But instead of learning stable diffusion and training their own model for better results for free, they’re paying a service for 100 images that likely won’t be well trained.
They could also just have someone take a picture of them for a perfect photorealistic result.
There is no reason for most people to get the hardware and put in the effort to train their own AI, just like we don’t expect everyone to be an expert on servicing their own car or flying their own plane.
If you have that hobby, cool, but most people don’t and never will.
But instead of learning stable diffusion and training their own model for better results for free, they’re paying a service for 100 images that likely won’t be well trained.
They could also just have someone take a picture of them for a perfect photorealistic result.
There is no reason for most people to get the hardware and put in the effort to train their own AI, just like we don’t expect everyone to be an expert on servicing their own car or flying their own plane.
If you have that hobby, cool, but most people don’t and never will.
I love this take because it’s the modern ML version of shaming someone for not brewing their own beer
I’m speaking in the context of the article which posits that AI is flawed.
I’m arguing that it’s not flawed if you do it right, but the services that provide cheap AI headshots are lacklustre.
I don’t expect everyone to learn it, but I also don’t think you should say it’s flawed unless you’ve tried to do it properly.