Hacker News Reader

>but, it's a real loss. Both in terms of human knowledge of, say composition, emotion, and so on, but also for style diversity

But that real art still exists, and can still be found, so what exactly is the loss here?

View on HN

We may differ on our take about the usefulness of diffusion models, but I'd say it's a loss in that many of the visuals humans will see in the next ten years are going to be generated by these models, and I for one wish they weren't just trained on weeb shit.

Just think that before 1995 (and in reality, decades later than that) most of the world would never have access to 99% of the worlds art.

And between 1995 and 2022 the amount of Art produced surpasses the cumulative output of all other periods of human history.

... And between 2022 and 2025 the amount of imagery generated will drive the percent of Art created to roughly 0% of all imagery.

You'll still be able to ask a person to create art in a specific style if you'd like.

Unfortunately we will have a generation of young artists who learn to draw based on models like flux, unless they get classical training..

Reply on news.ycombinator.com