Finally set it up today. A bit limiting, but definitely useful. Can't seem to set it up with 1200x1200 which is a shame, since that's been me sdxl sweet spot.
Peanutbjelly
joined 2 years ago
Yes, please keep fighting to ensure we are locked to adobe's rent seeking model with no open alternatives.
The best thing for the art world is to make sure independent and poorer artists have no available competitive tools as we head into an inevitably advanced future. Where would we be without our intellectual landlords in such a future. The ones who can afford proprietary datasets are the only ones who deserve to prosper.
Right?
Yeah actually I don't like that. Also as an artist with degrading digital dexterity, such a powerful medium that doesn't rely on hours of causing my hands more damage is really cool.
Can't wait to get holodeck style creative experiences. I will enjoy creating such things as well, if it's not exclusively available through corporately aligned rent systems.
You're conflating polarized opinions of very different people and groups.
That being said your antagonism towards investors and wealthy companies is very sound as a foundation.
Hinton only gave his excessive worry after he left his job. There is no reason to suspect his motives.
Lecun is the opposite side and believes the danger is in companies hoarding the technology. He is why the open community has gained so much traction.
OpenAI are simultaneously being criticized for putting AI out for public use, as well a for not being open enough about the architecture, or allowing the public to actually have control of the state of AI developments. That being said they are leaning towards more authoritarian control from united governments and groups.
I'm mostly geared towards yann lecun and being more open despite the risks, because there is more risk and harm from hindering development of or privatizing the growth of AI technology.
The reality is that every single direction they try is heavily criticized because the general public has jumped onto a weird AI hate train.
See artists still complaining about adobe AI regardless of the training data, and hating on the open model community despite giving power to the people who don't want to join the adobe rent system.
Not to mention the reason we can all fuck around with llama models despite the fact. Props to yann and other meta AI researchers. Also eager to see future jepa stuff.
If only openAI was so open.
Her spoilers, but it shouldn't matter since the ending was idiotic.
Can we get a remake of her that doesn't end in the most stupid way possible? Why does the AI have perfectly human emotion? Why is it too dumb to build a functional partition to fill the role it is abandoning? Why did the developers send a companion app that can recursively improve itself into an environment it can choose to abandon?
I could go on for an hour. I understand why people loved the movie, but the ending was predictable half way in, and I hated that fact because an intelligent system could have handled the situation better than a dumb human being.
It was a movie about a long distance relationship with a human being pretending to be an AI, definitely not a super intelligent AI.
Not to mention a more realistic system would be emulating the interaction to begin with. Otherwise where the hell was the regulation on this being that is basically just a human?
Antitrust was just a nice idea. It's kinda dead. Will remain dead unless we can purge corruption from politics. For some reason, most politicians seem averse to this idea.
Luckily the party driven and heavily influential political roles are filled with diverse representatives from every walk of life and aren't largely built around the same support circles and ideals that have already been entrenched for generations. With millions of citizens, its normal for the same handful of families to remain in power, with the exception of some rich celebrities who can win the popularity polls.
Everything is fine.
As long as the rich can get more money. That's what is most important.
Do miss working at Futureshop where you would get wholesale on dynex. You could get a dozen compressed air canisters for a couple dollars. Don't think I ever got anything else of theirs.
Why can't I just be a bigot in the workplace without being oppressed for it?
If they aren't like me, they shouldn't be allowed to find their peace, love or happiness, because I don't understand it.
Ah yes, just point at the furries. A crowd full of often neurodivergent individuals finding solace in a more accepting and friendly community.
They should die sad, alone, and ostracized like God intended.
As someone who isn't a fan of sexual social environments, I'm capable of letting others live as they want to, and still enjoying my life otherwise. And weirdly, minus inevitable bad actors in any group, they respect my boundaries and comfort as well.
When people don't understand gender dysphoria, do they think it's just for attention? Purely for the sake of sexual deviancy? Do they think the trans boogeyman will be hiding under their bed?
I feel like people are just really bad with confusion. If they don't understand it, they find it repelling and upsetting. Generally the same with all bigotry.
I think adults need to learn where their feelings end and the feelings of others begin. Maybe even learn to recognize when their feelings are unreasonable, or inspired by their own failures to understand the perspectives of others.
Not familiar with gong et al, but this does kind of go along with other recent developments. Ignoring that this article feels straight out of junji ito's uzumaki.
Earl k. miller of MIT's miller lab has been going on about oscillating patterns that show anti correlated brain waves that imply a predictive error correction system.
I feel miller's work explains higher level rumination while solms is more directly phenomenological. Really curious to catch these two in conversation.
Main takeaway is all hail the free energy principle.
I conflate these things because they come from the same intentional source. I associate the copywrite chasing lawyers with the brands that own them, it is just a more generalized example.
Also an intern who can give you a songs lyrics are trained on that data. Any effectively advanced future system is largely the same, unless it is just accessing a database or index, like web searching.
Copyright itself is already a terrible mess that largely serves brands who can afford lawyers to harass or contest infringements. Especially apparent after companies like Disney have all but murdered the public domain as a concept. See the mickey mouse protection act, as well as other related legislation.
This snowballs into an economy where the Disney company, and similarly benefited brands can hold on to ancient copyrights, and use their standing value to own and control the development and markets of new intellectual properties.
Now, a neuralnet trained on copywritten material can reference that memory, at least as accurately as an intern pulling from memory, unless they are accessing a database to pull the information. To me, sueing on that bases ultimately follows the logic that would dictate we have copywritten material removed from our own stochastic memory, as we have now ensured high dimensional informational storage is a form of copywrite infringement if anyone instigated the effort to draw on that information.
Ultimately, I believe our current system of copywrite is entirely incompatible with future technologies, and could lead to some scary arguments and actions from the overbearing oligarchy. To argue in favour of these actions is to argue never to let artificial intelligence learn as humans do. Given our need for this technology to survive the near future as a species, or at least minimize the excessive human suffering, I think the ultimate cost of pandering to these companies may be indescribably horrid.
Music publishers sue happy in the face of any new technological development? You don't say.
If an intern gives you some song lyrics on demand, do they sue the parents?
Do we develop all future A.I. Technology only when it can completely eschew copyrighted material from their comprehension?
"I am sorry, I'm not allowed to refer to the brand name you are brandishing. Please buy our brand allowance package #35 for any action or communication regarding this brand content. "
I dream of a future when we think of the benefit of humanity over the maintenance of our owners' authoritarian control.
Salty writer fears being made obsolete by beep boop. Insults every AI enthusiast as well successful engineers and scientists.
i hate how popular it's become to hate on AI amongst people who know little to nothing about it.
Id forgive it if it were clever or funny, but this is really just obviously salty ad hominem strawmanning by someone who doesn't understand or appreciate the technology
Guess what fam, we are in the copilot tool phase. You can learn how to use these new tools AND learn how to be creative. Maybe then you could ask it to critique the humour in your satire article. Perhaps it would be more clever than "people who like this thing I don't like are dumb, and can't be creative or better than me In any way, because I'm cooler than AI will ever be!!! You nerds are stooooopid!!"
Because that's how it read.