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

Hey, computer, make me a font

serce.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 150 posts

Re: Hey, computer, make me a font

#111

Post by rogerclark »

BeFlatXIII wrote: post #98
rogerclark wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Creatives will have their hopes and dreams stripped away so that artless and tasteless software engineers can type words into a box and instantly get exactly what they want, with no surprises, no feelings, and no economic upsides for anyone else. A beautiful future indeed.

Designing cereal boxes is not authentic human experssion.

You must not know any designers. Pretty much everyone I know would consider that to be pretty fun – this is exactly the kind of thing artistic kids say they want to do when they grow up. And most of us would rather get paid to design cereal boxes than to do many other things, and almost everyone would rather do it than to not get paid at all.

Re: Hey, computer, make me a font

#112

Post by cjaybo »

simonbw wrote: post #81
bambax wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author says he achieved text-to-SVG generation but doesn't point to a code repository for it... It would be super interesting (or does gpt-4 do it natively?) That said, I'm not sure that you need GPT-4 for outlining a BW image and making a path out of it; Corel Draw did that well, over 25 years ago? So yes, another approach to what the author is doing, would be to generate font bitmaps using any of the leading im…

ChatGPT/GPT-4 does it natively. You can say "Please generate me an SVG image of a unicorn" and it will spit out the SVG code.

Here’s my stupid question of the day:

Would you mind to explain what you mean by “native” in this context?

Re: Hey, computer, make me a font

#113

Post by tough »

cjaybo wrote: post #112
simonbw wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ChatGPT/GPT-4 does it natively. You can say "Please generate me an SVG image of a unicorn" and it will spit out the SVG code.

Here’s my stupid question of the day: Would you mind to explain what you mean by “native” in this context?

Not using a -plugin- probably

Re: Hey, computer, make me a font

#114

Post by SerCe »

Jack000 wrote: post #102

I think this approach isn't ideal because you're representing pixels as 150x150 unique bins. With only 71k fonts it's likely a lot of these bins are never used, especially at the corners. Since you're quantizing anyways, you might as well use a convnet then trace the output, which would better take advantage of the 2d nature of the pixel data. This kind of reminds me of dalle-1 where the image is represented as 256 i…

Thank you for the suggestion. A couple of ML engineers with whom I've spoken after publishing the blog also suggested that I should try representing x and y coordinates as separate tokens.

Re: Hey, computer, make me a font

#115

Post by Jack000 »

briandw wrote: post #107
Jack000 wrote: post #102

I think this approach isn't ideal because you're representing pixels as 150x150 unique bins. With only 71k fonts it's likely a lot of these bins are never used, especially at the corners. Since you're quantizing anyways, you might as well use a convnet then trace the output, which would better take advantage of the 2d nature of the pixel data. This kind of reminds me of dalle-1 where the image is represented as 256 i…

How would the Minkowski sum be used in the diffusion model? Is the idea to look at the Minkowski sum of the prediction and label?

In pixel space a convnet uses pixel-wise convolutions and a pixel-kernel. If you represent a vector image as a polygon, the direct equivalent to a convolution would be the Minkowski sum of the vector image and a polygon-kernel.

You could start off with a random polygon and the reverse diffusion process would slowly turn it into a text glyph.

Re: Hey, computer, make me a font

#117

Post by xyzelement »

123pie123 wrote: post #108
dwaltrip wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tree law? Please say more, sounds interesting

possibly this? https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/tree-law-is-a-gnarly-t... ....“It’s never about the trees,” Bonapart says. “The trees often serve as lightning rods for other issues that are the psychological underpinning of a dispute that people might have with each other.”

Funny - literally doing with this right now - a tree that crosses my boundary with a neighbor dropped a branch on another neighbor's house.

Re: Hey, computer, make me a font

#118

Post by sgerenser »

dave78 wrote: post #67
rogual wrote: post #62

> THE QUICK BROWN FOX JUMPS OVER THE LAZY DOG It's "a" quick brown fox, otherwise the sentence has no "a".

Huh, I never gave that sentence much thought, and I guess I never realized it conveniently covered the whole alphabet. It makes so much more sense now!

I liked the one that Apple used to use in the MacOS 7/8 era: “How razorback-jumping frogs level six piqued gymnasts!” (Might be slightly off but its unique enough that I remembered it at least 20 years after it disappeared from MacOS).

Re: Hey, computer, make me a font

#119

Post by logicallee »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #104
logicallee wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I found a few months ago that the gpt-4 code interpreter is capable of converting a black and white png of a glyph to an svg :) Easy there, let's not make all the naysayers who say it only just predicts plausible words sweat. Your phrasing almost makes it sound like you're sharing a clear example of it analyzing and completing a complex task correctly, while perfectly understanding what it's doing. Perhaps we should…

> Your phrasing almost makes it sound like you're sharing a clear example of it analyzing and completing a complex task correctly, while perfectly understanding what it's doing. OpenAI has hardcoded (or heavily overfit) several special-purpose functions into their ChatGPT systems. In the past few months, they've integrated other special-purpose models, so their tools can do more than just predictive text (e.g. image…

>>statistical prediction that does not involve any degree of thinking, analysis, or understanding.

>This is a straw argument.

People say that it does not understand anything, that it just predicts text as though it does.

However, I believe they're mistaken. I find that it clearly understands things.

What do you think? Do you think it understands you when you speak to it? Can it do problem solving or original thought in your opinion? My own anwer is: "100% it understands me, and 100% yes it can do problem solving and original thought - maybe not world class scientist level but to an impressive extent."

Clearly it just has a few thinking "moments", it can't spend hours extensively tackling a problem the way a human can, and it doesn't have a memory, nor can plan nor execute large projects by itself or anything like that.

But it can, as you say, do "limited verbal reasoning", and that is incredibly impressive.

Re: Hey, computer, make me a font

#120

Post by raincole »

mock-possum wrote: post #89
philipwhiuk wrote: post #18

> To train the model, I assembled a dataset of 71k distinct fonts. I give it a week before Monotype sues your face off.

Not this agin /eyeroll It’s not illegal for a human to look through 71,000 fonts and then creat their own. It can’t be illegal for a human to use a robot to look through the fonts for them.

> it can't be...

Oh boy it totally can. I'm not saying it it, but it totally can.

I feel many people (at least on HN) treat laws like programming. There are some similarities, but programmers like to eliminate arbitrary special cases, while lawmakers love to create arbitrary special cases. It's like their only job, really.

Post reply on HN