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

Flux 3

bfl.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 151 posts

Re: Flux 3

#111

Post by icantevenhold »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #82
icantevenhold wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only the enlightened tech elite should have access to such sophisticated technology - we can’t expect the uneducated masses to not misuse them /s

Yeah, really, masses are fine. I mean gross and boring mostly, but fine. Problem is when entrepreneurs get their hands on such tech, because they invariably put it to use for scamming and cheating people (read: marketing). It's the business people who are flooding social media with AI slop, for example.

Yea but that’s a fad - people are already fed up with the obvious slop. I don’t think it’s something we will see a lot in ~1-2 years. Marketers will continue to hop on the next big trend just like they always did and all the current slop will become a different flavour slop.

Re: Flux 3

#112

Post by Der_Einzige »

smokel wrote: post #52
mdp2021 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> probably borrowed the term from behavioral scientists It's from epistemology. It is not there to refer to the subjective but to the objective. > A similar thing happened to "object oriented" which has been misused by philosophers and visual artists alike For instance?

In the 1990s "Object-Oriented Ontology" was introduced by Graham Harman [1]. The name was borrowed from computing, but its meaning has little or nothing to do with Simula or Smalltalk. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Harman

The OOO/"Speculative Realism" crowd are loony charlatans who make the current post-modern neo marxist politburo who runs the humanities parts of academia look downright sane.

My response to unironic OOO believers is that we must wage war on objects:

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

Re: Flux 3

#113

Post by ryandrake »

user43928 wrote: post #81
walrus01 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be a very uninformed world view and naive to say that the people who build and implement cutting-edge technology shouldn't be thinking about its societal implications and dangers. Or even considering more basic things like making sure it doesn't hurt anyone. Just because you can do a thing doesn't mean you always should do a thing. Anyone ever taken a CS course that includes extensive discussion of the Thera…

My issue with comments around the impact of AI is that often they are just not interesting. What substance is there beyond "I don't like it, and I think it is a negative for society", typically delivered with what I perceive as a self-righteous attitude?

> My issue with comments around the impact of AI is that often they are just not interesting.

To quote the movie, that’s just your opinion, man. To me, the impact of technology on society is 100X as interesting and important than the technology itself. Tech does not exist in a vacuum. And we don’t invent it for its own sake. The major point of AI (maybe the only point of it) is what humans will do to each other with it. And like it or not, not all of those things are positive.

Re: Flux 3

#114

Post by ryanchants »

roenxi wrote: post #48
ra wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be interesting to see some time-series sentiment analysis of HN. Subjectively it feels like there's much negativity on HN these days, I hope I'm wrong.

Bunch of software engineers are worried about their future employment prospects.

A lot of us spent substantial parts of our careers automating other folks out of jobs. But now that it's come for us, we're upset.

Re: Flux 3

#116

Post by thisisauserid »

sexy_seedbox wrote: post #19
thisisauserid wrote: post #2

- Showed close to zero examples of people. - Frivolous use of the term World Model. - Claims 20 seconds of video, shows only jumpcuts. Coming soon!

Many video examples on /r/stablediffusion

None within 24 hours of the announcement that show realistic human faces for than 3 seconds.

Re: Flux 3

#117

Post by marvinborner »

cachius wrote: post #115
toilet wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's a reason people call it Flyburg im Nicegau.

Why Fly?

Being "fly" is slang for being cool. It has been officially chosen as German youth word of the year in 2016 [0].

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youth_word_of_the_year_(German...

Re: Flux 3

#118

Post by Q6T46nT668w6i3m »

smokel wrote: post #38
thisisauserid wrote: post #2

- Showed close to zero examples of people. - Frivolous use of the term World Model. - Claims 20 seconds of video, shows only jumpcuts. Coming soon!

> Frivolous use of the term World Model The term "world model" as it was once used in model-based RL can now apparently refer to anything as silly as linear regression. Then again, the RL folks probably borrowed the term from behavioral scientists before them. It's probably best to simply accept this :/ A similar thing happened to "object oriented" which has been misused by philosophers and visual artists alike.

I don’t see a problem. It appears to use a shared latent to learn inverse dynamics.

Re: Flux 3

#119

Post by speff »

ra wrote: post #22
jdthedisciple wrote: post #20

It's incredible how negative and dismissive the comments in here are while here I am thinking the model actually looks impressively capable. But then again I heard the downers have always been the first to leave their dung comments here so let's see...

It would be interesting to see some time-series sentiment analysis of HN. Subjectively it feels like there's much negativity on HN these days, I hope I'm wrong.

You may like this old comment by dang who did this type of analysis: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24215601 (2020)

Re: Flux 3

#120

Post by user43928 »

ryandrake wrote: post #113
user43928 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My issue with comments around the impact of AI is that often they are just not interesting. What substance is there beyond "I don't like it, and I think it is a negative for society", typically delivered with what I perceive as a self-righteous attitude?

> My issue with comments around the impact of AI is that often they are just not interesting. To quote the movie, that’s just your opinion, man. To me, the impact of technology on society is 100X as interesting and important than the technology itself. Tech does not exist in a vacuum. And we don’t invent it for its own sake. The major point of AI (maybe the only point of it) is what humans will do to each other with…

That not all of the tech's applications are positive seems obvious, and hardly makes for interesting discussion.

Is there something in particular that you think would be interesting to discuss here?

Post reply on HN