Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

TheAnonFeels t1_ir756qp wrote

Reply to comment by LordOfDorkness42 in "The number of AI papers on arXiv per month grows exponentially with doubling rate of 24 months." by Smoke-away

You've been pardoned.

BUT, have you seen this? https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/407355414229811200/1026593684441022594/AI1.png

I don't know much about where they came from, but the AI is still training

16

LordOfDorkness42 t1_ir76a5w wrote

Hadn't seen that one in particular, but I'd believe it.

Charlie, AKA penguinz0 did a video two weeks ago, where he was basically playing around with Stable Diffusion 1.5, and he made some really cool stuff.

https://youtu.be/MVu-bD5keAs

A lot of it looked wonky, of course... but some of it I'd definitively stood and stared at for a few minutes if I'd seen it up on somebody's wall.

7

TheAnonFeels t1_ir7891t wrote

Yeah, i've seen a number of outputs from this guy and he's posted a few odd ones, bodies turned halfway through, sitting wrong way on a bench that also kinda disappears.. It has issues, but it can output quality more often than not..

Its just remarkable, I'm sure in a few months we'll see a whole lot more come out!

4

Quealdlor t1_ir9cz4o wrote

AI works are getting better and better, I can see that. Still the vast majority are bad. The one you linked is good. I often see arms, hands being painted in a wrong way. I still think that it will take multiple years before AI is as good as the best artists. Stable Diffusion should be called Unreliable Diffusion or Unsteady Diffusion for now, judging by all the works I've seen and done.

−1

TheAnonFeels t1_ira0ks4 wrote

Even the fact it can produce quality, discredits all the bad works it produces. Rejecting the bad ones is simple enough, even if humans have to do it...

I don't see how it has an error rate is a problem?

3