[HN Gopher] DALL-E + GPT-3 = 
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       DALL-E + GPT-3 =
        
       Author : GLaNIK
       Score  : 81 points
       Date   : 2022-08-07 15:09 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (medium.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (medium.com)
        
       | bitwize wrote:
       | In addition their M-x psychoanalyze-zippy energy, these kind of
       | remind me of the creepypasta-fodder PlayStation game LSD:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol4OSIGGukA
       | 
       | Is the fire god going to tell me to write a book report on _Call
       | of the Wild_? (
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXVdTT1Sis0&t=6m42s )
        
       | dymk wrote:
       | Firstly, it's cool. But...
       | 
       | The generated images are underwhelming. Other than the snake king
       | one, they all kind of look the same album art look. The generated
       | text also seems like it's trying to have some cohesive theme to
       | it, but doesn't bring it together like one might expect in a
       | short story. And the writing style is filled with cliches.
       | 
       | I can see it being good for inspiration, but it's pretty rough
       | for final consumption.
        
         | mrtksn wrote:
         | Midjourney seems to have better hunch for artistic drama.
         | Though I'm not very satisfied with the AI outcomes, probably
         | because they don't watch movies(yet!).
         | 
         | Here is the output for the first prompt[0]:
         | https://imgur.com/a/18NRrx4
         | 
         | [0]You see a figure in the distance, waving at you. As you get
         | closer, you realize that the figure is your doppelganger. Your
         | doppelganger is wearing your clothes and has your face, but
         | their eyes are black voids. You hear a voice in your head that
         | says, "We are one. You are me and I am you."
        
           | jimhi wrote:
           | I have noticed this too. Midjourney seems to have poorer
           | quality and can't really do face but is vastly more
           | "creative".
           | 
           | I wonder if there is a trade off between a larger data set so
           | more accurate and how creative it can be.
        
         | coffee_beqn wrote:
         | The city was especially off. It was literally just a city. I
         | realize this would be an absurd complaint just a few years ago
        
       | aabhay wrote:
       | Wow, OpenAI should be truly taught in business schools around the
       | world as a case study in product marketing. Despite the dozens or
       | hundreds of similar tools, models, colab notebooks, etc. created
       | by a wide flourishing community, these two products are top of
       | mind for everyone. Both terribly disappointing and envy inspiring
       | for us in the field!
        
         | mach1ne wrote:
         | OpenAI was the first on GPT-level text generation, as it was (I
         | think) on DALL-E level image generation. It's winner takes all
         | rather than marketing.
        
         | centra_minded wrote:
         | GPT-3 and DALL-E (by my subjective opinion) feel much better
         | than other models that their respective tasks.
         | 
         | DALL-E in particular kind of blows the VQGAN+CLIP messing
         | around I've done out of the water. GPT-3 feels markedly better
         | than other text generation or chatbots I've tried.
         | 
         | Definitely these are well marketed, and not the only models
         | aorund, but they also feel ahead of other things I've tried.
         | Can you point out some of these other tools/models?
        
           | andybak wrote:
           | It's not as simple as "x is better than y". They all have
           | their own flavours. I'd had results from JAX CLIP Guided
           | Diffusion that I can't get from anything else and some of my
           | early experiments with Disco Diffusion have a quality that is
           | unique. I think people will always mix and match models due
           | to their unique qualities.
           | 
           | Having said that I'm on the beta for Stable Diffusion (
           | https://stability.ai/ ) and it's remarkably capable across a
           | broad range of styles. Dall-E probably still has the edge for
           | more complex semantic prompts and photographic coherance but
           | it's very good and it's got a very open strategy.
        
         | minimaxir wrote:
         | Google has similar models and could compete with OpenAI with
         | both a GPT-3 and DALL-E equivalent if they wanted to.
         | 
         | tbh I'm surprised they don't.
        
           | M4v3R wrote:
           | They already have, they've developed two projects for AI
           | image generation: Imagen and Parti. Sadly both are not open
           | to public yet.
        
             | minimaxir wrote:
             | That's what I meant.
        
       | ohiovr wrote:
       | If this crapola replaces real art, then the human race doesn't
       | need creativity.
        
       | stared wrote:
       | Prompts matter - here, it is interesting to see the cascade of
       | prompts, i.e. from ones you pass to GPT3 to those generated by
       | it.
       | 
       | I also like the topic choice - getting DALLE2 esoteric, dreamy,
       | surreal. I find generating things that do not exist more
       | interesting - as it stretches the limits of AI creativity and
       | imagination. (Plug: I generated quite a few religious, symbolic,
       | and esoteric images, both pleasant and gloomy,
       | https://pmigdal.medium.com/dall-e-2-and-transcendence-3a3a40...)
        
       | rvz wrote:
       | The road to hell is paved with good intentions, where the hype
       | around both DALL-E 2 and GPT-3 will create a new original wave of
       | disinformation and new levels of reality distortion.
       | 
       | Like GANs being abused by DeepFakes, the exact same thing will
       | happen with DALLE-2, GPT-3, etc and it always ends in tears.
        
         | Nasrudith wrote:
         | I have heard ceaseless doomsaying but never have I seeb a
         | documented case, much less one where the leading factor wasn't
         | a desire to believe. Standards of evidence drop through the
         | floor when the speaker seeks to rationalize what they already
         | feel.
         | 
         | I admittedly have my own biases - instead of any framing as a
         | threat of new technology I see it as a self-flaggating
         | Frankenstein complex married with bikeshedding.
        
       | totalview wrote:
       | I totally thought that this was a long wind up to the author
       | explaining how perfect GPT-3 and DALLE were for creating Dungeons
       | and Dragons narrative
        
         | ahstilde wrote:
         | That exists!
         | 
         | https://play.aidungeon.io/
        
       | Tistron wrote:
       | I made a quick comparison with midjourney, without going as much
       | into picking pictures.
       | 
       | https://hackmd.io/@einarmagnus/midjourney-hallucinations
       | 
       | It's quite fascinating to play around with this tool. Like user
       | `stared` mentions below, there are words like epic, realistic etc
       | that you can add to shape the pictures quite a lot. Auto-
       | generated text like this is not so great at producing interesting
       | results.
        
         | stared wrote:
         | For these prompts, I like the ones generated by Midjouney much
         | more. While they are less diverse, they are more consistent for
         | a digital art style. Thank you for making this comparison!
        
       | junon wrote:
       | Site is unusable on mobile. Anyone got a backup link?
        
         | seszett wrote:
         | It works fine for me on Firefox mobile.
        
       | freediver wrote:
       | I'll dare make a prediction: Transformers will be declared a dead
       | end in AI in few years and GPT-4 might be the last in line. The
       | method is able to produce highly convincing gimmicks (which is
       | what it comes to once initial excitement splashes) but that is
       | not how art or intelligence works.
        
         | Jack000 wrote:
         | Language model != Transformers. The scaling power of the
         | transformer architecture allows LLMs to exist, but LMs are just
         | one application of transformers. The architecture itself is
         | extremely generic and is applicable to nearly every problem.
         | 
         | I'm pretty certain whatever comes after GPT-4 will still be
         | using layered self-attention.
        
         | ebiester wrote:
         | Everything is eventually called a dead end in AI, no? Once it
         | has moved from the bleeding edge to something the public uses,
         | the limitations become known and everyone says, "of course a
         | computer can do it, but that's not intelligence."
        
           | feet wrote:
           | That's because we aren't building systems capable of self-
           | analysis and awareness. As far as I'm aware, there are only
           | AI/ML systems capable of analyzing some data and giving some
           | output with little to no nuance
        
           | Rerarom wrote:
           | no, the OP says it in a different sense, namely that even if
           | you are duly impressed by these advancements, they will stop
           | in a few years and a new line of research will be needed
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | lbotos wrote:
         | > The method is able to produce highly convincing gimmicks
         | (which is what it comes to once initial excitement splashes)
         | but that is not how art or intelligence works.
         | 
         | Uh, art is _often_ about reproducing highly convincing
         | gimmicks.
         | 
         | See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realism_(arts)
         | 
         | I think you mean that Transformers will become _kitsch_ , which
         | probably.
        
           | etrautmann wrote:
           | We've already seen this to some extent with GANs - which now
           | look somewhat outdated in comparison with Dall-e and others
        
       | hamiltonians wrote:
       | this is the first time i have seen an emoji rendered here
        
         | moreira wrote:
         | That's not an emoji, it's just a standard character[0] - added
         | to Unicode in 1993.
         | 
         |  There's a whole bunch of them[1]!
         | 
         | [0]: https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+2665 [1]:
         | https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/block/U+2600
        
           | delusional wrote:
           | Is there any functional difference between any of those
           | characters and emoji? To me they're all just "standard
           | characters"
        
             | crazygringo wrote:
             | Yes, functionally those characters are single-tone and will
             | change color in a word processor.
             | 
             | Emoji are full-color and can't have their color changed in
             | a word processor in the same way.
             | 
             | Also, in practice those characters' appearances are tied to
             | the font you've selected, while emoji's appearances are
             | usually tied to the OS you're using (although sometimes the
             | specific app -- e.g. Gmail in the browser on a Mac uses
             | Android-style emoji rather than Mac-style emoji).
        
               | easrng wrote:
               | They render in color for me. Those characters have 2 ways
               | they can be rendered and the default varies. You can use
               | the U+FE0F Variation Selector-16 to force them to show as
               | emojis or U+FE0E Variation Selector-15 to show them as
               | normal paths.
               | 
               | Though color fonts aren't restricted to emojis, they can
               | be used for any characters, they just aren't very common.
        
             | moreira wrote:
             | They're just characters from different Unicode blocks,
             | there's no functional difference between them that I'm
             | aware of, other than that characters from some blocks are
             | not allowed here on HN, including all emoji characters.
             | 
             | When I said "standard characters" perhaps I should've been
             | clearer. I meant "they're non-emoji characters". Sorry, I
             | didn't realise it would cause confusion.
        
             | monitron wrote:
             | Unlike "normal" characters, emoji are often displayed in
             | full color, independent of whatever color the surrounding
             | text is being rendered in.
        
             | jazzyjackson wrote:
             | Found an interesting source on the wiki for emoji,
             | basically Unicode 1 wanted to encode all existing text, it
             | wasn't until Unicode 6 that they widened the scope to
             | include "characters" that don't exist yet:
             | 
             | > For the majority of characters that are not emoji, the
             | UTC looks for evidence of existing usage as text. Proposers
             | need to establish that there is some reasonable body of
             | text, either modern or historic, that uses that character.
             | 
             | ...
             | 
             | > For emoji, rather than look for evidence of existing
             | textual use -- since emoji effectively cannot exist in text
             | until they are encoded -- we look for evidence of likely
             | high usage once they are encoded, plus a number of other
             | factors.
             | 
             | https://unicode.org/emoji/principles.html
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-08-07 23:02 UTC)