this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
67 points (98.6% liked)
Asklemmy
43893 readers
1263 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Devil's advocate: Why would we want to give AI image generators free hueristics to help them make themselves less detectable?
Anything we can provide is just a drop in the ocean of data they already have. Plus, this was how image generation worked before we got diffusion models (see "generative adversarial networks") and they never reached the level of image quality that diffusion models did.
Huh? GANs, even ones like thispersondoesnotexist are way better than SDXL, they're just hyper-narrow in focus usually, whereas SD can do just about anything
If only it were that simple to train something into an AI.