71–80 of 488 posts
I am a contrarian by nature. Wearing my investor hat, I continue to be unimpressed with AI tools, including the latest image generation enhancements. I do find stable diffusion interesting, but I don't see the disruption. Similarly, I don't see the disruption from Github Copilot considering I run a company full of highly paid and extremely skilled developers and not one of them uses copilot. How often have you wanted…
I tried SD for a bit and the results are at best mediocre. Dalle2 is dimensions better at understanding prompts, but it’s still a beta. So there is hope.
One day, images generated with these AIs will become ubiquitous online, and new AIs training on data will wind up with feedback problems because they got trained on photos that are AI generated, possibly even ones they themselves generated! This tech is a huge deal. Huge. Ubiquitous unique, beautiful art. Entire movies made by machines. Too many to even watch them all. Actor models that aren't real people owned by th…
How many search results are forum posts with some asshole saying "let me google that for you" to the exact question you are asking? Haaaaaate that.
Having seen some of the pictures of AI art (I don't know if they use the same or different programs or models), my opinion is that the pictures are not good enough, although sometimes they are almost good enough. (I think there might still be a use for it, despite this. Some other comments mention some possible ideas, although there may also be others.)
It's rapidly getting good enough for things like stock images for blog posts. Where you just need an image vaguely related and don't want to pay for an actual stock image.
I could see it becoming a marker of low-brow taste where vaguely related illustrations become something akin to decorating your home with velvet paintings of Elvis.
I am a contrarian by nature. Wearing my investor hat, I continue to be unimpressed with AI tools, including the latest image generation enhancements. I do find stable diffusion interesting, but I don't see the disruption. Similarly, I don't see the disruption from Github Copilot considering I run a company full of highly paid and extremely skilled developers and not one of them uses copilot. How often have you wanted…
Nearly impossible because logic doesn’t work in the real world like it does to make pictures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox
https://metarationality.com/rationalism
I can think of two good businesses you could build with SD right now. Neither of them are text to image models or necessarily "art", both involve using it to visualize other kinds of sensing by transforming them to image embeddings.
I'm no artist.. though I'll admit i dabble, but is it just me or does everything that is generated in this seem to lack emotion ? I have seen some very impressive pictures but nothing that seems to "emote"
The rest is up to the skill of the pilot. You can do a lot with color palettes for instance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Artist today use the exact same method of learning from other peoples artwork to generate new artwork and styles. These models are learning just like any artist learns and then producing new content.
Even if that's true (which it isn't), it doesn't matter. It's absolutely logically consistent to allow humans to do it while forbidding AI to do it.
Why would you, though? If art is for the sake of art, then all art is valuable regardless of origin. If art is for the sake of providing human employment, AI being better in no way stops performative make-work from existing. If art is for the sake of copyright trolls to troll harder, then fuck art, feed it to the AI!
What's the next step? Generating 3d scenes out of these images? Would that be feasible?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if that's true (which it isn't), it doesn't matter. It's absolutely logically consistent to allow humans to do it while forbidding AI to do it.
The problem is forbidding it won’t do much. - It appears people can train AIs from scratch or at least fine-tune them at home. - Even if your art isn’t in “the training set”, that does not prevent the AI from learning its style. (Someone can decode it to CLIP embeddings. It could have a really good text model trained on vivid art museum descriptions of your art.) - The ability of an image model to generate your art m…
You can also require cloud providers to enforce a ban on training (and deploying) such models, it's doable. Good luck training it in your basement, it will probably take you a decade.
If this is banned, it will become a lot like piracy - yes, it's available, no, most people (at least in the West) don't do it, practically no businesses do it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if that's true (which it isn't), it doesn't matter. It's absolutely logically consistent to allow humans to do it while forbidding AI to do it.
> It's absolutely logically consistent to allow humans to do it while forbidding AI to do it. Why would you, though? If art is for the sake of art, then all art is valuable regardless of origin. If art is for the sake of providing human employment, AI being better in no way stops performative make-work from existing. If art is for the sake of copyright trolls to troll harder, then fuck art, feed it to the AI!