs I feel confident
           | it could generate a script that could be reviewed directly or
           | review the final video then go back and tweak the script as
           | needed ("Ahh crap, it misunderstood the 'you' in that
           | sentence and the wrong character just spoke in the generated
           | video, let me fix that and re-gen that scene").
        
           | holoduke wrote:
           | One real example of AI generated video that in my opinion
           | marks the start of common people consuming AI video are the
           | bigfoot vlog vidoes. The first time ever i see normal people
           | watching this and genuinely like it.
        
           | sunrunner wrote:
           | > We'll have media that caters to people's long-tail
           | interests.
           | 
           | This isn't inherently a bad thing but I don't believe it's
           | without its costs, one of which being that with everyone
           | watching (potentially) completely unique media there'll be no
           | shared cultural artifacts to communicate with others about.
           | 
           | VivziePop may have started as a small creator but the recent
           | creations such as Hazbin Hotel have now become things where
           | the enjoyment can be shared with other fans, which in some
           | ways is the secondary purpose of all media. Media enjoyed
           | alone can still be rewarding, media enjoyed with others can
           | be much more than that (except for going to the cinema with
           | strangers, that can disappear immediately).
           | 
           | It seems like a common idea that if we can just generate a
           | practically-infinite stream of media then we've solved some
           | kind of problem with there just not being enough "content" (I
           | hate using the term in this way but it's concise), and while
           | I do sympathise with the points of view from people that
           | can't find things they like, I also don't really believe that
           | "Content is a problem".
           | 
           | More variety itself isn't a problem, but I'm not convinced
           | that in general there's a _lack_ of content. Humans have
           | already reached peak saturation in terms of the sheer amount
           | of text, audio and video that's created every day. No single
           | item of media is itself a problem, but perhaps the total
           | aggregate of everything isn't helpful.
        
         | thebestmoshe wrote:
         | Who is going to spend time watching those episodes if content
         | is so easy to make? Everyone will be busy watching their own
         | generated content.
        
           | azinman2 wrote:
           | Because few are great storytellers, people like celebrities,
           | and having a shared cultural reference point.
           | 
           | Even TikTok's main fuel are likes and shares. Isolated
           | material will just cease to be interesting, because it's from
           | your own imagination.
        
       | b0a04gl wrote:
       | > I wouldn't be surprised if in 5 years all content is generated
       | on the fly. You say something, and a 5-second video plays in
       | response.
       | 
       | live mode means content stops being fixed assets and starts
       | becoming ephemeral responses
       | 
       | video turns into output stream, not uploads voice prompt is the
       | new swipe
       | 
       | what they're doing isn't pushing a format shift, they're testing
       | runtime content systems on backend they're compressing model
       | infra with comet and tilting up llms that run cheaper and faster
       | that combo means they can serve gen content at scale without
       | needing to batch or cache if that holds, feed stops being a
       | scroll and becomes a render loop nothing about this is about
       | media anymore, it's turning the app into a low-latency model host
       | disguised as video platform
        
       | dvdjtdbidy wrote:
       | Rshtach ag
        
       | cchance wrote:
       | Sadly another closed model that will never go open weights i'd
       | guess
        
       | cchance wrote:
       | really coo, but wheres the sound? i'd expect that they'd have
       | built in the sound model since its gonna look like SOTA for
       | video, VEO3 is great for video but the audios what knocks it out
       | of the park
        
         | paulluuk wrote:
         | I work on AI solutions for a major video streaming company, and
         | the problem with VEO3 is that it doesn't have any consistency
         | between prompts. E.g. I can not upload a reference image of
         | what a character looks like, and if I say in one video "the old
         | priest bends down" and in the next video "the old priests picks
         | up the coin", the priest will look very different between
         | shots.
         | 
         | Veo3 does support image to video, so what you can do is create
         | an image that is the start of a scene, and then use that to
         | generate the actual scene. Unfortunately, Veo3 is really bad at
         | this. I expect this will improve over time.
         | 
         | Although I'm not super excited about this Seedance model
         | personally, I do really like that it focuses on consistency
         | between shots. I hope this puts pressure on increased
         | performance from Veo3 in that regard.
        
           | Uehreka wrote:
           | > I expect this will improve over time.
           | 
           | I'm starting to wonder if it will. There seems to be this
           | pattern that an awesome T2V model will come out and everyone
           | starts clamoring for an I2V model and then when the I2V
           | version drops a couple months later it's not as good. I'm
           | starting to get the feeling that I2V is just intrinsically
           | challenging in a way that makes it hard to do well at all.
        
       | benzible wrote:
       | "Old man" doesn't look that old to me (guess that means I'm old!)
        
       | sergiotapia wrote:
       | Hollywood is cooked isn't it?
        
       | DavidVoid wrote:
       | Man I hate when sites hijack the page up/down keys.
        
       | tartoran wrote:
       | I feel so bad for the next generation who will never have watched
       | man made movies, they will not be able to tell whether something
       | is junk or not because there will be no baseline.
        
         | pkkkzip wrote:
         | I dont think they care as long as the content is good. Even
         | memes popular at that demographic are AI generated today.
        
       | smusamashah wrote:
       | There is something in motion heavy videos that is making me
       | nauseas/sick in my stomach. Last time I felt this was with first
       | Sora release. It's not as bad as Sora, but its there. Veo 3
       | didn't gave me these feelings or may be I haven't seen its motion
       | heavy samples.
       | 
       | Does anyone else feels same looking at motion heavy samples of
       | Seedance?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-06-12 23:01 UTC)