[dead]
The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
11–20 of 69 posts
Re: The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
#12Calling them "the" company behind Stable Diffusion is pushing it. Just Stable Diffusion the model , but not the idea, maybe. As far as I know they pretty much just paid for servers to train a big shiny model on that was based on research they had no hand in. Throwing money at researchers after they came up with something good, just to let them build a big shiny version of it, does not retroactively make their accompl…
Mentioned in the article.
Re: The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
#13It would be a huge disaster to lose out on the folks releasing the models for free.
Nobody benefits from their failure.
If Runway and Stability can cut costs they will become cherished institutions.
Re: The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
#14Stable Diffusion was obviously never intended to make money, but as a Napster-style maneuver to enclose all image data on the internet through AI picture generation. They release something to the public that would get sued into oblivion were it done by an established company, but oops, the genie is out of the bottle, what you gonna do, the only choice now is to restrict it to a few power players who can actually do t…
To put it politely, your comment is bullshit. Stability AI is a billion dollar company with hundreds of millions in funding.
I would think the last decade or so of the tech industry would demonstrate otherwise? You could say the same about myriad other startups doing legally questionable things until regulators caught up with them or interest rates got raised. That someone throws piles of money at you and says your worth billions does not make that reality.
Re: The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
#15Calling them "the" company behind Stable Diffusion is pushing it. Just Stable Diffusion the model , but not the idea, maybe. As far as I know they pretty much just paid for servers to train a big shiny model on that was based on research they had no hand in. Throwing money at researchers after they came up with something good, just to let them build a big shiny version of it, does not retroactively make their accompl…
Mentioned in the article.
The article says they aren't the "sole inventor". They aren't an inventor at all.
Re: The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
To put it politely, your comment is bullshit. Stability AI is a billion dollar company with hundreds of millions in funding.
I would think the last decade or so of the tech industry would demonstrate otherwise? You could say the same about myriad other startups doing legally questionable things until regulators caught up with them or interest rates got raised. That someone throws piles of money at you and says your worth billions does not make that reality.
Motte and Bailey.
is it “company was planned vehicle for Napster except freeing images not music”
Or is it “an instance of companies wasting money because ZIRP and some companies are bad like some stuff I disagree with that happened at Uber”
Re: The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
#17Just a question but is it ever profitable to base a company around an open source product the way SD is? Why would anyone pay money to use the company's model when some guys on Reddit is distributing a similar product, albeit with lower performance, for free, that can be run locally? What would be the incentive for a person, not a company, to pay Stability AI company instead of downloading and doing a bit of setup to…
We should outlaw government spending on closed source, non public domain software. That would create a huge market for open source companies to thrive. Would be a win win for everyone (except the current closed vendors who provide government with crap software and get sucker taxpayers to foot the bill).
The issue is not "Microsoft Office vs Libre office" but rather "how much does it cost to necessary up to the support necessary for the government office in order to support Libre office?"
Things like "ok, we can't use one drive - need a different tool," "can't use Sharepoint, need to use a different tool," and so on.
The market is there. RHEL and similar are well established.
In order to make this a "we should do this" either government IT funding needs to be significantly increased (that is difficult in the current political climate in most places) or the support offerings and staff needed for the average user (using Windows, Sharepoint, Word, Excel, Teams, and Project) needs to be competitive with the pricing that Microsoft offers.
That should be "simple" - make a company that offers the same level of support as Microsoft does for a packaged suite of software that includes easy installations, appropriately locked down desktops, call center, and so on.
And if that can't be found at the same price that Microsoft offers - then we return to the "increase government funding."
Saying "we should outlaw government spending on closed source" misses a lot of the tools out there that are needed to keep things running. Is there a FOSS (with support contracts for the stack) alternative to Cerner or Epic? SAP? ArcGIS? And that's not even getting deep at all into the niche SaaS tools that some pieces use for specific problems.
The market is there and state and local governments would likely jump at the opportunity to switch if there's a company that can offer the same functional stack with the same support for the same price or cheaper built on top of FOSS. Otherwise... persuade those state and local governments to staff up to the necessary levels to be able to hire people able to customize and support the FOSS to fit their needs and be prepared to financially support that decision.
Re: The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would think the last decade or so of the tech industry would demonstrate otherwise? You could say the same about myriad other startups doing legally questionable things until regulators caught up with them or interest rates got raised. That someone throws piles of money at you and says your worth billions does not make that reality.
Motte and Bailey. is it “company was planned vehicle for Napster except freeing images not music” Or is it “an instance of companies wasting money because ZIRP and some companies are bad like some stuff I disagree with that happened at Uber”
Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive. Uber pursued both of these strategies (and lost massive amounts of money while breaking laws), but with a net benefit to their investors by weakening labor protections and other regulations.
Re: The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
#19Calling them "the" company behind Stable Diffusion is pushing it. Just Stable Diffusion the model , but not the idea, maybe. As far as I know they pretty much just paid for servers to train a big shiny model on that was based on research they had no hand in. Throwing money at researchers after they came up with something good, just to let them build a big shiny version of it, does not retroactively make their accompl…
Stable diffusion is just the "brand" of the diffusion generative model, just like Midjourney.
If you look at the stable-diffusion repo, it says that SD is based off a colab with StabilityAI and Runway.
Most of the value from these models is the training + dataset. The architecture is open source, and we've had flavours of it for several years. SD has some improvements on how it handles diffusions, but most architecture out there use about the same, but with wildly different results.
Re: The company behind Stable Diffusion appears to be at risk of going under
#20Interview 7mo ago w/CEO of StabilityAI.
Not too surprised about funding issues from the casual answer.
I’m not saying it was bad to self fund a project, but having to choosing between your life and fun (and potentially very profitable) projects is not easy.