4 ms·

Que sera, sera. Image generators seem to be on a downward slope in the hype curve. You see their creations in low-budget blogs or game prototypes. But the one

Que sera, sera. Image generators seem to be on a downward slope in the hype curve. You see their creations in low-budget blogs or game prototypes. But the ones that were generated quickly stick out, and the ones that were generated with careful repetition are expensive unless you and your GPUs' time is worthless. LLMs could change civilization for the better or worse in any number of ways. They could also turn out to be the next big flop or just another tool if they persistently hover around the "80-90% good enough" threshold. Personally, I still wouldn't bet a dollar on the question. Computers are interesting and useful, so I'll keep working with them and let the chips fall where they may.

minimaxir 4y ago
> Image generators seem to be on a downward slope in the hype curve. Mostly due to a) extreme legal uncertainty and b) endless harrassment on social media for speaking positively about AI image generation. There are a lot of very impactful things happening in that space, but the ChatGPT hype sorta drowned it out a bit, in addition to people now keeping actually-good workflows of Stable Diffusion to themselves due to the aforementioned constraints.
- tiedieconderoga 4y ago
  Couldn't that sort of fragmentation, uncertainty, and secrecy contribute to marginalizing these systems, or make it harder for them to keep growing? Those are some of the big questions that make guessing at the future so difficult. You can see the same sort of thing with OpenAI's reluctance to describe the GPT4 model in as much detail as past ones.
GaggiX 4y ago
>Image generators seem to be on a downward slope in the hype curve. I see fewer complaints on Twitter or other social media and more people actually using it to create beautiful images, of course online galleries are full of AI images, but right now they actually compete with human illustrators, not only for quality but also for composition, style, characters, etc. (thx to LoRAs in particular) Also progress is extremely fast on this research field. >the ones that were generated with careful repetition are expensive unless you and your GPUs' time is worthless. There's actually more to it than pure brute force when generating images with generative models, if you know what you're doing, there's no need for a powerful GPU or wasted time. >just another tool What are they supposed to be if not tools?
- satvikpendem 4y ago
  It's almost as if the tool is what separates the artist from the non-artist. Initially people got mad at AI art, but now, the people actually persisting beyond mere gimmick images are those who have a fundamental interest in art, and they would have done it even a hundred years ago with oil paints.

minimaxir 4y ago

> Image generators seem to be on a downward slope in the hype curve. Mostly due to a) extreme legal uncertainty and b) endless harrassment on social media for speaking positively about AI image generation. There are a lot of very impactful things happening in that space, but the ChatGPT hype sorta drowned it out a bit, in addition to people now keeping actually-good workflows of Stable Diffusion to themselves due to the aforementioned constraints.

tiedieconderoga 4y ago
Couldn't that sort of fragmentation, uncertainty, and secrecy contribute to marginalizing these systems, or make it harder for them to keep growing? Those are some of the big questions that make guessing at the future so difficult. You can see the same sort of thing with OpenAI's reluctance to describe the GPT4 model in as much detail as past ones.

GaggiX 4y ago

>Image generators seem to be on a downward slope in the hype curve. I see fewer complaints on Twitter or other social media and more people actually using it to create beautiful images, of course online galleries are full of AI images, but right now they actually compete with human illustrators, not only for quality but also for composition, style, characters, etc. (thx to LoRAs in particular) Also progress is extremely fast on this research field. >the ones that were generated with careful repetition are expensive unless you and your GPUs' time is worthless. There's actually more to it than pure brute force when generating images with generative models, if you know what you're doing, there's no need for a powerful GPU or wasted time. >just another tool What are they supposed to be if not tools?

satvikpendem 4y ago
It's almost as if the tool is what separates the artist from the non-artist. Initially people got mad at AI art, but now, the people actually persisting beyond mere gimmick images are those who have a fundamental interest in art, and they would have done it even a hundred years ago with oil paints.