[suprjami]

Because code either works or it doesn't. Nobody is replacing our entire income stream with an LLM.

You also need a knowledge of code to instruct an LLM to generate decent code, and even then it's not always perfect.

Meanwhile plenty of people are using free/cheap image generation and going "good enough". Now they don't need to pay a graphic artist or a stock photo licence

Any layperson can describe what they want a picture to look like so the barrier to entry and successful exit is a lot lower for LLM image generation than for LLM code generation.

[jodrellblank]

> "Meanwhile plenty of people are using free/cheap image generation and going "good enough". Now they don't need to pay a graphic artist or a stock photo licence"

and getting sandwich photos of ham blending into human fingers:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Wellthatsucks/comments/1f8bvb8/my_l...

[saurik]

And yet, even knowing what I was looking for, I didn't see it long enough that I guessed I misunderstood and swiped to the second image, where it was pointed out specifically. Even if I had noticed myself--presumably because I was staring at it for way too long in the restaurant--I can't imagine I would have guessed what was going on, BUT EVEN THEN it just wouldn't have mattered... clearly, this is more than merely a "good enough" image.

[datavirtue]

At best it's a prototype and concept generator. It would have to yield assets with layers that can be exported by an illustration or bitmap tool of choice. AI generated images are almost completely useless as-is.

[suprjami]

I agree there are plenty of images with garbled text and hands with 7 fingers, but text to image has freely available generators which create almost perfect images for some prompts. Certainly good enough to replace an actor holding a product, a stock photo, and often a stylised design.