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

Stable Diffusion 2.0

stability.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 519 posts

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#371

Post by wongarsu »

myaccount9786 wrote: post #94
rogers18445 wrote: post #3

They apparently tried to combat NSFW generation by filtering the training dataset not to include any.

The easiest way to combat this is to put your model behind an API and filter queries (midjourney, OpenAI) or just not make it available (Google). The tradeoff is that you're paying for everyone's compute. I guess SD is betting on saving $ on compute being more important in this space than the ability to gatekeep certain queries. And the tradeoff is that you need to do nsfw filtering in your released model. It will be…

Making a bulletproof filter is incredibly difficult, even more so in a topic where image descriptions are written in a culture that often has to circumvent text filters. Both midjourney's and OpenAI's filter works mostly because of the threat of bans if you try to circumvent them. I'm not sure I would describe that as "the easy solution"

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#372

Post by [deleted] »

2Gkashmiri wrote: post #338
imran-khan wrote: post #198

To put things in perspective, the dataset it's trained on is ~240TB and Stability has over ~4000 Nvidia A100 (which is much faster than a 1080ti). Without those ingredients, you're highly unlikely to get a model that's worth using (it'll produce mostly useless outputs). That argument also makes little sense when you consider that the model is a couple gigabytes itself, it can't memorize 240TB of data, so it "learned"…

hey..... first time i want to dip my toes into this, what graphics card do you suggest?

[deleted]

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#373

Post by arez »

2Gkashmiri wrote: post #338
imran-khan wrote: post #198

To put things in perspective, the dataset it's trained on is ~240TB and Stability has over ~4000 Nvidia A100 (which is much faster than a 1080ti). Without those ingredients, you're highly unlikely to get a model that's worth using (it'll produce mostly useless outputs). That argument also makes little sense when you consider that the model is a couple gigabytes itself, it can't memorize 240TB of data, so it "learned"…

hey..... first time i want to dip my toes into this, what graphics card do you suggest?

depends on your wallet but RTX 3080 or RTX 3060 are good graphic cards with which you can create these images. If you just want to dip your toes and not spend much you can use Google Colab and rent out googles graphicscards either for free or for $10. Here's a link to a google colab that you can just run for free and that is used a lot https://colab.research.google.com/github/TheLastBen/fast-sta...

P.S. if you want to buy a graphics card, make sure to have at least 12GB VRAM

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#374

Post by in3d »

arez wrote: post #369
in3d wrote: post #363

In addition to removing NSFW images from the training set, this 2.0 release apparently also removed commercial artist styles and celebrities [1]. While it should be possible to fine tune this model to create them anyway using DreamBooth or a similar approach, they clearly went for the safe route after taking some heat. 1. https://twitter.com/emostaque/status/1595731407095140352?s=4...

does this mean that stuff like artstation and deviantart doesn't work anymore as prompts? That would be a huge change

Based on sample images I’ve seen, “Greg Rutkowski” doesn’t work anymore for example.

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#375

Post by juliendorra »

ajuc wrote: post #325
acadapter wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human artists derive their inspiration and styles from a large set of copyrighted works, but they are free to produce new art despite of that. Art would have developed much slower and be much poorer if, for example, Impressionism or Cubism had been entangled in long ownership confrontations in courts. Then there's the fact that humanity has been able to develop and share art and literary works for thousands of years…

> It would be interesting to see if this technology can erode the copyright concept a bit Copyright law (especially in US) only ever changes in the direction that suits corporations. So - no. What I expect instead is artists being sued by a big tech company for copyright violations because that big tech company used the artist Public Domain image for training their copyrighted AI and as a result it created a copyrigh…

My bet is that big corporations won’t risk suing anyone over a supposed copyright on generated images,as there is a good chance that a court ends up stating that all AI generated images are in fact public domain (no author, not from the original intent and idea of a human)

You can already see the quite strange and toned down language they use on their sites. (And for some the revealing reversal from we licence to you to you licence to us)

Some smaller AI companies might believe they own a clear cut copyright and sue, but it would make sense that they would either be thrown out or loose

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#376

Post by momojo »

prakhar897 wrote: post #330
Zitrax wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It confused me that the letter boxes were divided in 7+3, thus I thought it would be two words while the correct answer was a single 10 letter word. Maybe try to avoid wrapping words.

Nice Observation!! I'm thinking including a start and end mark to improve the UX would work well. I can't avoid wrapping as the prompt might be very large.

If the word is always going to be a single word, I would clarify that with some examples in the tutorial

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#377

Post by momojo »

LASR wrote: post #120
searchableguy wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you building?

It started as an AI-powered MS paint for my son. But after demoing it to a few coworkers, it morphed into a bit more than that. Now it’s more of a storybook creator that young kids can use to generate their own stories. Not looking to monetize at all. But inference is expensive. So might have something to cover costs. Some backstory: When I was growing up in the early 90s, my dad took me into his office over the week…

I'm getting Scribblenauts vibes in a good way.

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#378

Post by liuliu »

eoerl wrote: post #179
corysama wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s my understanding that, amazingly enough, blending the models is done by literally performing a trivial linear blend of the raw numbers in the model files. Someone even figured out they could get great compression of specialized model files by first subtracting the base model from the specialized model (using plain arithmetic) before zipping it. Of course, you need the same base file handy when you go to reverse…

It is not typically possible to blend models like that, since the training process is (lateral) order insensitive, as far as the model goes.

I thought so too until found that there are quite a bit of literatures nowadays about "merging" weights, for example, this one: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.10515.pdf and also the OpenCLIP paper.

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#379

Post by BurningFrog »

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #296
thot_experiment wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not that people aren't owning ideas hard enough, ideas shouldn't be ownable in this way, the problem is that we've created a system that's obsessed with scarcity and collecting rents. Being able to own and trade ideas a la copyright/patents helps people who can buy copyrights and patents stifle creativity more than it helps artists gather reward for their creation (though it does both). Human endeavor…

When I was younger, I also thought that way. I also felt that being artist has nothing to with money: a true artist will always create out of their internal need, not for money. Then came the brutal reality: creating high-quality artwork needs time. Some can be created after work, but not that much. Some forms of art require expensive instruments. Some, like filmmaking, require collaboration and coordination of many…

Yeah, if you want artists to be able to devote their lives to their craft and reach the highest possible levels, they have to get paid enough to do that.

If all artists are "weekend warriors", they will still produce a lot of art, and some of it will be the best in that world. But the quality will be far from what we enjoy today.

That said, there are of course other ways to pay artists than the capitalist way of having customers pay for what they like. But I think the track record firmly favors a capitalist system.

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#380

Post by jbellis »

Jack000 wrote: post #84
echelon wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> train this from scratch If you're talking about training from scratch and not fine tuning, that won't be cheap or easy to do. You need thousands upon thousands of dollars of GPU compute [1] and a gigantic data set. I trained something nowhere near the scale of Stable Diffusion on Lambda Labs, and my bill was $14,000. [1] Assuming you rent GPUs hourly, because buying the hardware outright will be prohibitively expen…

Depends on the dataset. You can probably get decent results by restricting the modality of the images (faces, cars, bedrooms etc) I trained from scratch with 4x3090 and while it’s not as good as SD it’s surprisingly better with hands.

What kind of form factor do you use for 4x3090? Don't people usually use the datacenter product line when they're trying to get more than one into a box?
Post reply on HN