[Rantenki]

OK, that's cool, but those fonts are all terrible. The serifs are all different sizes and shapes, sometimes on the same letter. The kerning looks like a random walk. The stroke widths are all over the place, and/or the hinting is busted.

Now, that said, it's pretty amazing that this works at all, but it'll take some pretty specific training on a model to get something that can compete with a human made font that's curated for good usability _and_ aesthetics.

Sadly, we'll also probably see adoption of these kinds of fonts (along with graphic design, illustration, songwriting, screenwriting, etc)... because "meh, good enough" combined with some Dunning-Kruger.

TL;DR: Thanks, I hate it.

[jeron]

I don't think any self respecting graphic designer would use these fonts in its current state but it's a cool proof of concept and could be improved upon to a more usable state

[BoorishBears]

> Sadly, we'll also probably see adoption of these kinds of fonts (along with graphic design, illustration, songwriting, screenwriting, etc)... because "meh, good enough" combined with some Dunning-Kruger.

Ironic bringing up Dunning-Kruger as you treat generic RLHF as a "pretty specific training" and make sweeping declarations about how people will use AI as if the current SOTA of several of the tasks you just mentioned didn't come from not settling for "meh, good enough" and instead applying the "pretty specific training" you alluded to (see Midjourney)

[Rantenki]

I never mentioned reinforcement learning, and my DK statement was completely around using flawed fonts for graphic design, etc.

My partner _is_ a professional graphic designer, and we _have_ seen some pretty terrible client graphics that came out of Midjourney. They're amazing for what they are, but it's very difficult to get something out of it that competes with a professional illustrator, even ignoring the whole copyrighted content in the model issue.

[BoorishBears]

Reinforcement learning from human feeedback is the training you're referring to, you just don't realize it.

RLHF is why 2 years ago "They're amazing for what they are" would have been "They're so hideous no one in their right mind would use them", and why in 2 years that too will be some weaker form of argument.

There's no special knowledge needed to know "I like X over Y": RLHF allows a model to turn that into guidance at a scale that's never been possible before.

[fennecfoxy]

I mean the Ford Model T is pretty fucking terrible by today's standards, just saying.