Hacker News Reader

Comment by dragonwriter | Hacker News Reader

> If you're wondering how it's so fast and cheap and they can generate variants so easily

I assume its cheap because they are burning money to build a business, its not fast at all, and the quality... sucks.

> And if you're wondering how it can look so good

I’m not.

I'm wondering why they’re trying to get people to use something worse than using a decent photorealistic SD1.5-based checkpoint with some basic prompt templating.

Not saying GANs can't be awesome, just that this site isn't what I’d use to make that case.

View on HN

Looking at the poses, it feels optimized for generating porn, but one example someone showed had a child's face (good god please don't let your "AI" system generate child anything if you want to sell it for porn purposes), and another user noted that their attempt error'd out because it "detected nudity", even though other users get given a nude model by default.

I don't know if the thing in the crotch is a penis or a scrotum, but it is definitely NSFW:

https://images.generated.photos/0wV1dBnZ15hGneEfqfZT7SdEIill...

My prompt was simply "Standing in front of a rocket.".

That image is so full of wtf

I’m going with that guy is a reptile in disguise.

Good thing you didn't ask for sitting.

It's neither, because this AI doesn't care for gender norms. /s

That looks more like a machine, an android perhaps, than an actual human.

Oh no, no, no, I'm a rocket man

Hah. I've been playing with StableDiffusion locally and have gotten a few abominations like this myself.

Whatever you do don't take all those long prompts that include (((aesthetic))) and such and put them in the negative prompt with "human" in the positive prompt.

It's not nightmare fuel it's a nightmare engine

I had one generate a fully nude, spread eagle male model w/ a very vivid vagina when I typed in "on couch". Tried it again w/ other randomly generated male and female models with nowhere near the same results w/ any of the other tries...

It's interesting that the image has a "mirrored along the X axis" kind of look.

You asked for a phallus symbol, it gave you phallus symbols.

An AI-generated image is just a drawing, not a real human.

In Canada, CP drawings are illegal (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography_laws_in_Ca...)

I believe anything depicting CP is illegal in the US as well

The justice department defines it as anything depicting a real identifiable minor. Fictive persons are notably exempt from this definition (regardless of realism of the depiction). Canada is different in that regard.

> it feels optimized for porn

So I was relatively unimpressed with the first few images, they looked incredibly unrealistic. But then after reading this message i decided to add "topless" to the notes just to see how crazy the result was.

I was actually impressed, it returned an image that actually looks lifelike once I gave it an adult request. Which reinforces the idea that this was optimized for porn.

For those curious, this was the result I was provided. NSFW of course, topless female gender (ai generated): https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e6c26e190809000fb...

That image is really off-putting. It looks wrong in several ways I can identify and some that I can’t.

I can count a number of things wrong with that image on her right hand. 7 or 8.

7-finger porn!

We're not judging.

I tweaked yours a little.

[NSFW] https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e7e1aee4125d000cd...

And then I requested a full bush...

[NSFW] https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e7e47ff56326000b9...

I made the mistake of opening this in work and had to instantly close it

I am also a bit disappointed how it's not photorealistic. We had better quality 3-4 years ago.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com