←back to thread

1503 points participant3 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
MgB2 ◴[] No.43574927[source]
Idk, the models generating what are basically 1:1 copies of the training data from pretty generic descriptions feels like a severe case of overfitting to me. What use is a generational model that just regurgitates the input?

I feel like the less advanced generations, maybe even because of their limitations in terms of size, were better at coming up with something that at least feels new.

In the end, other than for copyright-washing, why wouldn't I just use the original movie still/photo in the first place?

replies(13): >>43575052 #>>43575080 #>>43575231 #>>43576085 #>>43576153 #>>43577026 #>>43577350 #>>43578381 #>>43578512 #>>43578581 #>>43579012 #>>43579408 #>>43582494 #
ramraj07 ◴[] No.43578381[source]
So I train a model to say y=2, and then I ask the model to guess the value of y and it says 2, and you call that overfitting?

Overfitting is if you didn't exactly describe Indiana Jones and then it still gave Indiana Jones.

replies(2): >>43578447 #>>43579929 #
MgB2 ◴[] No.43578447[source]
The prompt didn't exactly describe Indiana Jones though. It left a lot of freedom for the model to make the "archeologist" e.g. female, Asian, put them in a different time period, have them wear a different kind of hat etc.

It didn't though, it just spat out what is basically a 1:1 copy of some Indiana Jones promo shoot. No where did the prompt ask for it to look like Harrison Ford.

replies(3): >>43578572 #>>43582523 #>>43585657 #
1. crooked-v ◴[] No.43585657[source]
Or even just 'obvious Indiana Jones knockoff who isn't literally Harrison Ford'. Comics do that kind of thing constantly for various obviously inspired but legally distinct characters.