Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#41

Post by nl »

TekMol wrote: post #16

What is the reason Google published their research details about Imagen? Why don't they just keep their findings to themselfes and build products on top of them? Public companies can't do stuff just for the fun of it, right? So there must be some commercial reasoning behind it?

> Public companies can't do stuff just for the fun of it, right? So there must be some commercial reasoning behind it?

Yes they can actually.

If you are a shareholder you can either sue (unlikely to succeed) or vote against the board. That's pretty much the only recourse.

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#42

Post by nmfisher »

TekMol wrote: post #16

What is the reason Google published their research details about Imagen? Why don't they just keep their findings to themselfes and build products on top of them? Public companies can't do stuff just for the fun of it, right? So there must be some commercial reasoning behind it?

Two reasons: 1) Even though it's all technically very impressive, so far there's not a huge amount of commercialization potential here. OpenAI is charging for its GPT-3 model but its revenue is probably negligible next to the hardware costs (sunk + ongoing) to train it in the first place, let alone the researcher salaries they're paying 2) Most of the stunning examples are cherry-picked. These things fail much more often than they are willing to admit, and they're probably assuming (correctly) that not enough people are willing to pay for something that only-sorta-kinda-works 1/3 of the time, when you're holding it the right way.

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#43

Post by quickthrower2 »

TekMol wrote: post #16

What is the reason Google published their research details about Imagen? Why don't they just keep their findings to themselfes and build products on top of them? Public companies can't do stuff just for the fun of it, right? So there must be some commercial reasoning behind it?

It could be classed as a way to attract talent. It is basically then a very expensive fusball table.

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#44

Post by Yenrabbit »

dharma1 wrote: post #37
Yenrabbit wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a dataset of 5 billion image-text pairs (laion-5b) scraped by various parties. This can then be filtered and used to train these models. Cost is a bit of an issue but there are orgs that have provided compute for open model training. And Imagen is nice because the text encoder part is already available and doesn't need more training, so it would just be the diffusion model components being trained. I'd guess…

When you say a bit of an issue, how much are we talking?

Four or five figures I'd guess? I'm not clued up on costs/performance for TPU stuff to give a better estimate, but guessing at a week on a 256 TPU pod, call it $30k?

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#45

Post by quickthrower2 »

29athrowaway wrote: post #35

I guess the stock photos industry will be disrupted by this.

r/wtfstockphotos will be full of this

And medium posts about React hooks and Go generics are gonna be full of “Animated Drake meme but with Rick Astley” kind of fun.

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#46

Post by dirtyid »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #2

How much would it cost to train something like this? Is there even a good dataset for it?

I feel like the fact big porn hasn't poached talent and jumped all over this suggest at least 10s of millions. That said some for profit no-rules deepfake service for disinformation and illegal content has to be in the works.

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#47

Post by thorum »

tomatowurst wrote: post #13
minimaxir wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Training an AI requires high quality, clean/normalized data, which is very difficult to do at millions/billions of data points and is very frequently done incorrectly with silent failures.

There's a section of the internet where you can easily find billions of images or can be generated from moving pictures. Even upscaled. I really didn't expect to have to spell it out. hint: they are all about one thing and there are a lot of eager volunteers to help on those websites. It would be easy to "normalize/clean/classify" because the pictures would have a consistent theme, thus reducing the amount of paramet…

Does anyone actually want porn of fake, AI generated “people”? Seems like most of the demand would be deepfakes of real people, which is both highly unethical and a good way to get your business sued out of existence.

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#48

Post by Kleto »

mpalmer wrote: post #10
tomatowurst wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize web scraping has gotten very cheap at scale and easy now too. It's an after thought for me, I'm more concerned with the economics of training, it can't be cheap

Web scrape... what, exactly? How will "web scraping" lead to high quality results?

Reddit has plenty of nsfw categories.

And tags.

Insta has tags.

Plenty of others have nsfw and tags

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#49

Post by Kleto »

thorum wrote: post #47
tomatowurst wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a section of the internet where you can easily find billions of images or can be generated from moving pictures. Even upscaled. I really didn't expect to have to spell it out. hint: they are all about one thing and there are a lot of eager volunteers to help on those websites. It would be easy to "normalize/clean/classify" because the pictures would have a consistent theme, thus reducing the amount of paramet…

Does anyone actually want porn of fake, AI generated “people”? Seems like most of the demand would be deepfakes of real people, which is both highly unethical and a good way to get your business sued out of existence.

Why not?

Do you prefer known porn actress over non known ones?

I would say that I might know a handful of names but search for them rarly.

Re: Implementation of Imagen, Google's text-to-image neural network, in PyTorch

#50

Post by londons_explore »

tomatowurst wrote: post #9

What's it going to take to train this on porn? This is something that can be crowdfunded. Look deepnude is a thing and somebody is making money off it: https://app.deepnude.cc/upload

This tech is actually pretty bad at human faces - it all appears unnatural and distorted. You get things like the occasional extra earlobe...
Post reply on HN