15 ms·

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

390 points by jayalammar 4y ago

alex_duf 4y ago
These are mind bogglingly good
- tgv 4y ago
  Yes, and it still feels a lot like Searle's Chinese Room. It's as if it skips a dozen steps. Well, that's exactly what happens, of course. But it does show that the network can match linguistic descriptions to images extraordinarily well.
  - myrmidon 4y ago
    Do you find the Chinese Room argument convincing? Do you feel that the human mind is more than an "appropriately" trained "biological" neural network? What do you consider the limits of a DALL-E like system compared to a "true" mind? My personal opinion is that the Chinese Room argument is fancy handwaving that crucially relies on never being explicit about what it means by "understanding", combined with an appeal to intuition. I strongly believe that there is nothing "magical" about the human mind or brain (that could not be replicated artificially), and thus that a comparably trained, appropriately designed system ("DALL-E successor") OR a copy OR a simulation of a human brain would be all just as capable and "understanding"/"conscious" as another human...
    - Simon321 4y ago
      > My personal opinion is that the Chinese Room argument is fancy handwaving that crucially relies on never being explicit about what it means by "understanding", combined with an appeal to intuition. bingo
    - notahacker 4y ago
      There doesn't need to be anything "magical" about the human mind for human "understanding" not to be particularly closely approximated by performing mathematical transformations on a huge corpus of raster data, even though the latter approach produces very useful results (see also the utility of a pocket calculator vs attempting to skip a billenium or so of natural evolution to grow an organism motivated to learn multiplication in a petri dish, or parse human minds to figure out the elements of brain state associated with performing a calculation) GPT-3 is far, far better at generating descriptions of loving humanity than the average dog. But it's pretty obvious that the dog's goal formation and excitement hormones aren't particularly similar to letter-by-letter ASCII output probability calculations on a database, and that GPT-3 has no more grasp of the dog's love of humanity in general and this human in particular than the dog has of Shakespeare. "Thought" and intelligible results are essentially orthogonal, which limits the feasibility of training the former...
    - tgv 4y ago
      > My personal opinion is that the Chinese Room argument is fancy handwaving It isn't hand-waving. It's against it, really. It's a thought experiment that encourages a sceptic attitude towards jumps in understanding mental processes. The operator in the Chinese Room doesn't understand Chinese. While the translations are excellent, he or she wouldn't be able to go out in the street and ask for a glass of water if their life depended on it. Hence, a computer that mechanically translates Chinese cannot be automatically assumed to understand Chinese. The argument doesn't need to explain exactly what understanding means. We all (sort of) know what it means. The same goes for e.g. attention. That's what makes it so hard to define what strong AI is and how to verify it. The Turing Test famously tries to decide this (without defining anything, I might add), and the Chinese Room is a good argument against it being the proper test.
      - myrmidon 4y ago
        > The argument doesn't need to explain exactly what understanding means. We all (sort of) know what it means. Then what does "understanding" a language mean? Your "asking for a glass of water on the street" example implies to me that you demand a system with: a) capability for internal intent b) ability to express intent in target language to grant it "understanding". Basically, first you deliberately construct a system not capable of intent (pure stateless query-response algorithm), then you deny that it "understands" Chinese on the basis of being unable to express intent. That does not hold. Give me a precise definition for what you mean by "understanding" and I'll dismantle the Chinese Room for you.
        tgv 4y ago
        > Give me a precise definition for what you mean by "understanding" and I'll dismantle the Chinese Room for you. You probably can't define "chair" in an exact enough sense. It would merely show the shortcoming of the definition rather than refuting the Chinese Room. > a system not capable of intent If I now would require a definition of "intent" I would be just as childish. > That does not hold. First, the system isn't stateless. It has the operator who has to remember what has happened before in order to come up with a correct translation. Second, your argument implies that understanding requires intent. That alone is a tall order to prove. But it's the point of the Chinese Room: the mechanism doesn't understand, doesn't have intent, nothing. Yet it performs exactly as an intelligent, understanding, intentional translator. So would you not agree with the conclusion: you can't judge intent by only looking at I/O behavior? Note that Searle (probably, this is just my understanding) doesn't mean that the Room is useless or "dumb" (in most senses of the word).
- puranjay 4y ago
  Kermit in Sopranos did it for me. Hilariously accurate.
- coldcode 4y ago
  If you ran it 1000 times and picked the best, you might get all good ones. I would want to see all 1000. It's like stock picker ads (person who called the market says XXX) where you only show the lucky ones.
  - mensetmanusman 4y ago
    It doesn’t matter if these images were one in 10,000, the facts that any exist that are this good is crazy.
    - abhaynayar 4y ago
      Yeah exactly. The fact that a person who could never create such a picture on their own, now just has to go through a bunch of images and select one to get this result is already amazing. The goal posts keep shifting, glass half empty.
      - phaedrus 4y ago
        It reminds me of pop articles about the P=NP question which simplify it down to, "is being able to recognize creativity the same as being creative?" Turns out for practical purposes, yes (the simplification question not the mathematical question), as long as you can offload the work to an AI on a powerful compute cluster!
      - simiones 4y ago
        It's amazing and wonderful, but it's not the AI that's "creating art", it's the human choosing the best AI output that's doing the artistic part (often togehter with the person who input the prompt to the AI). It's just like Dada poets did 100 years ago: you use a mechanical process to generate quasi-random output, and then you choose some of this output to present to other humans. The way you provide input to the mechanical process (e.g. what words you choose to put in the hat) and the curation are the real creative part of the art, not the mechanical process generating the text itself.
      - coldcode 4y ago
ahoka 4y ago
Is there an easy way to try this model on my computer?
- jayalammar 4y ago
  Not Dalle2 specifically, it's proprietary and there's a waitlist. Older open source alternatives include https://huggingface.co/dalle-mini https://huggingface.co/dalle-mini
- jffry 4y ago
  As far as I know, the actual trained system is proprietary, and you can only use it by requesting access to their online system for generating imagery: https://openai.com/dall-e-2/ https://openai.com/dall-e-2/ There are open-source efforts to implement it and make trained models available, but I don't imagine they are yet at the same scale of ingested data / model size as OpenAI's system: https://github.com/lucidrains/DALLE2-pytorch https://github.com/lucidrains/DALLE2-pytorch
rlv-dan 4y ago
https://nitter.net/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531506455714492416 https://nitter.net/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531506455714492416
- aasasd 4y ago
  There are browser extensions to do this for you. Specifically ‘Redirector’ for FF.
hcarvalhoalves 4y ago
The Big Lebowski’s one is clearly a guy in a frog costume… hilarious!
high_5 4y ago
What about ... Kermit in the Muppet Show?
sp332 4y ago
Does that mean the developers put The Big Lebowski through the model during training? Where did they get all the movies and TV shows from? And does copying so directly from the source material open them and users up to copyright infringement liability?
- natly 4y ago
  They probably did, but even if they didn't it may have come from the terrabytes of data they scraped from the internet. OpenAI doesn't care. They claim that it's derivative enough to go under fair use. And whether it is or isn't, I guess their calculation is that the risk is worth taking to be the first to develop these algorithms, which is a huge head start if the courts decide that it does count as fair use.
  - gwern 4y ago
    Hilarious parodies like these are copyright infringement, yes, but also open-and-shut fair use defense. (You're confusing the issue of transformativeness and fair use defense.)
- BeefWellington 4y ago
  I'm imagining the defense will be: "Your honor, it can't be infringement because I ran it through an ML model first." Especially if the movie(s) that are eventually generated this way are ripping whole scenes or sequences out of other films, a la copilot.
  - bogwog 4y ago
    I feel like if they don’t have licenses for all of their source material, then the model should be required to be released into the public domain. It’s like extremely expensive piracy that is bad for artists and bad for the environment. I wonder if the reason OpenAI, Google, etc don’t release these things isn’t so much that they’re worried about racist/offensive output, but instead they’re worried about people using it to create images of, say, Mickey Mouse and drawing the attention of his lawyers? It’d be better for AI companies to keep all of this stuff in a legal gray area for as long as possible.
candlemas 4y ago
None of those look like Kermit the Frog.
feynmanalgo 4y ago
If this is legit it would be one of the most impressive things I've seen in many years.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- lfkdev 4y ago
  ? Dale is a legit project from openAI
  - tommoor 4y ago
    That doesn't mean the images in this tweet thread are output from Dalle though… Although if an individual created all of these then that's about the same amount of impressive
    - gk1 4y ago
      It's funny that 10 years ago "a human did it" would be, by far, the most plausible explanation. Today, it's "AI did it." Put another way, if a human made these then it'd be as shocking as seeing DALL-E 2 in 2012.
  - jffry 4y ago
    I think "legit" in this context might mean more of the Twitter post author's representation of their use of DALL-E 2: - Were the prompts shown the ones fed to DALL-E 2 or were there more complex details described in the prompt? - Were these the first images generated for the prompt, or did the author generate many images and cherry-pick the best example, and if so from how many?
    - sillysaurusx 4y ago
      The second one is how everyone does it, by the way. AI may as well be a cherry orchard. There’s nothing wrong with it. The first one, I’d have a huge problem with. Lying about prompts is a no no. Thankfully there’s not much incentive to lie.
tweton 4y ago
[flagged]
mensetmanusman 4y ago
This is amazing. We are at the precipice of someone releasing a $100M blockbuster movie just based on the language in the script with zero cost beyond compute. What will this mean for the future of entertainment…
- aqzman 4y ago
  I suspect at some point in the next 5-15 years we will begin to see AI generated entertainment perfectly tailored to a person's preferences.
  - phkahler 4y ago
    >> I suspect at some point in the next 5-15 years we will begin to see AI generated entertainment perfectly tailored to a person's preferences. Kermit in Debby Does Dallas. Kermit in the Graduate. Kermit with 2 broken flippers. Oh the depravity. I'm not sure getting high quality visualizations of any random passing thought is a good idea ;-)
  - Workaccount2 4y ago
    I can already envision everyone talking over each other trying to say how their personal AI generated TV show is the best show they have ever seen. Just imagine how much lonelier the world is going to feel when people don't even have entertainment in common anymore.
    - bogwog 4y ago
      Maybe the loneliness is a good thing? It seems like everyone (in America at least) hates each other, so extreme isolation may be just what we need in this country.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
        I think it's probable that everyone hates eachother because we're so isolated that we fail to form empathetic bonds with the people around us. More isolation doesn't seem like the solution.
Tade0 4y ago
I see a distinct lack of "Kermit The Frog in Dragon Ball Z".
- sillysaurusx 4y ago
  Oh man. Now I want to apply for access just for that. Thanks for the idea.
- rememberlenny 4y ago
  Here is the prompt for "A still of Kermit The Frog in Dragon Ball Z (1989)" https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1332366/171921054-21b2982b-2c89-4a97-a25b-7cdcc3b6bc76.png https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1332366/171921054-...
rvieira 4y ago
Kermit in Eraserhead is everything I expected it to be.
stuntkite 4y ago
When will they get back to me with my Dalle2 access! I need to make a ton of kermit images.
messe 4y ago
Loved the David Lynch ones. I'm disappointed the image it generated for Eraserhead[1] didn't have Kermit as the baby[2]. I'm curious as to what it would generate for "Kermit the Frog in David Lynch's Dune". [1]: https://twitter.com/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531774195234791424?s=20&t=KMZ0XUoT-nvTvBJV6WvHkQ https://twitter.com/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531774195234791424?... [2]: https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=eraserhead+baby&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=eraserhead+baby&iax=images&...
- giaour 4y ago
  > Kermit the Frog in David Lynch's Dune DALL-E would just shoot back a still with Kyle McLachlan in it. He's already so Kermit like!
- canjobear 4y ago
  Close https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1532578234855936000 https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1532578234855936000
  - monkeybutton 4y ago
    Absolutely terrifying https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1532578531674189824 https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1532578531674189824
PheonixPharts 4y ago
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 movie in the 90s. There are several distinctive features of Kermit that a missing from nearly all of these. - For any of the "live action" ones, Kermit should still always be a puppet. - Kermit notoriously has lanky arms, - Kermit never has eye lids - His eyes sit way on top of his head. - He often has his weird neck decoration. - His eyes have a very distinctive pupil shape. None of these get Kermit correct, they all just look like frogs (maybe Dalle2 isn't trained on copyrighted/trademarked material?) There are fan made versions of some of these which show just how different Dalle2 is from human imagination: Kermit actually has been on family guy: https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/muppet/images/7/71/Famguyswamp.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/250?cb=20060912202623 https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/muppet/images/7/71/Famguys... There are several "Kermit in Star Wars Examples" here are two: https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/021/668/kermit.jpg https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/021/668/ker..., https://i.ytimg.com/vi/6MebZx-4950/maxresdefault.jpg https://i.ytimg.com/vi/6MebZx-4950/maxresdefault.jpg Again if this was done on someone's laptop it would be really impressive. However the fact that so much talent and resources were poured into pushing AI to it's limits and this is what we get tells me we've hit another brick wall as far as research goes.
- tommoor 4y ago
  I genuinely can't tell if you're trolling. This isn't impressive because the AI model doesn't accurately capture the "feel" of Kermit!?
  - witheld 4y ago
    The computer was asked to produce photos of Kermit the frog. It failed spectacularly at rendering anything resembling Kermit the frog.
    - 4y ago
endisneigh 4y ago
I don’t understand how this isn’t infringing some copyright. Anyone do any research on this? If we accept that a model trained on copyright material does not infringe on the materials rights, then circumventing all copyright can be as simple as creating a sufficiently close derivative and giving it away. Not to say that copyright is good to begin with.
- jovial_cavalier 4y ago
  >circumventing all copyright can be as simple as creating a sufficiently close derivative and giving it away. That's correct. People do this all the time, sans the giving it away part. Also, there is no way that you can argue these images are not transformative.
  - phkahler 4y ago
    >> Also, there is no way that you can argue these images are not transformative. Exactly. Kermit has been very much transformed, and "in the style of" is not copyright infringement AFAIK.
  - endisneigh 4y ago
    I shouldn’t clarify - I’m not talking about the Kermit images, I’m talking about Dalle2 itself. If you had it render Neo from the Matrix, albeit imperfectly, would that be transformative use?
    - mcphage 4y ago
      It probably depends on how close it looks to the original.
    - zaphar 4y ago
      If I draw "Neo from the Matrix" does it matter how accurate I get Neo?
      - endisneigh 4y ago
gaudat 4y ago
Looking better than those pixel art NFTs.
aaron695 4y ago
qwertyuiop_ 4y ago
“ All the impressive achievements of deep learning amount to just curve fitting” - Judea Pearl https://archive.ph/89lqw https://archive.ph/89lqw
- ryanklee 4y ago
  If the results are actually impressive, then the dismissive rhetoric doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
FredPret 4y ago
How is this so good? If you told me this was done by a very talented human, I’d still be surprised at how good they are. That must count as a sort of Turing test, no?
- davidkunz 4y ago
  The Kermit Test.
  - lgvld 4y ago
    Love this name. ;-)
- pygy_ 4y ago
  DALL-E is indeed superhuman in its ability to create images from simple prompts. This shows the limits of the Turing test. To pass it a program must not only be smart enough, it must be dumb enough too. Pulling what DALL-E does is a tell-tale sign it’s most likely not human, and would make it fail the test.
  - simiones 4y ago
    Well, most of the pictures (if not all), while astoundingly good as an idea, have the tell-tale signs of being AI-generated, the kinds of mistakes a human would never make. For example, looking at the WALL-E one [0], you can clearly see that the hands and feet aren't actually separated properly. There is also plenty of missing "logic" around the armpits. These are the kinds of mistakes a human can't make - especially one that is so adept at drawing the other parts so perfectly. [0] https://twitter.com/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531512163738669057/photo/1 https://twitter.com/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531512163738669057/...
    - pygy_ 4y ago
      How long does it take to generate these pics? No human is that good at producing art of this quality. There may still be a few anatomic mistakes, but many artists also make some. The picture quality, lightning, and the way it capture the graphic essence and mood of these movies is just amazing and beyond what even the most talented artists can pull out in the same time frame.
jonnycomputer 4y ago
Not to detract from the accomplishment, but none of these are Kermit. The "Kermit" part of the query seems mostly to have accomplished querying for "humanoid frog"
- bergenty 4y ago
  These are all kermit. The identifying caricatural features are all here.
- moss2 4y ago
  No those are clearly Kermit the Frogs
  - jonnycomputer 4y ago
    If I hadn't been prompted with the words Kermit, no way would I have guessed that they were supposed to be Kermit. For example, Kermit has a characteristic shape of his pupils. None of the examples have that.
  - carapace 4y ago
    Instead of arguing about "what is" in re: subjective judgements, it can sometimes be useful to phrase things more literally, as in: "To me those are clearly Kermit the Frogs." "To me those are clearly not Kermit the Frogs." Then there's nothing really to argue about. Instead we can discuss what we see and how that affects our subjective perceptions. For example, Kermit the Frog doesn't have eyelids, but most of these images show a frog with eyelids.
- maxfurman 4y ago
  Some of them look a lot like Kermit! But many do not, depending on how far away the target aesthetic is from "muppet." A smarter Dalle2 could do a better job at preserving the "essential Kermit-ness" perhaps. But maybe it's more impressive to adapt to a completely new aesthetic?
- notahacker 4y ago
  That's actually one of the more interesting and impressive things: the AI has substituted in "humanoid frog" and in some cases given it movie-appropriate features like Matrix sunglasses ot Pixar-style eyes which are probably unique to the image rather than simply pasting photographs of the original muppet into movie poster settings which would be an acceptable lower level response to the brief.
dash2 4y ago
"Various films." I hope you're not thinking what I think you're thinking.
- sillysaurusx 4y ago
  You can bet your life savings that OpenAI could generate some really interesting Kermit porn.
spyremeown 4y ago
This is THE technology of the 2020s. It's insane. I'm in absolute awe at how amazing this AI is.
- aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
  Disagree — GPT-3 type AIs are. But people who do viral news and posts don't...read. So, their impact will continue to go unnoticed in comparison to DeEpFaKeS and Dall-E.
jdmoreira 4y ago
Dall-E still blows my mind every time. To someone who is plugged into these things, how is this possible? I understand computers and I understand back-propagation but this... it feels like magic to me. Can someone indulge me in a short explanation of how this works and how is it this good?
- jayalammar 4y ago
  These are good explanations: - https://www.assemblyai.com/blog/how-dall-e-2-actually-works/ https://www.assemblyai.com/blog/how-dall-e-2-actually-works/ - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1X4fHzF4mQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1X4fHzF4mQ
b0ner_t0ner 4y ago
More eye candy here: https://np.reddit.com/r/dalle2/top/?sort=top&t=year https://np.reddit.com/r/dalle2/top/?sort=top&t=year Very good one: https://np.reddit.com/r/dalle2/comments/u5kkty/a_fluffy_baby_sloth_with_a_knitted_hat_trying_to/ https://np.reddit.com/r/dalle2/comments/u5kkty/a_fluffy_baby... “a masterful impressionist portrait painting of a little doggey who is worried he may not be a good boy”: https://nitter.net/MarkRich388/status/1532482006809866240 https://nitter.net/MarkRich388/status/1532482006809866240
tinalumfoil 4y ago
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 what he looks like as a robot, what his mouth looks like, that his eyes should be enlarged. It gets a lot of things wrong, like I'm not sure why kermit has a plastic texture in many of the pictures. If you showed me ten pictures of Kermit and ten frames of total recall, and for some reason 8 of your pictures had a plastic Kermit, and asked me to combine them in my head, I'd probably imagine something on-par or worse than what Dalle has managed to do. But I wouldn't be able to show anyone what I'd made!
- tdehnel 4y ago
  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 bunch of data that said the Earth was the center of the universe.
  - dougmwne 4y ago
    These are fun discussions because words like "artistic creativity" have a colloquial meaning that could only apply to humans since the dawn of humanity. Now you have an image of Kermit in Wall-E. I have never seen or conceived of an image of Kermit in Wall-E. Let's assume that adorable robot Kermits do not exist in the training data to be spit out like a search algorithm. The image is new, it did not previously exist. It is a creation, a very vague idea of a few words that was created in full realization. So it sees like the only difference between the "Not creativity" that Dall-E is doing and "Real Creativity" that humans do is tht humans are the ones doing it? I agree there's this concept of expanding the frontiers of human aesthetic capability that has slow-marched from cave paintings till post-modernism. That there are a very few artists that invent completely new styles that the rest of us copy and remix. It's questionable that Dall-E can do that, but I'm also not sure that it can't do that.
FeepingCreature 4y ago
man look at this amazing curve fitting from training samples
- gwern 4y ago
  man all this is is a fancy Photoshop. i bet you could find all of these in Google Images or something.
mynegation 4y ago
I am finishing “Love, Death + Robots” on Netflix and between the quality of CGI and things like DALL-E and Imagen, movie, design, and illustration industries are in for an upheaval.
- layer8 4y ago
  Video is probably a whole other ballpark regarding required training and resources.
bergenty 4y ago
If these pictures are not touched up this is superhuman. My mind hasn’t been this blown in a long time. What a time to be alive.
layer8 4y ago
The Matrix version looks like TMNT. :)
ridgered4 4y ago
Is that Fozzie Bear in the mirror/backdrop of the Stranger Things one? Or am I seeing what I expect to see...
fred256 4y ago
These are so good I am scared.
- adamsmith143 4y ago
  Good, that is the correct response. The progress in AI recently has been staggering
jeffreygoesto 4y ago
Not a single image shows Kermit. Green frogs yes. Kermit no. Fail.
stuntkite 4y ago
Kermit the Frog in Behind The Green Door Kermit the Frog in Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom Kermit the Frog in Pink Flamingos ---- I actually might have Dalle2 access soonish. Honestly this is the best demonstration I've seen that demonstrates to me very well that we are about 2 years away from maybe not "general ai" but some pretty wild shit that is going to make most of what we do and value as humans very different.
motoxpro 4y ago
In this thread: 1. People thinking it's amazing (me) 2. People thinking it's not creative enough e.g. "It’s using what already exists, not conjecturing something new." 3. People thinking it's too creative e.g. "This looks nothing like Kermit"
qgin 4y ago
A lot of art-adjacent jobs are about to become toast.
gwern 4y ago
Followup: "Big Bird Throughout Cinematic History": https://www.reddit.com/r/dalle2/comments/v4q5rh/big_bird_through_cinema_history_swipe_through_how/ https://www.reddit.com/r/dalle2/comments/v4q5rh/big_bird_thr...

390 points by jayalammar 4y ago

alex_duf 4y ago

These are mind bogglingly good

tgv 4y ago
Yes, and it still feels a lot like Searle's Chinese Room. It's as if it skips a dozen steps. Well, that's exactly what happens, of course. But it does show that the network can match linguistic descriptions to images extraordinarily well.
- myrmidon 4y ago
  Do you find the Chinese Room argument convincing? Do you feel that the human mind is more than an "appropriately" trained "biological" neural network? What do you consider the limits of a DALL-E like system compared to a "true" mind? My personal opinion is that the Chinese Room argument is fancy handwaving that crucially relies on never being explicit about what it means by "understanding", combined with an appeal to intuition. I strongly believe that there is nothing "magical" about the human mind or brain (that could not be replicated artificially), and thus that a comparably trained, appropriately designed system ("DALL-E successor") OR a copy OR a simulation of a human brain would be all just as capable and "understanding"/"conscious" as another human...
  - Simon321 4y ago
    > My personal opinion is that the Chinese Room argument is fancy handwaving that crucially relies on never being explicit about what it means by "understanding", combined with an appeal to intuition. bingo
  - notahacker 4y ago
    There doesn't need to be anything "magical" about the human mind for human "understanding" not to be particularly closely approximated by performing mathematical transformations on a huge corpus of raster data, even though the latter approach produces very useful results (see also the utility of a pocket calculator vs attempting to skip a billenium or so of natural evolution to grow an organism motivated to learn multiplication in a petri dish, or parse human minds to figure out the elements of brain state associated with performing a calculation) GPT-3 is far, far better at generating descriptions of loving humanity than the average dog. But it's pretty obvious that the dog's goal formation and excitement hormones aren't particularly similar to letter-by-letter ASCII output probability calculations on a database, and that GPT-3 has no more grasp of the dog's love of humanity in general and this human in particular than the dog has of Shakespeare. "Thought" and intelligible results are essentially orthogonal, which limits the feasibility of training the former...
  - tgv 4y ago
    > My personal opinion is that the Chinese Room argument is fancy handwaving It isn't hand-waving. It's against it, really. It's a thought experiment that encourages a sceptic attitude towards jumps in understanding mental processes. The operator in the Chinese Room doesn't understand Chinese. While the translations are excellent, he or she wouldn't be able to go out in the street and ask for a glass of water if their life depended on it. Hence, a computer that mechanically translates Chinese cannot be automatically assumed to understand Chinese. The argument doesn't need to explain exactly what understanding means. We all (sort of) know what it means. The same goes for e.g. attention. That's what makes it so hard to define what strong AI is and how to verify it. The Turing Test famously tries to decide this (without defining anything, I might add), and the Chinese Room is a good argument against it being the proper test.
    - myrmidon 4y ago
      > The argument doesn't need to explain exactly what understanding means. We all (sort of) know what it means. Then what does "understanding" a language mean? Your "asking for a glass of water on the street" example implies to me that you demand a system with: a) capability for internal intent b) ability to express intent in target language to grant it "understanding". Basically, first you deliberately construct a system not capable of intent (pure stateless query-response algorithm), then you deny that it "understands" Chinese on the basis of being unable to express intent. That does not hold. Give me a precise definition for what you mean by "understanding" and I'll dismantle the Chinese Room for you.
      - tgv 4y ago
        > Give me a precise definition for what you mean by "understanding" and I'll dismantle the Chinese Room for you. You probably can't define "chair" in an exact enough sense. It would merely show the shortcoming of the definition rather than refuting the Chinese Room. > a system not capable of intent If I now would require a definition of "intent" I would be just as childish. > That does not hold. First, the system isn't stateless. It has the operator who has to remember what has happened before in order to come up with a correct translation. Second, your argument implies that understanding requires intent. That alone is a tall order to prove. But it's the point of the Chinese Room: the mechanism doesn't understand, doesn't have intent, nothing. Yet it performs exactly as an intelligent, understanding, intentional translator. So would you not agree with the conclusion: you can't judge intent by only looking at I/O behavior? Note that Searle (probably, this is just my understanding) doesn't mean that the Room is useless or "dumb" (in most senses of the word).
puranjay 4y ago
Kermit in Sopranos did it for me. Hilariously accurate.
coldcode 4y ago
If you ran it 1000 times and picked the best, you might get all good ones. I would want to see all 1000. It's like stock picker ads (person who called the market says XXX) where you only show the lucky ones.
- mensetmanusman 4y ago
  It doesn’t matter if these images were one in 10,000, the facts that any exist that are this good is crazy.
  - abhaynayar 4y ago
    Yeah exactly. The fact that a person who could never create such a picture on their own, now just has to go through a bunch of images and select one to get this result is already amazing. The goal posts keep shifting, glass half empty.
    - phaedrus 4y ago
      It reminds me of pop articles about the P=NP question which simplify it down to, "is being able to recognize creativity the same as being creative?" Turns out for practical purposes, yes (the simplification question not the mathematical question), as long as you can offload the work to an AI on a powerful compute cluster!
    - simiones 4y ago
      It's amazing and wonderful, but it's not the AI that's "creating art", it's the human choosing the best AI output that's doing the artistic part (often togehter with the person who input the prompt to the AI). It's just like Dada poets did 100 years ago: you use a mechanical process to generate quasi-random output, and then you choose some of this output to present to other humans. The way you provide input to the mechanical process (e.g. what words you choose to put in the hat) and the curation are the real creative part of the art, not the mechanical process generating the text itself.
    - coldcode 4y ago

ahoka 4y ago

Is there an easy way to try this model on my computer?

jayalammar 4y ago
Not Dalle2 specifically, it's proprietary and there's a waitlist. Older open source alternatives include https://huggingface.co/dalle-mini https://huggingface.co/dalle-mini
jffry 4y ago
As far as I know, the actual trained system is proprietary, and you can only use it by requesting access to their online system for generating imagery: https://openai.com/dall-e-2/ https://openai.com/dall-e-2/ There are open-source efforts to implement it and make trained models available, but I don't imagine they are yet at the same scale of ingested data / model size as OpenAI's system: https://github.com/lucidrains/DALLE2-pytorch https://github.com/lucidrains/DALLE2-pytorch

rlv-dan 4y ago

https://nitter.net/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531506455714492416 https://nitter.net/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531506455714492416

aasasd 4y ago
There are browser extensions to do this for you. Specifically ‘Redirector’ for FF.

hcarvalhoalves 4y ago

The Big Lebowski’s one is clearly a guy in a frog costume… hilarious!

high_5 4y ago

What about ... Kermit in the Muppet Show?

sp332 4y ago

Does that mean the developers put The Big Lebowski through the model during training? Where did they get all the movies and TV shows from? And does copying so directly from the source material open them and users up to copyright infringement liability?

natly 4y ago
They probably did, but even if they didn't it may have come from the terrabytes of data they scraped from the internet. OpenAI doesn't care. They claim that it's derivative enough to go under fair use. And whether it is or isn't, I guess their calculation is that the risk is worth taking to be the first to develop these algorithms, which is a huge head start if the courts decide that it does count as fair use.
- gwern 4y ago
  Hilarious parodies like these are copyright infringement, yes, but also open-and-shut fair use defense. (You're confusing the issue of transformativeness and fair use defense.)
BeefWellington 4y ago
I'm imagining the defense will be: "Your honor, it can't be infringement because I ran it through an ML model first." Especially if the movie(s) that are eventually generated this way are ripping whole scenes or sequences out of other films, a la copilot.
- bogwog 4y ago
  I feel like if they don’t have licenses for all of their source material, then the model should be required to be released into the public domain. It’s like extremely expensive piracy that is bad for artists and bad for the environment. I wonder if the reason OpenAI, Google, etc don’t release these things isn’t so much that they’re worried about racist/offensive output, but instead they’re worried about people using it to create images of, say, Mickey Mouse and drawing the attention of his lawyers? It’d be better for AI companies to keep all of this stuff in a legal gray area for as long as possible.

candlemas 4y ago

None of those look like Kermit the Frog.

feynmanalgo 4y ago

If this is legit it would be one of the most impressive things I've seen in many years.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
lfkdev 4y ago
? Dale is a legit project from openAI
- tommoor 4y ago
  That doesn't mean the images in this tweet thread are output from Dalle though… Although if an individual created all of these then that's about the same amount of impressive
  - gk1 4y ago
    It's funny that 10 years ago "a human did it" would be, by far, the most plausible explanation. Today, it's "AI did it." Put another way, if a human made these then it'd be as shocking as seeing DALL-E 2 in 2012.
- jffry 4y ago
  I think "legit" in this context might mean more of the Twitter post author's representation of their use of DALL-E 2: - Were the prompts shown the ones fed to DALL-E 2 or were there more complex details described in the prompt? - Were these the first images generated for the prompt, or did the author generate many images and cherry-pick the best example, and if so from how many?
  - sillysaurusx 4y ago
    The second one is how everyone does it, by the way. AI may as well be a cherry orchard. There’s nothing wrong with it. The first one, I’d have a huge problem with. Lying about prompts is a no no. Thankfully there’s not much incentive to lie.

tweton 4y ago

[flagged]

mensetmanusman 4y ago

This is amazing. We are at the precipice of someone releasing a $100M blockbuster movie just based on the language in the script with zero cost beyond compute. What will this mean for the future of entertainment…

aqzman 4y ago
I suspect at some point in the next 5-15 years we will begin to see AI generated entertainment perfectly tailored to a person's preferences.
- phkahler 4y ago
  >> I suspect at some point in the next 5-15 years we will begin to see AI generated entertainment perfectly tailored to a person's preferences. Kermit in Debby Does Dallas. Kermit in the Graduate. Kermit with 2 broken flippers. Oh the depravity. I'm not sure getting high quality visualizations of any random passing thought is a good idea ;-)
- Workaccount2 4y ago
  I can already envision everyone talking over each other trying to say how their personal AI generated TV show is the best show they have ever seen. Just imagine how much lonelier the world is going to feel when people don't even have entertainment in common anymore.
  - bogwog 4y ago
    Maybe the loneliness is a good thing? It seems like everyone (in America at least) hates each other, so extreme isolation may be just what we need in this country.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
      I think it's probable that everyone hates eachother because we're so isolated that we fail to form empathetic bonds with the people around us. More isolation doesn't seem like the solution.

Tade0 4y ago

I see a distinct lack of "Kermit The Frog in Dragon Ball Z".

sillysaurusx 4y ago
Oh man. Now I want to apply for access just for that. Thanks for the idea.
rememberlenny 4y ago
Here is the prompt for "A still of Kermit The Frog in Dragon Ball Z (1989)" https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1332366/171921054-21b2982b-2c89-4a97-a25b-7cdcc3b6bc76.png https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1332366/171921054-...

rvieira 4y ago

Kermit in Eraserhead is everything I expected it to be.

stuntkite 4y ago

When will they get back to me with my Dalle2 access! I need to make a ton of kermit images.

messe 4y ago

Loved the David Lynch ones. I'm disappointed the image it generated for Eraserhead[1] didn't have Kermit as the baby[2]. I'm curious as to what it would generate for "Kermit the Frog in David Lynch's Dune". [1]: https://twitter.com/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531774195234791424?s=20&t=KMZ0XUoT-nvTvBJV6WvHkQ https://twitter.com/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531774195234791424?... [2]: https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=eraserhead+baby&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=eraserhead+baby&iax=images&...

giaour 4y ago
> Kermit the Frog in David Lynch's Dune DALL-E would just shoot back a still with Kyle McLachlan in it. He's already so Kermit like!
canjobear 4y ago
Close https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1532578234855936000 https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1532578234855936000
- monkeybutton 4y ago
  Absolutely terrifying https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1532578531674189824 https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1532578531674189824

PheonixPharts 4y ago

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 movie in the 90s. There are several distinctive features of Kermit that a missing from nearly all of these. - For any of the "live action" ones, Kermit should still always be a puppet. - Kermit notoriously has lanky arms, - Kermit never has eye lids - His eyes sit way on top of his head. - He often has his weird neck decoration. - His eyes have a very distinctive pupil shape. None of these get Kermit correct, they all just look like frogs (maybe Dalle2 isn't trained on copyrighted/trademarked material?) There are fan made versions of some of these which show just how different Dalle2 is from human imagination: Kermit actually has been on family guy: https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/muppet/images/7/71/Famguyswamp.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/250?cb=20060912202623 https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/muppet/images/7/71/Famguys... There are several "Kermit in Star Wars Examples" here are two: https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/021/668/kermit.jpg https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/021/668/ker..., https://i.ytimg.com/vi/6MebZx-4950/maxresdefault.jpg https://i.ytimg.com/vi/6MebZx-4950/maxresdefault.jpg Again if this was done on someone's laptop it would be really impressive. However the fact that so much talent and resources were poured into pushing AI to it's limits and this is what we get tells me we've hit another brick wall as far as research goes.

tommoor 4y ago
I genuinely can't tell if you're trolling. This isn't impressive because the AI model doesn't accurately capture the "feel" of Kermit!?
- witheld 4y ago
  The computer was asked to produce photos of Kermit the frog. It failed spectacularly at rendering anything resembling Kermit the frog.
  - 4y ago

endisneigh 4y ago

I don’t understand how this isn’t infringing some copyright. Anyone do any research on this? If we accept that a model trained on copyright material does not infringe on the materials rights, then circumventing all copyright can be as simple as creating a sufficiently close derivative and giving it away. Not to say that copyright is good to begin with.

jovial_cavalier 4y ago
>circumventing all copyright can be as simple as creating a sufficiently close derivative and giving it away. That's correct. People do this all the time, sans the giving it away part. Also, there is no way that you can argue these images are not transformative.
- phkahler 4y ago
  >> Also, there is no way that you can argue these images are not transformative. Exactly. Kermit has been very much transformed, and "in the style of" is not copyright infringement AFAIK.
- endisneigh 4y ago
  I shouldn’t clarify - I’m not talking about the Kermit images, I’m talking about Dalle2 itself. If you had it render Neo from the Matrix, albeit imperfectly, would that be transformative use?
  - mcphage 4y ago
    It probably depends on how close it looks to the original.
  - zaphar 4y ago
    If I draw "Neo from the Matrix" does it matter how accurate I get Neo?
    - endisneigh 4y ago

gaudat 4y ago

Looking better than those pixel art NFTs.

aaron695 4y ago

qwertyuiop_ 4y ago

“ All the impressive achievements of deep learning amount to just curve fitting” - Judea Pearl https://archive.ph/89lqw https://archive.ph/89lqw

ryanklee 4y ago
If the results are actually impressive, then the dismissive rhetoric doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

FredPret 4y ago

How is this so good? If you told me this was done by a very talented human, I’d still be surprised at how good they are. That must count as a sort of Turing test, no?

davidkunz 4y ago
The Kermit Test.
- lgvld 4y ago
  Love this name. ;-)
pygy_ 4y ago
DALL-E is indeed superhuman in its ability to create images from simple prompts. This shows the limits of the Turing test. To pass it a program must not only be smart enough, it must be dumb enough too. Pulling what DALL-E does is a tell-tale sign it’s most likely not human, and would make it fail the test.
- simiones 4y ago
  Well, most of the pictures (if not all), while astoundingly good as an idea, have the tell-tale signs of being AI-generated, the kinds of mistakes a human would never make. For example, looking at the WALL-E one [0], you can clearly see that the hands and feet aren't actually separated properly. There is also plenty of missing "logic" around the armpits. These are the kinds of mistakes a human can't make - especially one that is so adept at drawing the other parts so perfectly. [0] https://twitter.com/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531512163738669057/photo/1 https://twitter.com/HvnsLstAngel/status/1531512163738669057/...
  - pygy_ 4y ago
    How long does it take to generate these pics? No human is that good at producing art of this quality. There may still be a few anatomic mistakes, but many artists also make some. The picture quality, lightning, and the way it capture the graphic essence and mood of these movies is just amazing and beyond what even the most talented artists can pull out in the same time frame.

jonnycomputer 4y ago

Not to detract from the accomplishment, but none of these are Kermit. The "Kermit" part of the query seems mostly to have accomplished querying for "humanoid frog"

bergenty 4y ago
These are all kermit. The identifying caricatural features are all here.
moss2 4y ago
No those are clearly Kermit the Frogs
- jonnycomputer 4y ago
  If I hadn't been prompted with the words Kermit, no way would I have guessed that they were supposed to be Kermit. For example, Kermit has a characteristic shape of his pupils. None of the examples have that.
- carapace 4y ago
  Instead of arguing about "what is" in re: subjective judgements, it can sometimes be useful to phrase things more literally, as in: "To me those are clearly Kermit the Frogs." "To me those are clearly not Kermit the Frogs." Then there's nothing really to argue about. Instead we can discuss what we see and how that affects our subjective perceptions. For example, Kermit the Frog doesn't have eyelids, but most of these images show a frog with eyelids.
maxfurman 4y ago
Some of them look a lot like Kermit! But many do not, depending on how far away the target aesthetic is from "muppet." A smarter Dalle2 could do a better job at preserving the "essential Kermit-ness" perhaps. But maybe it's more impressive to adapt to a completely new aesthetic?
notahacker 4y ago
That's actually one of the more interesting and impressive things: the AI has substituted in "humanoid frog" and in some cases given it movie-appropriate features like Matrix sunglasses ot Pixar-style eyes which are probably unique to the image rather than simply pasting photographs of the original muppet into movie poster settings which would be an acceptable lower level response to the brief.

dash2 4y ago

"Various films." I hope you're not thinking what I think you're thinking.

sillysaurusx 4y ago
You can bet your life savings that OpenAI could generate some really interesting Kermit porn.

spyremeown 4y ago

This is THE technology of the 2020s. It's insane. I'm in absolute awe at how amazing this AI is.

aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
Disagree — GPT-3 type AIs are. But people who do viral news and posts don't...read. So, their impact will continue to go unnoticed in comparison to DeEpFaKeS and Dall-E.

jdmoreira 4y ago

Dall-E still blows my mind every time. To someone who is plugged into these things, how is this possible? I understand computers and I understand back-propagation but this... it feels like magic to me. Can someone indulge me in a short explanation of how this works and how is it this good?

jayalammar 4y ago
These are good explanations: - https://www.assemblyai.com/blog/how-dall-e-2-actually-works/ https://www.assemblyai.com/blog/how-dall-e-2-actually-works/ - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1X4fHzF4mQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1X4fHzF4mQ

b0ner_t0ner 4y ago

More eye candy here: https://np.reddit.com/r/dalle2/top/?sort=top&t=year https://np.reddit.com/r/dalle2/top/?sort=top&t=year Very good one: https://np.reddit.com/r/dalle2/comments/u5kkty/a_fluffy_baby_sloth_with_a_knitted_hat_trying_to/ https://np.reddit.com/r/dalle2/comments/u5kkty/a_fluffy_baby... “a masterful impressionist portrait painting of a little doggey who is worried he may not be a good boy”: https://nitter.net/MarkRich388/status/1532482006809866240 https://nitter.net/MarkRich388/status/1532482006809866240

tinalumfoil 4y ago

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 what he looks like as a robot, what his mouth looks like, that his eyes should be enlarged. It gets a lot of things wrong, like I'm not sure why kermit has a plastic texture in many of the pictures. If you showed me ten pictures of Kermit and ten frames of total recall, and for some reason 8 of your pictures had a plastic Kermit, and asked me to combine them in my head, I'd probably imagine something on-par or worse than what Dalle has managed to do. But I wouldn't be able to show anyone what I'd made!

tdehnel 4y ago
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 bunch of data that said the Earth was the center of the universe.
- dougmwne 4y ago
  These are fun discussions because words like "artistic creativity" have a colloquial meaning that could only apply to humans since the dawn of humanity. Now you have an image of Kermit in Wall-E. I have never seen or conceived of an image of Kermit in Wall-E. Let's assume that adorable robot Kermits do not exist in the training data to be spit out like a search algorithm. The image is new, it did not previously exist. It is a creation, a very vague idea of a few words that was created in full realization. So it sees like the only difference between the "Not creativity" that Dall-E is doing and "Real Creativity" that humans do is tht humans are the ones doing it? I agree there's this concept of expanding the frontiers of human aesthetic capability that has slow-marched from cave paintings till post-modernism. That there are a very few artists that invent completely new styles that the rest of us copy and remix. It's questionable that Dall-E can do that, but I'm also not sure that it can't do that.

FeepingCreature 4y ago

man look at this amazing curve fitting from training samples

gwern 4y ago
man all this is is a fancy Photoshop. i bet you could find all of these in Google Images or something.

mynegation 4y ago

I am finishing “Love, Death + Robots” on Netflix and between the quality of CGI and things like DALL-E and Imagen, movie, design, and illustration industries are in for an upheaval.

layer8 4y ago
Video is probably a whole other ballpark regarding required training and resources.

bergenty 4y ago

If these pictures are not touched up this is superhuman. My mind hasn’t been this blown in a long time. What a time to be alive.

layer8 4y ago

The Matrix version looks like TMNT. :)

ridgered4 4y ago

Is that Fozzie Bear in the mirror/backdrop of the Stranger Things one? Or am I seeing what I expect to see...

fred256 4y ago

These are so good I am scared.

adamsmith143 4y ago
Good, that is the correct response. The progress in AI recently has been staggering

jeffreygoesto 4y ago

Not a single image shows Kermit. Green frogs yes. Kermit no. Fail.

stuntkite 4y ago

Kermit the Frog in Behind The Green Door Kermit the Frog in Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom Kermit the Frog in Pink Flamingos ---- I actually might have Dalle2 access soonish. Honestly this is the best demonstration I've seen that demonstrates to me very well that we are about 2 years away from maybe not "general ai" but some pretty wild shit that is going to make most of what we do and value as humans very different.

motoxpro 4y ago

In this thread: 1. People thinking it's amazing (me) 2. People thinking it's not creative enough e.g. "It’s using what already exists, not conjecturing something new." 3. People thinking it's too creative e.g. "This looks nothing like Kermit"

qgin 4y ago

A lot of art-adjacent jobs are about to become toast.

gwern 4y ago

Followup: "Big Bird Throughout Cinematic History": https://www.reddit.com/r/dalle2/comments/v4q5rh/big_bird_through_cinema_history_swipe_through_how/ https://www.reddit.com/r/dalle2/comments/v4q5rh/big_bird_thr...