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

SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

stability.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 157 posts

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#81

Post by Jackson__ »

refulgentis wrote: post #67
Jackson__ wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only truly successful commercial use of SDXL I know of is by NovelAI. Said company appears to have used an 256xH100 cluster to finetune it to produce anime art. Open source efforts to produce a similar model seem to have failed due to the extreme compute requirements for finetuning. For example, Waifu Diffusion using 8XA40[0] have not managed to bend SDXL to their will after potentially months of training. If you…

Is that the correct link? I've never heard of A40s, the link is to release notes from a year and two months ago, and SD XL just came out a month or two ago. Hard for me to get to "SD XL cannot [be finetuned effectively]" from there.

A40: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/a40-pcie.c3700

I have not heard about the team upgrading or downgrading from the hardware mentioned there, so I assumed it's still the same hardware they use.

>SD XL just came out a month or two ago

About 4.5 months actually.

For the SDXL cannot be finetuned efficiently claim, an attempt at a finetune was released here: https://huggingface.co/hakurei/waifu-diffusion-xl

The team was given early access by StabilityAI to SDXL0.9 for this. You'll have to test it out for yourself, if you're interested in comparing. From my experience, it is a world of a difference between the NovelAI and WaifuDiffusion models in both quality and prompt understanding.

Note, the very baseline I set for the WaifuDiffusionSDXL model was to beat their SD2.1 based model[0], which it did not in my opinion.

[0] https://huggingface.co/hakurei/waifu-diffusion-v1-4

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#82

Post by kmeisthax »

godelski wrote: post #63
kmeisthax wrote: post #48

Noncommercial use - aside from being one of my licensing pet peeves - seems to indicate that the money is drying up. My guess is that the investors over at Stability are tired of subsidizing the part of the generative AI market that OpenAI refuses to touch[0]. The thing is, I'm not entirely sure there's a paying portion of the market? Yes, I've heard of people paying for ChatGPT because it answers programming questio…

> Porn. It's always porn. I've been surprised at the explosion of porn. Well, not actually. Automatic1111 made that easy and anyone that CivitAI knows all too well what those models are being used for. I mean when you give teenagers the ability to undress their crushes[0] what do you think is going to happen (do laws adequately protect people (kids)? Can they? Will this force a shift towards actually chasing producer…

>do laws adequately protect people (kids)? Can they? Will this force a shift towards actually chasing producers, distributors, and diddlers?

It's extremely complicated. Actual CSAM is very illegal, and for good reason. However, artistic depictions of such are... protected 1st Amendment expression[0]. So there's an argument - and I really hate that I'm even saying this - that AI generated CSAM is not prosecutable, as if the law works on SCP-096 rules or something. Furthermore, that's just a subset of all revenge porn, itself a subset of nonconsensual porn. In the US, there's no specific law banning this behavior unless children are involved. The EU doesn't have one either. A specific law targeted at nonconsensual porn is drastically needed, but people keep failing to draft one that isn't either a generalized censorship device or a damp squib.

You can cobble together other laws to target specific behavior - for example, there was a wave of women in the US copyrighting their nudes so they could file DMCA 512 takedown requests at Facebook. But that's got problems - first off, you have to put your nudes in the Library of Congress, which is an own goal; and it only works for revenge porn that the (adult) victim originally made, not all nonconsensual porn. I imagine EU GDPR might be usable for getting nonconsensual porn removed from online platforms, but I haven't seen this tried yet.

I'm disgusted, but not surprised, that teenage kids are generating CSAM like this. Even before we had diffusion models, we had GANs and deepfakes, which were almost immediately used for generating shittons of nonconsensual porn[1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalit... and the later https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Handley

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCLaeBAkFAY

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#83

Post by fnordpiglet »

__loam wrote: post #65
fnordpiglet wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open AI has a pretty robust and profitable business without Microsoft. In every enterprise I’ve been involved with over the last few years we have had some incredibly material and important use cases of OpenAI LLMs (as well as Claude). They aren’t spewing slop or whatever, they’re genuinely achieving valuable and foundational business outcomes. I’ve been a bit stunned at how fast we’ve achieved these things and it te…

Sigh I'm really tired of seeing people assume OpenAI is profitable. We have no idea of they are or not and have some indication that they're incinerating money on chatgpt to the point that they're turning off sign ups because they're out of compute.

My understanding, which I can’t prove other than to say it comes from folks affiliated with OpenAI, is that chatgpt doesn’t make money but also doesn’t lose money (in aggregate, some accounts use way more than others but many accounts are fairly idle), and their API business is profitable and accounts for most of their GPU utilization. I have no insight into why they would turn off signups for chatgpt other than they may need the capacity for their enterprise customers, where they make a decent margin.

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#84

Post by dreampen »

kmeisthax wrote: post #48

Noncommercial use - aside from being one of my licensing pet peeves - seems to indicate that the money is drying up. My guess is that the investors over at Stability are tired of subsidizing the part of the generative AI market that OpenAI refuses to touch[0]. The thing is, I'm not entirely sure there's a paying portion of the market? Yes, I've heard of people paying for ChatGPT because it answers programming questio…

> Porn. It's always porn.

I posted about my AI porn site pornpen.ai here last year and it reached the top of the front page. And yes, it's still going strong :D (and we've integrated SDXL and videos recently)

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#85

Post by [deleted] »

gremlinsinc wrote: post #28
LordDragonfang wrote: post #7

Based on the demo, that's... incredibly fast. Literally generating images faster than I can type a prompt. They've clearly got a set seed, so they're probably caching request, but even with prompts that they couldn't possibly have cached it's within a second or so.

I hope playgroundai.com adopts this asap, but not sure they can with that non-commercial bit...

[deleted]

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#86

Post by jauntywundrkind »

swyx wrote: post #39
jauntywundrkind wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any good resources for learning a lot of "syntactic sugar" terms? This is new to me, but I'd love to know more.

https://github.com/swyxio/ai-notes/blob/main/IMAGE_PROMPTS.m...

#LearningInPublic strikes again! I love you swyx!

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#87

Post by zorgmonkey »

htrp wrote: post #9
thot_experiment wrote: post #8

I've been mucking with this stuff again and the SDXL + LCM sampling & LoRA makes 1280x800 images in like 2 second, so about a ~5x speed increase for me (so this would be roughly 2x faster than LCM (??, napkin math)). I've found that the method isn't as good at complex prompts. They claim here this can outperform SDXL 1.0 WRT prompt alignment, but I'm curious what their test methodology is. I searched the paper and I…

the use case here is really for segmented inpainting. don't like a part of an image? replace it instantly

It has been a while since I last tried, but I never had very good results when I tried inpainting with SDXL in comparison to the SD1.5 inpainting models.

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#88

Post by DeathArrow »

Jackson__ wrote: post #62
kmeisthax wrote: post #48

Noncommercial use - aside from being one of my licensing pet peeves - seems to indicate that the money is drying up. My guess is that the investors over at Stability are tired of subsidizing the part of the generative AI market that OpenAI refuses to touch[0]. The thing is, I'm not entirely sure there's a paying portion of the market? Yes, I've heard of people paying for ChatGPT because it answers programming questio…

The only truly successful commercial use of SDXL I know of is by NovelAI. Said company appears to have used an 256xH100 cluster to finetune it to produce anime art. Open source efforts to produce a similar model seem to have failed due to the extreme compute requirements for finetuning. For example, Waifu Diffusion using 8XA40[0] have not managed to bend SDXL to their will after potentially months of training. If you…

>Open source efforts to produce a similar model seem to have failed due to the extreme compute requirements for finetuning.

A distributed computing project similar to SETI @ Moon wouldn't help with training?

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#90

Post by __loam »

senseiV wrote: post #76
__loam wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the artists get to say whatever they want about this bullshit considering it's entirely dependent on their work to even function. I don't think the AI community gets to call the people who make the models possible at all snobs or anything else. The AI people didn't make shit. They should have some respect for the people that do.

The so called "AI People" built the entire architecture, something people didn't think was possible at the scale and quality a year ago, and the matter of "artists should get whatever they want" because it trained on their works isn't the point. Diffusion Models don't rip parts of pictures together, they happen to be trained to make art out of noise, finding patterns in art. same things happening with LLM's in court…

These models can't exist without the training sets. Their value is entirely derived from existing data. The ml architecture does not matter at all. Sure, throw enough compute and data at a problem, do a little parallelization, and you can extract plenty of patterns. Does that mean the ml engineers understand art? Or are they just using glorified brute force to alienate people who actually make things from their labor? No, I have very little respect for the AI people. Once you get over the novelty, their creations inspire little else beside disgust. They seem to take pride in how little they understand about the models they create.
Post reply on HN