No, GPT-3 still produces gibberish at times. The majority of the good examples still ramble like a schizophrenic person. Much of the output is uncanny, interesting, and impressive in its own right but I wouldn't describe it as human level.
DALL-E 2 is different from what I've seen. The things it produces seem to actually make sense the majority of the time. The outputs are strikingly similar to what a competent human might output as opposed to one with a severe mental illness.
I'm sure part of this is an inherent advantage that DALL-E enjoys regarding context. Art is supposed to be artistic whereas text is expected to maintain long distance logical consistency of abstract concepts across a stream of output and also to communicate something concrete. So in a sense the bar for art is probably lower in many ways.
The difference is I've had the chance to play with GPT-3 extensively and I've only got 2nd hand access to Dall-E 2.
GPT-3 amazes me and occasionally disappoints me. But it's still something I never thought I'd see in my lifetime. I suppose I'm still putting GPT-2 and Dall-E 2 in the same ball park because they are both so far beyond what I thought would be possible from what are essentially brute force methods.
You cannot absorb words as fast as pictures. GTP-3 is more impressive as it seems to have auch broader depth of understanding context. The disadvantage of GTP-3 is that it is sometimes very wrong like with simple math problems
Yes, and if you look at the "blue cube on a red cube beside a yellow sphere" example, it's clear that there are other areas where it simply lacks the semantic basis to get a request that needs to be correct in a non-image sense right. It knows letters, and that letters come in sequences related to things it might paint, but it has no very good dictionary mapping those sequences to things; it knows how to draw a cube, and a sphere, but the semantics of "on" and "beside" are largely absent.
I don't think that is terribly surprising, nor a very cogent detraction from the model.
DALL-E 2 is different from what I've seen. The things it produces seem to actually make sense the majority of the time. The outputs are strikingly similar to what a competent human might output as opposed to one with a severe mental illness.
I'm sure part of this is an inherent advantage that DALL-E enjoys regarding context. Art is supposed to be artistic whereas text is expected to maintain long distance logical consistency of abstract concepts across a stream of output and also to communicate something concrete. So in a sense the bar for art is probably lower in many ways.