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

DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

imgur.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 57 posts

Re: DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

#11

Post by fooker »

quadcore wrote: post #8

I dont know how artists feel about DALL-E but as an amateur I feel bad. "This should be forbidden" bad. I guess the root of this feeling is the same as the one Copilot gives OSS programmers, it feels like theft and copyright enfringement. The pictures in this case uses techniques and colors scheme widely used by illustrator in the entertainment industries. Some of them are even above the average quality and that's sc…

You can not regulate away tech advancements.

Your competitors (researchers, companies, or countries - depending on granularity) certainly won't.

Re: DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

#12

Post by jstanley »

quadcore wrote: post #8

I dont know how artists feel about DALL-E but as an amateur I feel bad. "This should be forbidden" bad. I guess the root of this feeling is the same as the one Copilot gives OSS programmers, it feels like theft and copyright enfringement. The pictures in this case uses techniques and colors scheme widely used by illustrator in the entertainment industries. Some of them are even above the average quality and that's sc…

All that will happen is humans start operating another abstraction layer up -- same thing as happened every previous time the machines have "taken our jobs".

It's a good thing.

Re: DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

#13

Post by fab1an »

desindol wrote: post #6
fab1an wrote: post #4

Amazed we haven't seen more DALL-E / Midjourney on HN. Probably the most astonishing new tech I've used since booting up a computer in the 90s. Just generating images is barely doing the tools justice though - you can create entire mini movies with it, like SALT (a 70s sci-fi adventure happening on Twitter): https://twitter.com/SALT_VERSE/status/1536799731774537733 DALL-E's inpainting feature is incredibly powerful t…

Because it’s a novelty abused for attention with clickbait popculture references. It’s not ready for primetime.

"photography is a novelty abused for attention, it's not ready for primetime and cannot replace a great painter"

Re: DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

#14

Post by wittycardio »

quadcore wrote: post #8

I dont know how artists feel about DALL-E but as an amateur I feel bad. "This should be forbidden" bad. I guess the root of this feeling is the same as the one Copilot gives OSS programmers, it feels like theft and copyright enfringement. The pictures in this case uses techniques and colors scheme widely used by illustrator in the entertainment industries. Some of them are even above the average quality and that's sc…

If you're a programmer working on non trivial problems you should be happy about copilot. It's just a tool to be more productive. Same with dall-e for artists. They will eliminate unproductive jobs and create new more interesting opportunities. In the long run technological progress is always good

Re: DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

#15

Post by fab1an »

la64710 wrote: post #7

Somehow I find the Dall-E and othe AI generated pictures revolting … is it the choice of colors or what I don’t know? It’s like looking at an art piece without a soul ..

DALL-E has that quality, yes - I did a project where I tried to recreate my own photographs with DALL-E, which shows both its potential and limitations right now: https://twitter.com/fabianstelzer/status/1551663900776595461

(obviously ignoring the potential to conjure things you cannot photograph...)

Re: DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

#17

Post by bastawhiz »

quadcore wrote: post #8

I dont know how artists feel about DALL-E but as an amateur I feel bad. "This should be forbidden" bad. I guess the root of this feeling is the same as the one Copilot gives OSS programmers, it feels like theft and copyright enfringement. The pictures in this case uses techniques and colors scheme widely used by illustrator in the entertainment industries. Some of them are even above the average quality and that's sc…

> The pictures in this case uses techniques and colors scheme widely used by illustrator in the entertainment industries.

"Widely used" seems to negate your point here, no? I would expect a machine to use widely used techniques, rather than ones specific to individual artists. I don't know about you, but I've never seen DALL-E replicate an art style that isn't popular enough to be common knowledge.

> Some of them are even above the average quality and that's scary too.

Is your suggestion to make systems like DALL-E worse? Or to forbid the creation of systems that exceed a certain measurable performance?

Re: DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

#18

Post by desindol »

fab1an wrote: post #13
desindol wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it’s a novelty abused for attention with clickbait popculture references. It’s not ready for primetime.

"photography is a novelty abused for attention, it's not ready for primetime and cannot replace a great painter"

and it was true until photography matured just like it is now with art generating AI. At least have a look at the early technology of your strawman argument. A better analogy would be the switch to digital photography it was really exciting because of the ease of use but years down the road nobody could use their early digital images for anything but stamps because of their atrocious quality.

Re: DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

#19

Post by kuboble »

quadcore wrote: post #8

I dont know how artists feel about DALL-E but as an amateur I feel bad. "This should be forbidden" bad. I guess the root of this feeling is the same as the one Copilot gives OSS programmers, it feels like theft and copyright enfringement. The pictures in this case uses techniques and colors scheme widely used by illustrator in the entertainment industries. Some of them are even above the average quality and that's sc…

For what is worth, dall-e is great for exploring but it's nowhere near to being able to deliver a particular image you might have in your mind.

I wanted a very particular, well defined scene:

- A pig and a donkey play poker at the poker table. - The pig is using a computer while playing and we can see the screen of the pig. - The pig must look like a pig - The donkey must look like a donkey - The cards and chips must look like chips and cards

The dall-e simply can't deliver. Nothing is even remotely close to what I want. The best things I came up with after dozens of attempts (I bought extra credits) is something like this: https://i.gyazo.com/4bec0651b78f29a45c291a7f48f468e4.jpg

Kinda there, but the pig doesn't look like a pig or a donkey doesn't look like a donkey, or it's not a pig that has a computer and the cards and chips never look like cards and chips.

So in short - nobody is losing their jobs yet I think.

Re: DALL-E Chess in Jungle and Dunes

#20

Post by legutierr »

jstanley wrote: post #12
quadcore wrote: post #8

I dont know how artists feel about DALL-E but as an amateur I feel bad. "This should be forbidden" bad. I guess the root of this feeling is the same as the one Copilot gives OSS programmers, it feels like theft and copyright enfringement. The pictures in this case uses techniques and colors scheme widely used by illustrator in the entertainment industries. Some of them are even above the average quality and that's sc…

All that will happen is humans start operating another abstraction layer up -- same thing as happened every previous time the machines have "taken our jobs". It's a good thing .

Consider, however, that the output of these systems may not be copyrightable.

So, when you move human involvement up to a higher layer of abstraction, it’s possible that the economics of the whole effort will be fundamentally transformed. Meaning, if these systems displace human artists, copyright itself may cease to be a motivator of economic activity—removing a significant incentive for the production of new art.

Also, keep in mind that:

(1) there are likely to be many fewer human custodians of systems like this who sustain themselves economically than there are artists who currently sustain themselves by producing new art; and

(2) these systems are only as good as the artistic inputs that are fed to them, and is very unlikely that the contributing artists gave their consent or were compensated for their involvement in any way.

Post reply on HN