Warning
Warning
You're viewing a single thread.
129 comments
-
This is such a stupid take, the author is either a lemming or doesn't understand how resources and commodities work
-
If you don't explain why you hold this opinion your comment is wasted.
-
-
So how many images would need to be generated at once to take down a city 👀
-
exactly 1,063,829,787, can't you read?
-
1,063,829,787
It would be that many times the squared volume of a 200x200 image. Which is already 40,000 pixels. Multiply those together and you get 4.25 million megapixels (which are 1 billion pixels each), aka 4.25 gigapixels. It's extremely large but not unachievable.
People are AI generating entire movies which are 24-30 pictures per second. Seems like you could hit really big numbers really really fast.
-
People are AI generating entire movies which are 24-30 pictures per second.
I don't think they're generating those movies in real time.
-
-
-
-
-
because people just make shit up and post it on the internet, and other people content with making shit up and posting it on the internet go "wow good post"
and then nobody bothers fact checking anything ever.
like i understand the anti AI sentiment, but please do yourself a favor and use actually good arguments against it, not stupid arguments that make you look incompetent and silly.
-
-
Also it's not a small city, merely a village. Not even a very nice one.
-
Not a village. My gaming PC can generate a 200 x 200 avatar in seconds
-
That being the case, let's have a couple of avatars.
-
-
129 comments