3 ms·

For lots of uses cases, if the end output meets user expectations, does it really matter if it was interpolated from simulated data? For many use cases (editin

by giobox 2y ago

For lots of uses cases, if the end output meets user expectations, does it really matter if it was interpolated from simulated data? For many use cases (editing old family photos etc), I'm increasingly not caring. I don't need per-pixel accuracy, I need a nice artifact that reminds me of a memory. If it looks 100 percent accurate to my eye, I'm not sure I care how much "fake" data it took to generate it. The important thing is it records the scene as I remember it. This isn't hypothetical either; Photoshop already shipped their first iteration of the idea, for sure won't be the last: > https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/photoshop-generative-expand-ai/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/photoshop-generative... > https://www.reddit.com/r/photoshop/comments/13s6tp9/using_the_new_generative_fill_to_produce_infinite/ https://www.reddit.com/r/photoshop/comments/13s6tp9/using_th...

krapp 2y ago
Obviously if you don't care, it doesn't matter to you. But you not caring about objective reality versus your own vibes doesn't mean no one else has a valid reason to care. I personally would prefer my family photos not to contain machine generated hallucinations, because that doesn't actually represent reality. But, just as obviously, you're correct that AI is going to force itself into every possible application and it doesn't matter.