> I think it's fascinating, and at least to me completely unexpected, how good these image generation models are. What happens when we have a 42gb model, or a 4

> I think it's fascinating, and at least to me completely unexpected, how good these image generation models are. What happens when we have a 42gb model, or a 4.2tb model? First 'how good' is an ill-defined metric -- that it seems in this case is a measurement of how much surprise and wonder they generate in the audience. Second, it might just be that the real wonder of the models is the their compression -- that is there is a space of mappings of line drawings and simple descriptions into art and this technique was able to lossy compress that space down to 4.2G. If you only compress it down to 42G, you'll be looking at the JPEG that's 90% compressed instead of 99%. Yeah it will be better but incrementally, not necessarily "Wow!" better. Honestly it's not obvious that it will be better at all. > For comparison, the human brain is estimated to have a (equivalent to a computer) capacity of about 2.5 petabytes [0]. That's a terrible and basically non-sensical comparison to make.