Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> what they produce is something totally new

It is? I may be cursed with a good memory but absolutely no "AI art" that my friends passed on to me looked original. In some cases it was painfully obvious what it's based on, in other cases it just felt like i've seen it before.

Legal it may be (although there will be conflicts about machine generated derivative works) but it's also boring.

People are just enthusiastic because it's "do it with a computer". If a young human artist came up with this stuff you'd tell them they're good technically but now they need to develop their own personality.




It is more than capable of producing stuff that isn’t even in its dataset as the original DALLE paper shows.

Inference takes 4 seconds on an A100, I’d say that makes it useful for a wide range of applications that weren’t even possible before.

I do agree that the outputs will lack a sense of communication with the viewer that art has.


> In some cases it was painfully obvious what it's based on

Do you have an example of this?

Ideally with a link (for DALL-E 2/Midjourney) or prompt and seed (for Stable Diffusion) to show that it was generated from an incidental prompt - as opposed to uploading the existing image and just using the AI for inpainting/fine-tuning.


I don't keep the image spam from the group chats I'm on, sorry. Man or machine generated. There lies madness.

But I definitely remember being shown something that was the submarine from the beatles album cover with different colours and ... something else that i forgot what it was ... pasted in. The text prompt included submarine but not beatles.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: