I get your point, but I also think it depends on what you mean by oversimplification. Of course there is _a lot_ of stuff going on and things like SD capture al

I get your point, but I also think it depends on what you mean by oversimplification. Of course there is _a lot_ of stuff going on and things like SD capture all kinds of information, not just what I described, however, any way you want to describe it, capturing all the "constraints" and real life knowledge to perfectly create realistic images with all the details and all the higher abstractions correctly is not anywhere close I think. Also it's not only to always get 2 arms, it's to - at the same time - also get 2 ears, 2 eyes, perfect pupils, perfect fingers, perfect trees, perfect chairs, all simultaneously (if it is to be used at least in the mainstream) - etc you get my point. I also don't think there's anything wrong with the model architectures in themselves or the data, nor that it is impossible, only that it is hard and as you say I think it needs a lot of data and clever engineering to fix mistakes. It may even be possible to fix most mistakes, over time, which would be pretty impressive imo, but the absolute limits of what a model can produce/"contain" with our hardware is kind of an open question though interesting.