Only roles "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent" will be eligible for awards. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences—probably better known to the world as the Oscars folks—have drawn a firm line in the sand against the use of generative AI, changing its eligibility rules to exclude AI-generated performances and scripts. The new rules, via The Wrap, state that in acting categories, only roles "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent" will be considered eligible for consideration, while in the writing categories, only "human-authored" screenplays will be eligible. It doesn't represent a wholesale ban on gen AI in the filmmaking process, which wouldn't be realistic anyway: The rules state that the use of gen AI "and other digital tools" in other categories won't have any impact on the chances of a film's nomination for an award, although the Academy will "[take] into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship when choosing which movie to award." If questions about the use of gen AI should come up, "the Academy reserves the right to request more information about the nature of the use and human authorship." That's a necessary flexibility because, just as with game development, technology evolves, tools improve, and the use of gen AI for, say, early storyboarding probably shouldn't be cause for a film's exclusion for award consideration. And even making those allowances, the new rules represent a fairly strong repudiation of the stupid, exploitative future we are building for ourselves. Is it likely that an AI-generated screenplay will be worthy of an Oscar someday? I will say no. But the creation of AI 'actors' like the wretched Tilly Norwood thing, not to mention the money-grubbing obscenity of dragging actual actors out of the afterlife, opens the door to scenarios like the AI avatar of George C. Scott going berserk and actually accepting the Best Actor award for Patton 2: Hormuz Boogaloo.