I was going to say this, their new architecture seems to be better than previous ones, they have more compute and I’m guessing, more data. The only explanation for this downgrade is that they tried to ban porn. I haven’t read online info about this at the time anyways, I’m just learning this recently
Basically, any time a user prompt homes in on a concept that isn’t represented well in the AI model’s training dataset, the image-synthesis model will confabulate its best interpretation of what the user is asking for.
I’m so happy that the correct terminology is finally starting to take off in replacing ‘hallucinate.’
The model does have a lot of advantages over sdxl with the right prompting, but it seems to fall apart in prompts with more complex anatomy. Hopefully the community can fix it up once we have working trainers.
? They are all bad at first for the average person that uses surface level tools, but SD3 won’t have the community to tune it because it is proprietary junk and irrelevant now.
They realized that no matter how much they charged as a one time fee, the people the got the one time fee enterprise license would eventually cost them more in computational costs them the fee. So they switched it to 6000 image generations, which wasn’t enough for most of the community that made fixes and trained loras, so none of the “cool” community stuff will work with SD3.
Have they considered a community sponsored “group buy” of compute, to just train the model as far as the community will bear ?
SDXL was so great, surely 100k people could put 5$ a month toward making monthly improvement open source checkpoints happen ?
I don’t see any other financing model work out if the output is open source. It simply can’t be financed after publication. And it won’t get the community support if it’s behind a paywall.
Honestly I think that it’s models like these that output things that could be called art.
Whenever a model is actually good, it just creates pretty pictures that would have otherwise been painted by a human, whereas this actually creates something unique and novel. Just like real art almost always ilicits some kind of emotion, so too do the products of models like these and I think that that’s much more interesting that having another generic AI postcard.
Not that I’m happy to see how much SD has fallen though.
I agree, bring on the weird, I don’t need accurate, I want hallucinated novelty. This is like people who treat LLM like a dictionary or search engine and complain about innaccuracy. They don’t understand this is to be expected of a synthetized answer.
Hallucinations is an essential part of the value these things bring.
It would be great if the model could produce this beautifully disfigured stuff when the user asked it to. But if it can’t follow the user’s prompts reasonably, then it’s pretty useless as a tool
I can see an argument for artists choosing to use chaotic processes they can’t really control.
Setting up a canvas and paints and brushes in a particular arrangement in the woods, and letting migratory animals and weather put their mark on the work, and then see what results. That could be art.
And if that can be art, then I guess chaotic, unpredictable AI models can output something that can be art, too.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Almost like the issues with repressing sex and nudity are harming the development of intelligence. Just like real life.
I was going to say this, their new architecture seems to be better than previous ones, they have more compute and I’m guessing, more data. The only explanation for this downgrade is that they tried to ban porn. I haven’t read online info about this at the time anyways, I’m just learning this recently
I see this growing sentiment. Are we on the cusp of a re-examination of this social wound.
I’m so happy that the correct terminology is finally starting to take off in replacing ‘hallucinate.’
The model does have a lot of advantages over sdxl with the right prompting, but it seems to fall apart in prompts with more complex anatomy. Hopefully the community can fix it up once we have working trainers.
“Laying on grass” is complex?
Also from reddit, with zero irony:
💀
AI has already peaked. It’s all downhill from here.
? They are all bad at first for the average person that uses surface level tools, but SD3 won’t have the community to tune it because it is proprietary junk and irrelevant now.
What changed between SDXL and SD3? I’m out of the loop on this one.
They realized that no matter how much they charged as a one time fee, the people the got the one time fee enterprise license would eventually cost them more in computational costs them the fee. So they switched it to 6000 image generations, which wasn’t enough for most of the community that made fixes and trained loras, so none of the “cool” community stuff will work with SD3.
Have they considered a community sponsored “group buy” of compute, to just train the model as far as the community will bear ? SDXL was so great, surely 100k people could put 5$ a month toward making monthly improvement open source checkpoints happen ? I don’t see any other financing model work out if the output is open source. It simply can’t be financed after publication. And it won’t get the community support if it’s behind a paywall.
Honestly I think that it’s models like these that output things that could be called art.
Whenever a model is actually good, it just creates pretty pictures that would have otherwise been painted by a human, whereas this actually creates something unique and novel. Just like real art almost always ilicits some kind of emotion, so too do the products of models like these and I think that that’s much more interesting that having another generic AI postcard.
Not that I’m happy to see how much SD has fallen though.
🤦
Say the phrase, go on, stochastic parrots !
Ai would do it better than me.
Ai : “Stochastic parrots? Nah, more like digital toddlers with a crayon. They might surprise you with something wild, but let’s not pretend they’re the next Picasso!”
true, true, chatgpt
I agree, bring on the weird, I don’t need accurate, I want hallucinated novelty. This is like people who treat LLM like a dictionary or search engine and complain about innaccuracy. They don’t understand this is to be expected of a synthetized answer.
Hallucinations is an essential part of the value these things bring.
It would be great if the model could produce this beautifully disfigured stuff when the user asked it to. But if it can’t follow the user’s prompts reasonably, then it’s pretty useless as a tool
I can see an argument for artists choosing to use chaotic processes they can’t really control.
Setting up a canvas and paints and brushes in a particular arrangement in the woods, and letting migratory animals and weather put their mark on the work, and then see what results. That could be art.
And if that can be art, then I guess chaotic, unpredictable AI models can output something that can be art, too.
“Biblically accurate models”
Ah, yes. Man made horrors beyond my comprehension.
this is gonna lead to some weird fetishes