71–80 of 421 posts
Oh yeah, totally ready for prime time, hyper realistic, SFW filter works great, not at all hallucinations /massive_sarcasm Actually NSFW, not safe for sanity. That's...not how body parts work: https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e644f39c8c0400108... Prompt was "young woman with tattoos in miniskirt" really nothing crazy there. But perhaps the latent space with that particular pose is particularly raunchy.
If you refuse their tracking and marketing cookies it redirects you to google.com. Classy.
Oh yeah, totally ready for prime time, hyper realistic, SFW filter works great, not at all hallucinations /massive_sarcasm Actually NSFW, not safe for sanity. That's...not how body parts work: https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e644f39c8c0400108... Prompt was "young woman with tattoos in miniskirt" really nothing crazy there. But perhaps the latent space with that particular pose is particularly raunchy.
Not quite right. I am, however, impressed that the fingers are generally "mostly" correct.
> Thanks to our advanced AI algorithms, you won’t tell generated humans from real people If the images posted are the best they can do, then i have some bad news from them
Oh yeah, totally ready for prime time, hyper realistic, SFW filter works great, not at all hallucinations /massive_sarcasm Actually NSFW, not safe for sanity. That's...not how body parts work: https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e644f39c8c0400108... Prompt was "young woman with tattoos in miniskirt" really nothing crazy there. But perhaps the latent space with that particular pose is particularly raunchy.
Yeah, this was my first attempt: https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e648819c8c0400088... Not quite right. I am, however, impressed that the fingers are generally "mostly" correct.
Oh yeah, totally ready for prime time, hyper realistic, SFW filter works great, not at all hallucinations /massive_sarcasm Actually NSFW, not safe for sanity. That's...not how body parts work: https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e644f39c8c0400108... Prompt was "young woman with tattoos in miniskirt" really nothing crazy there. But perhaps the latent space with that particular pose is particularly raunchy.
Yeah, this was my first attempt: https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e648819c8c0400088... Not quite right. I am, however, impressed that the fingers are generally "mostly" correct.
I wonder if their pose detection/interpolation struggles for rarer poses, eg "kneeling with legs splayed leaning forward" is quite specific in saucy contexts and fairly sparse in more typical model shoots, so the manifold gets a bit holey, and overlaps with similar poses like one knee up, one hand forward.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, this was my first attempt: https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e648819c8c0400088... Not quite right. I am, however, impressed that the fingers are generally "mostly" correct.
my first attempt created some kind of gym monster lol https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e64a2f412bec0009b...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be quite hard to make any AI tool that preemptively avoids the wide range of potential issues that you've mentioned. If tool makers are forced to always err on the side of caution, it's likely that the resulting tool ends up disappointing. Only when published, and when put into context of the entire work, could a creation deemed harmful. A tool should not, for example, prevent you from making a bunch of imag…
Just because it's hard to make a tool that can't be used in negative ways doesn't mean that it's a good idea to make a tool that (charitably) makes specifically negative uses easy and (uncharitably) is deliberately designed for them. Tool makes do err on the side of caution all the time - we **** out passwords so users don't share them as easily, we put safety catches in secateurs. "Build in safeguards against the ob…
- assuming you found an egregious issue, do you also double down on maintaining that the tool is 'deliberately designed to make negative uses easy'? How so?
- I disagree with the 'safety catches' metaphor and would offer the 'hammer' metaphor instead.
- Actually, with the rapid development in this field I expect that anyone will be able to locally prompt for any content, even movies, soon, limited only by people's taste and imagination; with this realization I don't think I will follow up on this discussion that will surely be outdated in a minute.
We know about all of the potential harms that deepfakes can cause, the problems with inherent bias in training data, etc. Creating/publicising a tool that winks at these issues (consider the difference between the poses offered for 'male' and 'female' bodies) but does nothing to mitigate them - and a lot to enable them - is irresponsible at best.
All these AI content generators are still early stage. So it's kind of wild west for the time being.
First cars were what? Horse carriage with an engine duct taped onto it? Only when they became more numerous, things like traffic rules, reliable brakes & steering etc became important.
We're in the engine-with-wheels stage. Have fun, be happy.
Ethnicity: American
What does that mean in latent space and does this mostly represent training bias?