Stable Diffusion is a big deal • Hacker News Board

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#301

Post by isaacfrond » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:47 PM UTC

canjobear wrote: post #7

michaelchisari wrote: post #6

After using SD heavily for a week, I half agree with this. It is incredibly disruptive, and it's wild how much it accelerates the creative process. I'll give you that. But two things I've noticed: First, artists will still have a massive advantage over non-artists with this tool. A photographer who intimately knows the different lenses and cameras and industry terms will get to a representation of their idea much fas…

> Second, we need the ability to persist a design. I See yesterday's Stable Diffusion article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643564

For face generation, I think there are deep neural networks that can generate multiple views of the same face [1], [2]. Stable diffusion already provides the possibility to generate variations. So I don't think it is a stretch to imagine that these existing capabilities will only get better and/or be applied to SD.

[1]: Multi-View 3D Face Reconstruction with Deep Recurrent Neural Networks [2]: Deep Neural Network Augmentation: Generating Faces for Affect Analysis

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#302

Post by peoplefromibiza » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:48 PM UTC

Yeah, it is.

It is for authors that got their works stolen for "the greater good" without even being notified.

A friend of mine found his works in the Stable Diffusion dataset, the work was not meant for public use, he's never been notified and, most of all, he would have never agreed if they cared to ask.

https://laion-aesthetic.datasette.io/laion-aesthetic-6pls/im...

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#303

Post by hbn » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:48 PM UTC

HelloNurse wrote: post #286

Playing with the prompt-only demo at https://huggingface.co/spaces/stabilityai/stable-diffusion I got the impression that many apparently harmless requests corner the model into a very sparse set of examples exhibiting extreme bias and utter nonsense. For example (seed 0, other advanced options at default values): Blue hamsters filling donuts with nails mostly edible donuts and quasi-donuts; some blue, but no hamster…

It's not working because your prompts are bad.

Here's a few of "martian hamsters wrestling" I generated:

https://imgur.com/a/k5rgcXn

Prompt (modified from a recent post on the /r/StableDiffusion subreddit):

A picture of 2 hamsters wrestling on the surface of mars, intricate, elegant, highly detailed, digital painting, artstation, concept art, matte, sharp focus, illustration, art by greg rutkowski and alphonse mucha

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#304

Post by isaacfrond » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:50 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #10

michaelchisari wrote: post #6

After using SD heavily for a week, I half agree with this. It is incredibly disruptive, and it's wild how much it accelerates the creative process. I'll give you that. But two things I've noticed: First, artists will still have a massive advantage over non-artists with this tool. A photographer who intimately knows the different lenses and cameras and industry terms will get to a representation of their idea much fas…

What about using this tech for ideation and artists for production? You could use Stable Diffusion et al to create new characters based on a prompt, then farm the concept out to artists to produce individual works. Kind of like hiring a super expensive agency to design your new logo or brand identity, then using a stable of in-house designers to translate the concept into UI, ads, etc.

Like this user, who creates new fashion designs using Dale

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32661515

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#305

Post by rhodorhoades » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:51 PM UTC

BigJono wrote: post #204

petra wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have we seen similar behavior in the usage of older GPT-3 based tools, for example in copywriting or using Copilot? How's the story there?

There's one huge difference between Copilot and stuff like this. Art that's 98% correct is awesome. Code that's 98% correct is completely useless. I think Copilot is going to live off hype for a while then tank and be looked back on as a failed experiment. Whereas I think that this kind of AI will eventually get to a point where it's extremely useful and could change up certain industries (game assets, marketing mate…

It seems like you haven’t used CoPilot. Yeah, some of the harder bits I may have to code myself but the amount of boilerplate it reduces is incredibly liberating.

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#306

Post by isaacfrond » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:53 PM UTC

systemvoltage wrote: post #138

michaelchisari wrote: post #6

After using SD heavily for a week, I half agree with this. It is incredibly disruptive, and it's wild how much it accelerates the creative process. I'll give you that. But two things I've noticed: First, artists will still have a massive advantage over non-artists with this tool. A photographer who intimately knows the different lenses and cameras and industry terms will get to a representation of their idea much fas…

I always wondered if we massively overestimate human creativity. Maybe it is ingrained in our culture and our very being. I’ve never heard counter arguments that humans are not that creative. Creativity demonstrated by Alpha zero chess engine blows Magnus Carlsen’s mind (from his recent interview with Lex Fridman), I wonder if at some point in the future, we’ll finally throw in the towel and get out of the denial pha…

"AlphaZero would sacrifice a knight or sometimes two pawns, three pawns, you can see that it's looking for some sort of positional domination, but it's hard to understand. It was really fascinating to see. "

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#307

Post by _gabe_ » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:54 PM UTC

Is it just me, or do the comments in this thread seem to be the exact opposite of the sentiment in the comments on similar Github Copilot threads?

I just find it a bit ironic that programmers are irate about Github Copilot using their copyrighted material to train. However, if it's an ML model training off of copyrighted artists material, clearly its a transformative work. I just find the opposing sentiments for these scenarios a bit funny.

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#308

Post by aronowb14 » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:56 PM UTC

It's funny how hyped up stable diffusion is on HN right now: reminds me of when style transfer first started making it's rounds in 2017. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13958366

I think as technologists we want to think that code can "solve" some of the problems in the art world... but I think we still have a really, really long way to go. I tried to get style transfer adopted at work (worked at a creative technology firm in NY) but frankly I think deep learning methods for art generation tend to be really unpredictable, which make them pretty hard to use for professional applications. Imagine deploying production code that only worked 85% of the time... would be a nightmare. I felt, and feel similarly about deep learning approaches to art. They're just so finnicky and unpredictable, for example, add a single extra pixel to that example in this article and the output would look completely different.

Either way, cynicism aside, stable diffusion is awesome :).

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#309

Post by peoplefromibiza » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:56 PM UTC

planb wrote: post #175

> Stable Diffusion has been trained on millions of copyrighted images scraped from the web. My brain has been trained on even more copyrighted material. Every book I read, every tv show I watch, the toys I played with as a child. It's hard to imagine that I could come up with anything that is not inspired by copyrighted work.

> My brain has been trained on even more copyrighted material

That's in fact a problem: plagiarism is considered cheating/intellectual dishonesty and can ruin a career, copyright infringement is punished by civil law (and fined), counterfeit is a crime, etc. etc.

You must retain yourself from copying too much, but only the original author (and eventually a judge) can decide if that happened.

If stable diffusion is used for counterfeiting or the result infringe the copyright, do you think the fact that the model was trained on unlicensed copyrighted material is irrelevant?

Re: Stable Diffusion is a big deal

#310

Post by peoplefromibiza » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 1:57 PM UTC

Fricken wrote: post #253

pnt12 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two objections: 1: you cannot produce thousands of detailed pictures in a day, this program can. The argument gets pretty clear if you transpose it to other objects, ie why is it fair to ride a bicycle in the sidewalk but not drive a car? 2: copyright laws. You may not see a picture and imitate it. How do you know this AI didn't just imitate one of the million pictures it saw? And if you distribute it and the author…

It's a lot of work for a human to produce an image, but they can think thousands of images in a day quite easily. The artistic process often begins with some daydreaming.

> but they can think thousands of images in a day quite easily

thought is not a crime yet.

thought police is not a thing, yet...