[AndrewKemendo]

At the end of the day it didn't blow people away and that's the real reason it failed to land. You can't release something like this on the heels of Stable Diffusion and not expect people to be underwhelmed. This is a user-centric design problem.

It actually takes experimentation and skill to get anything useful out of Galactica and you have to actually have some sense of prompt engineering principles for it to work. Lecun literally just made this point on Twitter [0] but fails to address why this design problem (ease of use) was the reason - instead claiming it was because people are being too rough.

Compare that to all the recent StableDiffusion/Vision Transformer demos where people with literally zero computer literacy can just type in a string of nonsense and get out something interesting. The barrier to entry to a "first meaningful paint" for stable diffusion is being able to speak English and having access to the internet. That's it.

Discussion about AI safety are always present when new FOSS AI tools come out. But when it "just works" and "works like magic" then those voices are drowned out with: "OMG it's the robot apocalypse, but check out this silly picture"

[1]https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1594001407958564864

[rossjudson]

In the domain of text, garbage is not amusing. In the domain of images, it often is.

[heresie-dabord]

You make a subtle point.

The human mind is tightly coupled to language. The existence of humour is the most prominent -- yet not fully recognised -- example of this coupling.

We can share images and enjoy interpreting them. The image can be as random as splashes of paint. But throw random words at humans, or words that fail to cohere, and disputes arise.

To modify one of the criticisms already made: The entire WWW is "little more than statistical nonsense at scale."

[anonymouskimmer]

I think the mistake here is science versus art. In science garbage is not intriguing (though AI generated images can be disturbingly well done), in art it can be amusing whether text or imagery.

"Twas Brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe. All mimsy were the borogoves and the mome raths outgrabe." (Pardon misspellings, I'm doing this from long-ago memory.)

Also, madlibs.

[spacechild1]

> In the domain of text, garbage is not amusing.

I disagree. For example, I find the following pretty hilarious: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33673193

[AndrewKemendo]

In fact that is the core distinction in my opinion