3 ms·
For me even if I know what I want, if I’m using gen AI I’m happy to compromise and get good enough (which again, is so much better than I could do otherwise).
by cube2222 2y ago
For me even if I know what I want, if I’m using gen AI I’m happy to compromise and get good enough (which again, is so much better than I could do otherwise).
If you want higher quality/precision, you’ll likely want to ask a professional, and I don’t expect that to change in the near future.
- adamc 2y agoThat limits its value for industries like Hollywood, though, doesn't it? And without that, who exactly is going to pay for this?
- cube2222 2y agoTo me, currently, visual generative ai is an evolution and improvement of stock images, and has effectively the same purpose. People pay for stock images.
- adamc 2y agoYeah, maybe for some purposes. In business, people sometimes pay for stock images but often don't have the expertise or patience to really spend a lot of time coaching a video into fruition. Maybe for advertising or other contexts where more effort is worth it (not just powerpoints), but it feels like a slim audience.
- cube2222 2y agoWith tools like Apple Intelligence and its genmoji (emoji generation) and playground (general diffusion image generation) I expect it to also take on some of the current entertainment and social use-cases of stickers and GIFs. But that’s probably something you don’t pay for directly, instead paying for e.g. a phone that has those features.
- jddj 2y agoAdvertisers, I guess. Same folks who paid for everything else around here
- adamc 2y agoYeah, I just question if there are enough customers to make this work.