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

Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 593 posts

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#571

Post by pixl97 »

rootusrootus wrote: post #203
manuelabeledo wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By making these fake images ubiquitous we are forcing people to quickly learn that they can't believe what they see on the internet and tracking down sources and deciding who you trust is critically important. Has this thought process ever worked in real life? I know plenty of seniors who still believe everything that comes out of Facebook, be AI or not, and before that it was the TV, radio, newspapers, etc. Most p…

> I know plenty of seniors And not just seniors. I see people of all ages who are perfectly happy to accept artificially generated images and video so long as it plays to their existing biases. My impression is that the majority of humanity is not very skeptical by default, and unwilling to learn.

As they say, people have accepted made up religions for thousands of years.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#572

Post by lm28469 »

wordpad wrote: post #357
lm28469 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you talked to "artists"? In my experience the vast majority say the opposite of what you worded here.

They are just gatekeeping and upset their skillet is devalued or completely trivialized which hurts both their pockets and ego.

The artists I know didn't make money from art to begin with. One is a part time baker who illustrates his life in his journal, thousands upon thousands of sketches and paintings documenting his entire life. That's the person I commission when I want to make a nice personalised presents. Of course I could ask chatgpt to shit me out the blandest drawing humanity as laid eyes upon for free but that's not the point.

It seems like what people like you want to build is a matrix style "life in a pod" world, the most optimal way to spend life: as cheap as possible, as easy as possible, as bland as possible, no struggle, no hardships, no efforts, nothing matters as long as it's cheap and "better" (while not being able to define "better")

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#573

Post by UpsideDownRide »

akarii wrote: post #436
tlh wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI art is certainly considered uncool today in many circles. I do wonder though… were there other innovations that were uncool in their early years, where now nobody bats an eyelid? Is that point just a generational/passage of time issue?

Digital Photography and digital painting. Both were considered deeply offensive to a lot of artists. I have witnessed both first hand and the criticisms were verbatim the same as AI. They said you couldn't become a good photographer if you didn't learn it with the limitation of film that forced you to make each shot count. Photoshopping a picture made it "not a real photo" and was banned from online communities and i…

Limiting the number of shots and putting thought into each one, composition, focus in detail, exposure and other technicalities is important for great photos. Similar to AI if the person using the tool is mindless about it the resukts will just be mid as well as little to no growth and learning will be achieved.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#574

Post by detritus »

yakattak wrote: post #16

I think this tech is cool, from an engineering perspective. I’m trying to figure out if there’s any justification for using it in a business world outside of: “We don’t want to pay an artist.” You can argue things like code generation are an extension of the engineer wielding it. Image generation just seems like a net negative overall if it’s used at scale. Edit: By scale, I mean large corporations putting content in…

I use AI as a stock art/asset replacement.

I'm old-fashioned so I still Photoshop it all together, but that's my use case here.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#575

Post by javier123454321 »

donkeybeer wrote: post #558
javier123454321 wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being alive is divine. It doesn't matter if you understand it or not. It's a beautiful thing to have a consciousness in this world, and to have the ability to create, to love. It takes a huge intellectual effort to try to trick yourself out of believing something so intuitive as that.

It takes immense hubris to believe only you are divine. You are a physical system, if one physical system can be divine, so can others. Or do you believe in the supernatural soul nonsense?

I agree, it's not exclusive.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#576

Post by antkim »

create a color pencil style artwork that is extremely detailed, with a surrealistic style of a farmhouse near a cornfield. There should be a cow or two, some chickens and a pig pen with piglets scurrying around. The sky should be overcast and threatening a storm. Purple mountains can be seen far in the distance

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#577

Post by antkim »

Create a drawing that looks like a detailed color pencil drawing. It should be of a farmhouse near a cornfield. There should be a couple of cows, some chickens and a pig pen with piglets scurrying around. The sky should be overcast and threatening a storm. Some purple mountains can be seen in the distance.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#578

Post by CamperBob2 »

imtringued wrote: post #548
CamperBob2 wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a pretend intelligence at best. The best time to start paying attention was ten years ago, when the first Go grandmaster was defeated by a "pretend intelligence." I sure wish I had. The next best time to start paying attention is now.

I wish I knew what to pay attention to. I've always had trouble with that. I spent 2024 and 2025 learning how neural networks and transformers work. The conclusions of that learning are pretty sobering. Everything uses transformers and despite all the novel architectures that have come out in those years, transformers are still the best and I'm not sure how to come to terms with that. Does it mean that researchers wa…

Everything uses transformers and despite all the novel architectures that have come out in those years, transformers are still the best and I'm not sure how to come to terms with that. Does it mean that researchers wasted their time on useless dead end architectures, or are they ahead of the curve and commercial companies are slow to adopt them?

I don't quite follow. Are you saying researchers are wasting their time working with transformer networks now, or that they wasted too much time in the past, or...?

Even the coding agents are more primitive than expected.

What did you expect, exactly? I don't know about you, but I bought my GPU to play games, and now it's finding bugs in my C code, writing better code to replace it, and checking it into Github. That doesn't signal "primitive" to me. More like straight outta Roswell.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#579

Post by ticulatedspline »

nindalf wrote: post #46
alex43578 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a company uses a photocopier, they don’t want to pay a scribe. When a company sends an email or docu-sign, they don’t want to pay a courier. Technology supplements or replaces jobs, often reducing costs. This is no different.

Art isn't just a job or a way to make money, like being a courier is.

If art isn't your job then it probably doesn't matter how good AI gets, you're still going to make art, and you'll do it however you want. If anything, capable tools will allow people who want to make art for art's sake but lack the skill to express their ideas.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#580

Post by charcircuit »

jacquesm wrote: post #201
charcircuit wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We would have tons of great artworks if it existed in the past. The works would be both more numerous and at a higher quality.

Absolutely not a chance. You see, in the past there was nothing to train it on. And that's sort of the point: the only reason that this AI image generation works at all is because it is lifting on the hard work of the people that had the skills, put the time and the effort in.

The hypothetical is if it existed.
Post reply on HN