3 ms·
You raise some very interesting points. For me this also demonstrates how deeply rooted, historical bias and prejudice bleeds through to this technology and cou
by gricardo99 4y ago
You raise some very interesting points.
For me this also demonstrates how deeply rooted, historical bias and prejudice bleeds through to this technology and could become a perpetuating factor. These models will reflect societal values, for better or worse.
But also what will the next model, and successive models, that are trained on data from AI generate images, be like?
It seems you could get an amplified or skewed model that is pretty far from reality.
At least currently they are all trained on “real” images (granted some images are heavily edited or photoshopped). I can imagine that In the (not too distant) future most images will be generated and not “real”.
- lofatdairy 4y agoYeah, I wanted to stress that the categorizations seem more to me to be symptomatic than a reflection of OP's decision making. I loathe the label "problematic", but it seemed worth noting a potentially unintended consequence that could introduce some harms. That said, it might be too early to speculate on models trained on the outputs of other models. This algorithm seems to benefit greatly from the post-DALLE 2 art-gen renaissance, but still has a number of oddities and uncanny outputs (noted in the rest of this thread) that I imagine are nearly unavoidable given how familiar the human form is. But certainly, if such decisions end up amplified in later work, or through widespread usage, then the consequences are more significant than, say, simply reflecting uncritically a skewed data set.