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

Krita AI Diffusion

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 279 posts

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#131

Post by livrem »

bayindirh wrote: post #125
cwillu wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, CC-NC is not akin to the GPL, at all. The GPL says “you can sell this if you want, but whoever you sell it to can still do whatever they want with it, subject to the same terms.” CC-NC says “you can't do whatever you want with this” Which isn't to say that you're wrong to use whatever license you like, just that it's very much not similar in spirit to the GPL. Protecting the right of others to ma…

By akin, I didn't mean it's functionally equivalent. GPLv3 is one of the strongest copyleft licenses for software out there, forcing re-sharing of changes while preventing any source closing. CC-BY-NC is the strictest CC license which allows sharing, with credit, with no commercial use and no derivatives. Hence I tried to aim for "I'm selecting the one of the most strict license for sharing my photos, as I do the sam…

CC-BY-SA is much closer to GPL.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#132

Post by esjeon »

I saw a person using this. The system had 4090, which can pull about 20-30 iter/sec. This roughly translates to 4 image/sec with 8 iter/image. This allows interactive AI drawing (thou a bit quirky). Once the desired image is reached, the user can re-run w/ 30-50 iterations to finalize the image. This is really cool.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#133

Post by Nullabillity »

Kiro wrote: post #117
lionkor wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that's a thing, I'm one of those people. While impressive, the two issues I have with codepilot and other AI tools are: 1. The code is usually the same code I'd get a few web searches away, except then it would have the appropriate copyright. As a FOSS developer (in my free time), I do not want to risk using code I don't have a license for, and thus dirtying up my entire project and putting it in danger of being…

> The code is usually the same code I'd get a few web searches away My impression is that people normally don't use Copilot as a substitute for finding solutions (ChatGPT is much better for that), but as a way to help with otherwise tedious tasks that are really specific to your codebase. Check out 6:05 and 6:25 in this Andreas Kling video for a good example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mxubNQC5O8 Regarding your…

> Check out 6:05 and 6:25 in this Andreas Kling video for a good example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mxubNQC5O8

Oof. So not only was it a poor replacement for a macro, it didn't even generate the correct code!

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#134

Post by Filligree »

tambourine_man wrote: post #118
hutzlibu wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As far as I know there's a sizeable number of devs who don't intend to ever rely on copilot" Is that really a thing? I mean, I also don't want to rely on Microsoft and therefore also not on Copilot, but not using AI tools in general out of principle is probably a very rare minority. I simply would prefer my own local LLM. But in the thread linked above I read "AI never had and never will have it’s place in art." And…

I’m a Vim guy and I’m very impressed with VS Copilot, but: - Not enough to switch (yet, at least) - I would have to carefully review the generated code, which is not as fun writing The license issue is something I expect will be solved in the next few years (a dropdown menu to choose from, maybe).

You can use copilot with vim, no problem.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#135

Post by RunSet »

vouaobrasil wrote: post #101
ben_w wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So I suppose your need to create AI diversions is more important than the need of others to feel a sense of purpose through their work through their actual talent that you don't have? Not so. Sense of purpose is important. Your sense of purpose conflicts with the opportunity of everyone else to express themselves as they wish. How familiar are you with utilitarian ethics, and the "mere addition paradox" criticism o…

> Your sense of purpose conflicts with the opportunity of everyone else to express themselves as they wish. I do not believe people should be able to express themselves as they wish unconditionally. They should not be able to express themselves to the point of destroying the environment, they should not be able to express themselves by creating nuclear weapons or something EXTREMELY dangerous (AI), they should not be…

> I do not believe people should be able to express themselves as they wish unconditionally. They should not be able to express themselves to the point of destroying the environment, they should not be able to express themselves by creating nuclear weapons or something EXTREMELY dangerous (AI), they should not be able to express themselves by disrupting society.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#136

Post by Riverheart »

dthul wrote: post #74
vouaobrasil wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a luddite and I agree with most luddite sentiments. Most of this generative AI is NOT about using AI for boring tasks, and have you ever even tried to draw clouds? Not easy. Everyone draws clouds differently, which you would know if you ever tried to draw anything. Moreover, AI as a societal phenomenon goes way beyond AI drawing clouds.

> which you would know if you ever tried to draw anything I know exactly how hard it is to draw anything because I tried a bunch of times, and failed. I for one am happy that I can now express my creative ideas, which I couldn't do before due to missing talent / practice.

“I for one am happy that I can now express my creative ideas, which I couldn't do before due to missing talent / practice.”

The problem here is we need to look beyond our own self interest to how this will impact other people.

We don’t make a career out of art. This technology is just a novelty to us and but many others rely on it for themselves and their family and had no way of foreseeing the technology coming. They need it more than we do.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#137

Post by jwells89 »

hutzlibu wrote: post #95
makeitdouble wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it that different from how we view Github copilot ? As far as I know there's a sizeable number of devs who don't intend to ever rely on copilot, and I would expect the a similar trend in the drawing community with amateurs and pros not specially anti-AI, but not wanting to have a random generator meddle with their art.

"As far as I know there's a sizeable number of devs who don't intend to ever rely on copilot" Is that really a thing? I mean, I also don't want to rely on Microsoft and therefore also not on Copilot, but not using AI tools in general out of principle is probably a very rare minority. I simply would prefer my own local LLM. But in the thread linked above I read "AI never had and never will have it’s place in art." And…

I’ll use ChatGPT to help surface docs and examples or to get a very rough high level overview if what a task might involve, but I don’t really want an LLM in my IDE.

Not only does it feel like something that might be dangerous to become reliant on (what happens when it’s not working or I don’t have access to it), I have no idea what material it was trained on which makes it ethically gray. I might be more receptive to a local LLM where I can personally vet what it was trained on (primarily, I’m concerned with if the material was obtained fully consensually or not).

My attitude towards image generators is similar. Adobe’s is totally out of the question for example, because though they claim it’s 100% ethically trained because all material came from their stock image service, I know that’s bullshit because I’ve seen stolen art put up for sale there more times than I can count (and worse, they’re unresponsive when theft is reported).

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#138

Post by loki-ai »

makeitdouble wrote: post #91
raincole wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think at one point Krita will fork to two apps because of this exact reason. AI-based tools are clearly the next step of painting apps (to me at least, but I can't be the only one who believes in this). I think in 3~5 years an painting app without AI generation feature is just like a painting app without pen pressure today. It's still usable, you can make great art with it if you have the skill, but it will be so o…

Is it that different from how we view Github copilot ? As far as I know there's a sizeable number of devs who don't intend to ever rely on copilot, and I would expect the a similar trend in the drawing community with amateurs and pros not specially anti-AI, but not wanting to have a random generator meddle with their art.

Like the artists, this won't be an option. Market pressures will force devs to use AI assistance.

For example, this recent GitHub presentation about productivity improvements: 35% acceptance rate, 50% more pull requests, etc. I believe these numbers, and even if you don't, they will be a reality soon.

https://youtu.be/AAT4zCfzsHI?t=486

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#139

Post by ChrisRR »

shultays wrote: post #22
hafriedlander wrote: post #8

Somewhat tangential, but the Krita community and core team have been pretty explicitly anti-AI. https://krita-artists.org/t/change-in-policy-for-topics-rela... (I am part of a group that builds UI on top of open models, but we stopped working on our Krita version for that reason.)

Huh, I wasn't aware Krita was a thing. As a software engineer that rarely needs image editing Gimp was my go to software. Why there is a second open source image editing software now?

Even ignoring the fact that Krita is a digital painting piece of software, not general image editing

The fact that you think there's only one open source image editor out there is fascinating.

Re: Krita AI Diffusion

#140

Post by Dioxide2119 »

dale_glass wrote: post #77
amelius wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the difficulty is the point Ok, so what does the next level of "difficult" look like?

It's an interesting question, because AI breaks the intuitiveness of this dramatically. You can look at say, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wedding_at_Cana and quickly get that yup, this took a whole lot of time and effort. But AI has nothing like that. Some things that look like an awful lot of work it spits out with ease, some things that sound simple can take a whole lot of fiddling. Like the other day I was pl…

In the same way that using a limited medium like some oil paints, paintbrushes, and canvas to create images = the art of painting, there will become the art of hacking / abusing / advanced prompt engineering / pushing AI to do things that are close to or at its limits of capabilities.

A: Oh so your LLM generated an image of a spaceship cockpit, so what?

B: So what? This LLM was trained on nothing but tax records from 1929!

A: :o amazing!

So AI artists do not necessarily equal 'creatives who render images using AI tooling', they may instead be 'creatives who tease out novel outputs from AIs' or something like that.

Then again, this is suspiciously close to a 'what is art' conversation, so i'll stop here.

Post reply on HN