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

DALL-E 2 generates images of Kermit The Frog in various films

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–198 of 198 posts

Re: DALL-E 2 generates images of Kermit The Frog in various films

#191

Post by SergeAx »

tdehnel wrote: post #111
tinalumfoil wrote: post #104

The amount of creativity here is astounding. Just imagine all the decisions the AI made in incorporating Kermit into the movies: the clothing it's chosen, how the character wears the clothing, the facial expressions, how to make Kermit himself look similar to the other movies characters. Should he be lanky? pudgy? Even simple decisions like obliviously Kermit in Wall-E is going to be a robot, it has to figure out wha…

Sorry to be this guy but that is not creativity. It’s using what already exists, not conjecturing something new. Contrast with real creativity (what people can do but machines currently cannot) where you conjecture something completely new. For example, Copernicus conjecturing the idea that the Earth revolves around the Sun. No machine learning model would have gotten there because it would have been trained on a bun…

Artist is using ideas already existed and creates something new out of them. It has always been this way since cave wall art.

I am 100% sure Copernicus was not the first to suggest a heliocentric system, but he was the one who put enough energy into proving it and defend that theory.

Re: DALL-E 2 generates images of Kermit The Frog in various films

#192

Post by Gnarled »

PheonixPharts wrote: post #24

These are honestly not very impressive (no sarcasm here) and further convince me that the next AI Winter will come with this coming recession. Don't get me wrong, they are still impressive in the quality of the visual they produce, but just like Markov Chain demos of old, they're neat but way miss the mark. None of these capture the "feel" of Kermit the Frog. Most of them look like weird designs for the Ninja Turtles…

> These are honestly not very impressive (no sarcasm here) and further convince me that the next AI Winter will come with this coming recession.

"Sure, this AI can produce high-resolution realistic images leaps and bounds above anything that's been shown before... but there's an aspect which could use improvement. Obviously, this proves that the current AI technology will never amount to anything and we should just give up on it now."

Re: DALL-E 2 generates images of Kermit The Frog in various films

#193

Post by adamsmith143 »

simiones wrote: post #148
adamsmith143 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's to say that Dall-E 3.0 won't do exactly that? This is not the peak of AI art generation and it will only continue to improve.

Sure, it might. But until then, I wouldn't say it makes sense to consider the AI as "being the artist". When DALL-E x.0 does that, and when it also generates similar quality from much higher-level prompts ("paint a sad picture", or "social commentary on BLM" or something like this, instead of a description of what the picture should show and in what style), then I for one will be in complete agreement that it's indee…

>paint a sad picture

Fairly certain you can get results using this prompt with no issues.

Dalle 1.0 -> 2.0 was a shocking improvement, I expect the jump to 3.0 to be equally jarring if not more so

Re: DALL-E 2 generates images of Kermit The Frog in various films

#194

Post by adamsmith143 »

tdehnel wrote: post #183
adamsmith143 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Sorry to be this guy but that is not creativity. It’s using what already exists, not conjecturing something new. Such a cute point of view, completely wrong but cute. Please go find the original images of Kermit in Blade Runner and WallE that were just copied here. >For example, Copernicus conjecturing the idea that the Earth revolves around the Sun. No machine learning model would have gotten there because it would…

The smugness of your reply annoyed me. But I feel somewhat satisfied that you’re just misinterpreting what I said. I never said copying existing images, I said it’s using what already exists for inspiration. That is not the same as creativity. I want to see what Dall-E comes up with when you ask it to create something new. Maybe “a new type of animal” or “an apartment building made to withstand radiation”. Basically…

>The point is a human could come up with those trivially. I think this system would struggle. Because it’s not capable of creating anything new, only combining things that already exist.

This is the flaw in your thinking. Humans are doing the same thing, I don't know why some people think the brain is so magical. We live in a materialist reality and to think the brain is anything other than a complex computer is farcical.

Re: DALL-E 2 generates images of Kermit The Frog in various films

#195

Post by simiones »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #189
simiones wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That remains to be seen. If I take a photograph of a still from the Matrix and print it, that's not the same as me photo-realistically drawing the same still from memory, which is itself not the same as me photo-realistically drawing it while looking at the still itself. Copyright law is way more nuanced than you think, especially around fair use.

I think this is already established. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/us-copyright-offic...

It's established that you can't assert copyright over a picture generated by an ML algorithm. I don't think it's established whether a picture generated by an ML algorithm can infringe someone else's copyright (e.g. if you ask DALL-E to produce a picture of Mickey Mouse, and it does a perfect rendition of him, is this picture in the public domain, or does it infringe Disney's copyright?).

Re: DALL-E 2 generates images of Kermit The Frog in various films

#196

Post by FeepingCreature »

simiones wrote: post #195
FeepingCreature wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is already established. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/us-copyright-offic...

It's established that you can't assert copyright over a picture generated by an ML algorithm. I don't think it's established whether a picture generated by an ML algorithm can infringe someone else's copyright (e.g. if you ask DALL-E to produce a picture of Mickey Mouse, and it does a perfect rendition of him, is this picture in the public domain, or does it infringe Disney's copyright?).

Hang on, I don't see where that said that you can't assert copyright over a ML generated picture. I think the decision says that the ML algorithm itself cannot assert copyright?

Re: DALL-E 2 generates images of Kermit The Frog in various films

#197

Post by simiones »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #196
simiones wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's established that you can't assert copyright over a picture generated by an ML algorithm. I don't think it's established whether a picture generated by an ML algorithm can infringe someone else's copyright (e.g. if you ask DALL-E to produce a picture of Mickey Mouse, and it does a perfect rendition of him, is this picture in the public domain, or does it infringe Disney's copyright?).

Hang on, I don't see where that said that you can't assert copyright over a ML generated picture. I think the decision says that the ML algorithm itself cannot assert copyright?

The decision says that no one can be considered the author of that picture, as copyright only protects human creative works. It is possible that the work infringes someone else's copyright (the decision doesn't address this point at all), but unless that happens, the image is in the public domain and you can freely copy it.

Note that, unlike patents and trademarks, copyright doesn't require registration. The court could have found that, while the AI can't assert copyright, the copyright still exists and belongs to the owner of the AI or the designer of the AI etc. Instead, they found that the work can't be protected by copyright, since it is not the product of human creativity.

Edit: here is a citation from the article that I'm basing the previous assertions on:

> Both in its 2019 decision and its decision this February, the USCO found the “human authorship” element was lacking and was wholly necessary to obtain a copyright, Engadget’s K. Holt wrote. Current copyright law only provides protections to “the fruits of intellectual labor” that “are founded in the creative powers of the [human] mind,” the USCO states.

Re: DALL-E 2 generates images of Kermit The Frog in various films

#198

Post by silicon2401 »

tsimionescu wrote: post #175
silicon2401 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the human artist does this choosing themselves. I disagree. The human artist's tastes at least partially originate in other people, both individuals and general societies/cultures, and oftentimes the artist directly incorporates feedback into future work. Are you aware that students in art school, music conservatories, etc constantly get feedback from instructors and peers? I reject your premise entirely unless you…

Does DALL-E incorporate (or even receive) feedback about which of the pictures it generated were better? It of course does not, and it currently has no function to do so. IF it incorporated this feedback and changed its weights based on it, I would agree with you that the situation could be comparable. Until then, my point remains: DALL-E is currently like an (extraordinarily good) hat that you can put words in and e…

We're basically just arguing semantics at this point. You define art/artist differently than I do. We won't make further progress with this discussion, but regardless it's great to see that technology is coming so far
Post reply on HN