There’s also a huge difference in what people, even children, expect when sitting down to watch a movie versus seeing a clip of some funny cat/seal hybrid playing football while I’m looking for the Bluey episode we left off on. My daughter is almost five and cautiously asks “is that real?” about a lot of things now. It definitely makes me work harder when trying to explain the things that don’t look real but actually are; one could definitely feel like it takes some of the magic away from moments. I feel alright in my ability to handle it, it’s my responsibility to try, but it isn’t as simple as the Looney Tunes argument or, I believe, dramatic effects in movies and TV.

Yet, in a movie setting it's clear something is a special effect or alike which is not the case for GenAI. Massive underestimation of the potential impact in this thread, scary.

Not a bad point, those representations have, in some cases, caused widespread misunderstandings among people who learn about those concepts from movies... and this is all while simultaneously knowing "it's just a movie".

Yes but a movie is a movie whereas these AI-generated videos will likely be used to replace stock footage in other (documentary, promotional, etc.) contexts

People don't watch The Matrix expecting a documentary on how we all got plugged in. If someone generated the referenced ladybug movie for use in a science classroom, that's a problem.

And it's already harmful in some cases. E.g. people drag people out of a crashed car because they think it's going to explode, sometimes seriously injuring them.