You’re lumping all of machine learning into the bucket of tech bros, ChatGPT, Facebook and such.
There was a thriving, small scale world of machine learning stuff that existed before they hijacked the public’s attention, and it never went away. It still exists. It will continue to exist when this bubble at least deflates some.
But what does it matter if:
The model weights are distributed, for free.
Run by the user, not profiting the trainer at all.
Its output is strictly used for noncommercial use; nothing the user ever makes a dime from, nor that competes with the original artist?
Thats the same thing as a fanfic to me. Or open software. Or per your analogy, a personal (noncommercial) painting inspired by another’s work.
I’m not simping for big tech or LLMs or anything, I’m just saying if one rips out the commercial aspect completely, that takes a lot of the bad ethics with it.
I don’t like EF-S on my R50V, same sensor as your R10.
I mean, I have what are supposed to be some great ones. The Tamron 10-20 VC, the sigma 30mm 1.4, the Canon 50-250, the 18-55. They’re great on old bodies, they haven’t changed, but on modern ILCs the optics, VC, autofocus and weight does not hold it up at all…
And they’re all too loud for video.
A Viltrox Air will run circles around them, for less money. Basically any mirrorless lens will. Honestly I’d rather have an old Sony body + a modern Viltrox or Sirui lens now.
(want that because I throw up from the laggy ones like the 6400 had when I tried it)
With Sony bodies, I believe you can change the display refresh rate in the settings, so it doesn’t feel so sluggish. The R50/R10 can as well, but I believe the default is just higher.
I’m not trying to simp for Sony or anything though, the prices on their bodies are outrageous. But at least they have an open lens ecosystem.
What if they give the resulting LLM out for free, Apache licensed? And don’t take any steps to anthropomorphize it at all?
In other contexts, that would be classified as fair-use, as long as it stays non-commercial.
The APS-C lenses are awful. And the FF ones with IS, especially the zooms, have outrageous barrel distortion that crops the sensor a ton… on $2K lenses.
This is the brand new 20-50mm F/4 for instance, and its not even the worst offender. It’s $1400:
The Thypoch 24-50 2.8, for comparison, on Sony E. This is $650, often less on sale:
I’m speaking as someone who mistakenly bought into Canon APS-C. I loathe it, as a hobbyist with a Canon SLR for years.
I’m selling out, as soon as I see with what Fuji/Panasonic/Sony cook up within the year.
Looks like a Canon?
Canon RF lenses are outrageously priced, even amongst other outrageous ILC brands, because they lock out third parties. So yeah, this lady got ripped off.
Well, apparently Nintendo fans and commenters in the linked news section do too.
But I don’t want do disqualify how sus the blog post is, either. It does feel a little like a corporate paint-over; the internet can reasonably be suspicious of that. But I haven’t been convinced by a single comment trying to dissect the picture.
First of all, they did do a bad job with their blog post.
…But I’m also shocked by the number of people who think they’re human AI detectors.
I suspect people are a year or two behind, looking for signs of messy Stable Diffusion XL output, like suspiciously styled appendages or that weird framing 1.5 always did. Or maybe the Ghibli-esque style Tweeters used to ape Sam Altman.
Models aren’t like that any more.
The other day, I was sitting at a TV, looking at photos side by side, I cannot tell my own mirrorless camera RAWs apart from some locally-run generations that used my photos as a reference, even if I zoom in to pixel peep or try to nitpick the depth-of-field from my lens.
Videos edited by H3 are shockingly good now, albeit at lower resolution.
I did some animesque character design mockups (just for my own thinking/brainstorming), and I can feed the model separate reference images for characters and art styles and poses and it… just gets it. It looks just like the original painted style, and I can’t find any artifacts or distortions that jump out. Not counting the ones in the original material.
I’m not trying to glaze diffusion or anything; quite the opposite. It’s messy, and sloppy. Besides, that’s not the point, and I don’t want to get into that.
What I’m saying, outside of really lazy slop or bad models like ChatGPT, people are behind if they think they can spot AI-generated stuff reliably.
So, maybe the studio lied.
The blog post certainly makes it suspicious. They could have uploaded some asset at least?
But, as suspicious as the style is, I can’t tell if that “process” picture is AI generated. Certainly not because the 2nd frame has a cartoon style, or the 3rd and 4th look like weird cg.
Buff arms being “unfeminine” is so stupid, IMO.
It’s sexy, on anyone.
OP, can you link the original research? It’s an excellent site:
I wish this had happened to me…
I was tagged as ADHD in kindergarten. Knowing (what I suspect to be) the other half would have been immensely helpful.
I have been putting off focusing on some niches too long, mostly because of IRL executive dysfunction.
The Feng Shui is strong, with this one.
It is, with the right framework to accumulate memories. Even as a Rimworld mod it’s pretty sick.
The implementation has to be just right, though.
And fact is, long context LLMs that are just too intense to run alongside games, much less during the RAMpocalyse. That, and with all the AI Bros poisoning the well, it’s just not the time.
And I certainly don’t want to touch ChatGPT with a ten foot pole. No one is going to roll their own API.
I’m a huge fan of procedural game mods, but… yeah, it’s just not the time. The AI bubble has to burst first, then I think this will be an interesting side feature in games, though obviously not replacing the handwritten core or anything.
He says Kimi is one big girl, and Qwen is soooo thin.
Don’t mind my green text.
But even if I try go get inside the head of GestapoBro here… I do not understand the thing about “race mixing.”
Has he ever seen such a person?
They tend to be drop dead gorgeous. And statistically, they inherit fewer genetic issues, right? It literally improves genetic outcomes.
Like, even playing ball with the eugenics and genetic purity things, it makes no sense. A modern neonazi (with statistics the original Nazis didn’t have) should love “race mixing,” but I guess they’re… just total idiots. Which explains a lot.
Does any of that make social media any better?
It’s the reason why they would prefer a first hand encounter from someone via social media without the narrative being twisted.
This is the lie social media sells.
Nothing is vetted. There’s no standard of information hygiene on social media. Anything posted could be a misunderstanding, or fabricated, or deliberate clickbait propaganda.
In fact, that’s exactly what engages the algorithms; its why modern social media is such a cesspool, because clickbait is easier to produce and more engaging than professional journalism, and the algorithm boosts that garbage to everyone.
But I’m not in this thread to argue this thoroughly.
Frankly, if you came to Lemmy with the belief that social media (especially corporate social media) is more reliable than news outlets… I don’t know what to tell you.
… that was only heard from word of mouth or tabloids (newspapers).
I think your question is one of perception.
People trusted “tabloids” (newspapers) back then. They were respected institutions, generally. Public payed attention to investigative journalists, and that’s how stuff got out.
They read news. From newspapers. This was normal.
Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Reddit or Twitter (X)
…And these kind of took over from sheer engagement, not necessarily reliability.
TBH, if someone on X told me the sky is blue, I’d still be skeptical. Hence I’m the opposite of you, I suppose: I find it wild that these artificial spaces have become the world’s de-facto news feed over professional journalism.
Yeah.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to touch projects vibe coded to this level, going solely on past experience with them.
But I am scientifically curious about its functionality.
Okay, well, what about Nvidia Nemotron’s series as a counter example?
It’s built on an open dataset; its training regime isn’t secret, it’s reproducible. It’s Apache licensed. It’s not published to manipulate anyone; it’s mostly presented as a research tool, or a starting point for users to customize for mundane text processing tasks. It runs reasonably efficiently on a large variety of software and hardware, with a standardized architecture.
Of course AI, as it is mostly presented to the public, is an existential problem.
But you’re trying to fundamentally tie text-based machine learning to the tech bros as a root for its ethical issues. It’s not that simple. Even if Sam Altman and all his kind keel over tomorrow, the complications the existence of LLMs and other generative models present is not going away, and we will have to deal with models that can do unethical things without anything unethical in their training regime.