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

ChatGPT Images 2.5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 474 posts

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#391

Post by the-mitr »

ActionHank wrote: post #141
meerita wrote: post #111

I've really enjoyed using AI to generate images. For example, Long time ago, I read an amazing five-book saga called Riverworld, and I used AI to recreate many scenes, places, and ideas from the story. Seeing the books come to life through hundreds of images was a great experience. Definitely one of the coolest things to enjoy in 2026. Try it with your favorite books.

[flagged]

Then reading a book is outsourcing imagination or enjoying it's illustrations by someone else, as you rely on the others for imagining stories

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#392

Post by weird-eye-issue »

webdood90 wrote: post #107

Coming to HN to read comments on releases like this reminds me that there is a small, vocal minority that is pushing so hard for more and more features like this. The majority of the world does not want or need any of this, yet the nerds in SF that can hardly hold a conversation with another human being are pumping it out as quickly as they can. I truly think we're fucked.

Do you travel? I've visited several countries in the past couple of years, and everywhere I go I see AI-generated images used widely by businesses.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#394

Post by nojs »

pelzatessa wrote: post #6

The "composite party photo", while impressive, shows that still the miniscule details are being lost, like the teeth structure of the guy in the middle or the fact that the guy on the left is holding the cup with three fingers. Wondering why they chose this edit for the showcase.

The guy’s arm is also extremely long.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#396

Post by bahmboo »

wolfy1993 wrote: post #130
bahmboo wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Groan. Your comment is the most depressing thing I've read today. What a sad way to look at the world. People are doing stuff and having fun. Meanwhile a whole sub-cult is sucking from the doom straw and mumbling carbon, water, greed, blah. The sport of Golf consumes far more resources than any AI data center.

Remind me what golf club comes close to the energy consumption of a data center? Or do you literally mean the entire sport of golf vs 1 data center?

That's fair and I left it as is knowing that. But it was still factually correct.

The main point is people worrying about resources and how to allocate them. We are creatures who want joy and I will not apologize for that. Certainly in face of abstract things such as "the environment". Which environment? I am a humanist. That definition varies. Golf is not the problem sorry to pick on it!

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#397

Post by nozzlegear »

rnjesus wrote: post #389
nozzlegear wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well what are they posting that concerns you? That's what I'm wondering.

not that i have a problem with any of these, but i believe he’s talking about anime titties, futas, lolis, etc. and their more realistic variants

Ah okay, I was thinking stuff like political propaganda or something, but I think yours makes more sense.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#398

Post by echelon »

api wrote: post #379
hirvi74 wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pandora's box is already wide open? The lid was blown off the hinges long before AI. There were people eating Tide Pods in the 2010s. People were drinking bleach and taking Ivermectin to kill a virus about five years ago. AI, in some ways, might be our only saving grace at this point. It sure as Hell cannot cause people to do much worse.

AI makes it easier to fact check. It’s not perfect but it’s better than nothing.

This is the right perspective.

While {AI, the Internet, Smartphones} can cause harm, {AI, the Internet, Smartphones} are vastly more beneficial to society than not.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#399

Post by pibaker »

xp84 wrote: post #286
cobolcomesback wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, are these really the best examples they could come up with? What is the point of having a fake picture of your dog in a costume? What’s the point of having a fake picture about being at a party? The only use case I can think of for this is for someone who likes to make up stories and lie about what they’ve done. Is that really the target market?

Trying to be as least cynical as possible, imagine if you were a party with 3 or more people, and you really wanted a nice pic like that to commemorate the night, but never got to take one all together because someone left early, and you were in the bathroom when they announced their departure. Yes, it's a major first-world problem to not get a photo, but to the right person, it could mean a lot to them to "fix" the…

What's the point of having a photo like that?

Is spending time with your friends not enough in 2026? Do we must provide photographic evidence of all the fun you have been having or it did not happen?

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#400

Post by dang »

recitedropper wrote: post #386
dang wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN, and particularly not unsubstantive + negative ones, which kill the kind of discussion we're hoping to have here (i.e. curious and thoughtful). If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. Note this one: " Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but…

What? He quotes the opening line of the article, and notes that he reacts negatively to it. Interpreting his sentiment as "curmudgeonly" is a clear exaggeration. And sure--it isn't a high-substance comment, but it isn't irrelevant either. It was, for a while, the top-voted comment on this whole thread. That shows people resonate with the thought, and it obviously sparked quite a lot of discussion. This seriously make…

This was not a borderline call! The GP comment is not in keeping with the kind of discussion we're hoping for, especially not at the top of a thread—which unfortunately is where cheap negative comments often end up.

The problem isn't primarily with the comment, and in that sense conradludgate did nothing wrong. The problem is the upvotes. If it weren't for those, such comments wouldn't rise to the top and choke out more interesting conversation. But they routinely do, and that's one of the biggest problems we have here.

Post reply on HN