Open to everyone, but you must have Google or Discord account. Has the definition of everyone changed?
Touché. But it's certainly leagues more "everyone" today than it was yesterday. It used to require arcane knowledge of deep Discord server bot navigation. I gave up after 20 minutes and never figured it out. Today I tried it in seconds. I have about 40+ google accounts for reasons, so I don't begin to understand the aversion some have to registering a burner google/discord/facebook/etc account under their hampster's…
Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
121–130 of 182 posts
Re: Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Open to everyone, but requires a computer. Has the definition of everyone changed?
Equating participating in walled garden social platforms to simply having a computer is bleak
What a strangely deranged view of the world some people have.
Re: Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
#123This is a interesting company to watch in the Gen AI space since they don't have all the same restrictions as the bigger companies. Crazy this took them so long, and also crazy that they got so far through a very confusing Discord experience.
> space since they don't have all the same restrictions as the bigger companies. Can you give an example? Midjourney is heavily censored so it seems like it has a lot of restrictions.
Re: Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
#124This is a interesting company to watch in the Gen AI space since they don't have all the same restrictions as the bigger companies. Crazy this took them so long, and also crazy that they got so far through a very confusing Discord experience.
What was the confusing Discord experience? Was it that Discord was the main way to access Midjourney, and it was chaotic? I vaguely remember this, but didn't spend much time there.
Re: Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Touché. But it's certainly leagues more "everyone" today than it was yesterday. It used to require arcane knowledge of deep Discord server bot navigation. I gave up after 20 minutes and never figured it out. Today I tried it in seconds. I have about 40+ google accounts for reasons, so I don't begin to understand the aversion some have to registering a burner google/discord/facebook/etc account under their hampster's…
Where do you quickly get burner phone numbers for registration ?
Re: Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Touché. But it's certainly leagues more "everyone" today than it was yesterday. It used to require arcane knowledge of deep Discord server bot navigation. I gave up after 20 minutes and never figured it out. Today I tried it in seconds. I have about 40+ google accounts for reasons, so I don't begin to understand the aversion some have to registering a burner google/discord/facebook/etc account under their hampster's…
Where do you quickly get burner phone numbers for registration ?
Re: Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the alternative is pretty provably worse for you, and for them. * You have to save your (hopefully unique!) email/password in a password manager which is effectively contradictory to your "I won't use a cloud service" argument. * The company needs to build out a whole email/password authentication flow, including forgetting your password, resetting your password, hints, rate limiting, etc etc, all things that…
All very thoughtful arguments but I think this solution to these problems is flawed. I don't believe we should be solving authentication management problems by handing over all authentication capabilities and responsibilities to one or two mega companies. Especially since those companies can wield this enormous power by removing my access to this service because I may or may not have violated a policy unrelated to th…
I want to believe, but sadly there's no market for it. unless someone wants to start a privacy minded alternative to auth0, and figure out a business model that works , which is to say, are you willing to pay for this better way? are there enough other people willing to pay a company for privacy to make it a lucrative worthwhile business? because users are trained to think that software should be free-as-in-beer but unfortunately, developing software is expensive and those costs have to be recouped somehow. people say they want to pay, but revealed preferences are they don't.
Re: Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the alternative is pretty provably worse for you, and for them. * You have to save your (hopefully unique!) email/password in a password manager which is effectively contradictory to your "I won't use a cloud service" argument. * The company needs to build out a whole email/password authentication flow, including forgetting your password, resetting your password, hints, rate limiting, etc etc, all things that…
All very thoughtful arguments but I think this solution to these problems is flawed. I don't believe we should be solving authentication management problems by handing over all authentication capabilities and responsibilities to one or two mega companies. Especially since those companies can wield this enormous power by removing my access to this service because I may or may not have violated a policy unrelated to th…
I’m very not impressed by this deep, extended critique of machine learning researchers using common security best practices on the grounds that those practices involve an imperfect user experience for those requiring perfect anonymity…
Re: Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
#129Re: Midjourney web experience is now open to everyone
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to clarify for other readers, Draw Things has support and provides download links to quants but no iOS device can run the full precision model which means you will get slightly different and usually lower quality output than stuff you may see elsewhere, even if you use the same settings. It's still damn impressive though.
Quality issue should be mainly due to using FP16 accmulators for GEMM in M1-M2, A14-A16 devices (it is not a problem for SD v1 / SDXL models due to smaller channel count). This is changed to FP32 accmulators for GEMM in these devices with 1.20240820.1 release. q8p should have comparable quality to non-quantized models (in Draw Things, it is called FLUX.1 [dev] (Exact)).