yeah I naïvely thought that nobody would care about using a vision model, since image classifiers seem non controversial to me? I wouldn’t dare touch a diffusion model since I agree those suck in every conceivable way. anyway clearly people don’t see it that way
Yeah, I personally don’t trust OpenAI, given their cagey comms on how they source training data. Even if they claim they won’t train with data sent to their API.
But definitely agree that “AI” has taken on a genericide-like usage, akin to calling all gaming systems “a Nintendo.”
I also feel bad for the “generative art” community, which has to endlessly explain that they use math and deterministic algorithms to generate patterns and it’s not at all related to genAI.
Every term other than "large learning model" tries to pass it off as some other unrelated thing that already exists to give itself legitimacy, which has the side effect, intentionally or not, of making those other things sound illegitimate.
A tactic for products that are totally real and not scams.
Yes, and the first plane to strike proc gen art was "NFT" shit! It's unfair that they now have to distance themselves from a new fraud that has nothing to do with them. bsky.app/profile/symb...
Something similar happened to generative/procedural art (when NFTs brainslugged everything adjacent to it). Now you have to parse everyone involved to see if they're involved or pushing that garbage.
I actually do agree but I think it’s more than just “AI” that rankled people here, it’s gpt specifically. the former is a triggering word now for sure, but for the latter, I think many people just top-to-bottom don’t like that company
yeah honestly sucks, I'm really interested in ML myself, but now I'll have to be super careful with wording to not immediately trigger everyone who just knows the umbrella buzzword
