Procrastination matinale: Overthinking the limits of « AI artists » or AI image generators.

I think there is something interesting and deeply distinct from what human can do that still show when you push the prompts to their limits.

It’s like a collage of approximation of what I asked for, but certainly not what I asked for.

The prompt was:

Two girls eating a giant pineapple with a glowing spork, in the background a teddy bear is trying to find the meaning of life, photorealistic

Dall-E shows some form of understanding of what a ‘fork’ is, and what a ‘spoon’ is, but facing the concept of a ‘spork’ it falls back to a blurry approximation of one or another. It doesn’t try to understand what is a spork and produce the illustration based on a understanding of the tool a spork would be, it rather produce a liminal representation that is both close to be a spoon and close to be a fork, but is certainly not a spork.

While I really like a lot of OpenAI stuff, I still feel like most of what they do is still a bit gimmicky.

Those AIs are impressive, for sure, and they seem to solve simple problems quite effectively, but at the root of it all, I feel like they don’t understand what they are doing.

Ergo, they don’t really solve the problems that they are being asked to solve. They rather provide a guess of what a solution could look like.

In most ‘simple’ case, the high level of guessing doesn’t make a substantial difference in the result, because it is a good enough guess to provide an acceptable and practical answer to the problem.

But the issue is exactly there, they don’t provide a solution, they provide an answer.

And as the extreme cases show, the answers they provide are not real solution to the problem they are asked to solve.

Votre commentaire

Entrez vos coordonnées ci-dessous ou cliquez sur une icône pour vous connecter:


Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Connexion à %s