Vali2003

Most AI outputs are useless and annoying

52 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, Vali2003 said:

I think the image-generation and audio- generation will continue to develop quite well though.

I have the most experience with AI image gen. It is incapable of making images of things it wasn't already trained with.

So, no, image gen is very creatively bankrupt and limited.


You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Leo Gura wrong but you need to be creative to create them ( using stitching of others prompt to feed it in )
for instance I can doodle something bad on paper and use seedream 4 - 4k to recreate it in others genre or style.

But on midjourney using the function prompt adding images is the only way to make it creative.
Also obviously you need iteration, and curation if you want to do serious things.

 just a first time trying with stupid low level doodle

PXL_20250919_182454130.jpg

ggg.png

Screenshot_9hhh.pngScreenshot_10hh.png


freepik__turn-one-of-those-character-into-a-live-action-rea__11350.pnghhhgh.png


final video 

freepik__a-whimsical-scene-unfolds-as-a-fantastical-creatur__36647 (2).mp4
https://streamable.com/rsz31s

you can say it's not respecting the initial doogle but overall I wasn't going for reproduction, just playing around, it's true that it have trouble fixating on new geometry ( but I could have done it, so maybe not the best experimentation, I encourage doing it yourself, you can get redraw that might look very close of your initial traits. )


The kind of project I usually do :
 



It was mostly with midjourney for the initial shot, then iteration on nano banana from google, almost all the videos is done with midjourney, music is a suno creation too.

yeh 99% of what ai does is not so good yet, but it will be.
Most artistic people do not touch ai for survival/political/economic reasoning.
Also most of art is only remixing data, there is no "novel art" that truly exist, the more I did art ( before ai ) the more I felt like everything is the same and all patterns have the same core feature.

Edited by AerisVahnEphelia

nowhere in the bio  @VahnAeris 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a computer doesn’t do what you want. The computer isn’t stupid. You are. Improve your prompts (prompt engineering helped me a lot) or wait for others to improve the models while you are whining.  

Edited by AION

In stercore invenitur 💩 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AerisVahnEphelia aren't you proving Leo's point? 

You are training it in your example. He said without training it is incapable of making new images.


Deal with the issue now, on your terms, in your control. Or the issue will deal with you, in ways you won't appreciate, and cannot control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AerisVahnEphelia Do a set of Goku from Dragon Ball doing ten most common yoga poses using your techinque. I bet you will fail miserably. Start with the Downward-facing Dog pose. It's freaking impossible to create such pictures in the same consistent style and all from the same perspective, so they can be used alongside. More so, it's even impossible to get Goku into the position. Some positions are possible, but downward dog? Hell, nah. Image AI was shit in my experience.

It fails even with a creative input like you do. Notice, in your example, you are the one being creative by doodling, not the AI.

Edited by Girzo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AION That’s what they always say. My point is that it’s actually false. Everybody just bought into this narrative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

A child does not need to memorize 1,000,000 books to be intelligent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Natasha Tori Maru This is not training; these are prompting techniques.
What Leo referred to is trained data (pre-trained).
Also, the images being fed do not train the model; they guide it, which is different from what “training” means in the context of AI.
 

Edited by AerisVahnEphelia

nowhere in the bio  @VahnAeris 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Girzo show me the pose or doodle the basic of it.

First, let’s be clear: AI is not creative in any genuine sense, because the act of observation, selection, and curation; the process of assigning meaning or value is and will always be ( with our current tech ), performed by a human.
What you all seem to talk about : “a robot having its own choices and doing things” this does not exist.

People often speak of AI as if it were a conscious agent with self-awareness.
In reality, no such system exists today. Current ""AI"" models are large probabilistic pattern generators, trained to predict the next most likely token, pixel, or data point based on vast datasets. (At least that’s the current myth; real capabilities are understood only through practice; no one truly knows what these systems are capable of.)

AI simulates creativity through statistical recombination of patterns learned from human-created data; but it does not possess intent, understanding, or awareness of what it generates. 

But it doesn’t matter what we call it; I think this thing is awesome. I don’t care if it’s AGI or not or AI or Poneypopcorn. It’s not yet where I want it to be, but in just one year it captured my full attention again when I saw the video quality in January.

So if "AI" is retarded, you are retarded.
If "AI" is genius, you are a genius.

What we have is mainly a mirror of ourselves and our own data through the lense of a collective unification of patterns, and the output is only as good as the input.

Be beautiful in your thoughts, and you’ll get something beautiful back.
Is the mirror limited in its reflection?

 

Yeah, sure. But I wouldn’t dare to call myself anything but a genius even with a tiny reducted glimpse of my infinite self, but you do you.
I’m always guilty if anything I touch turns out to be anything less than genius.

Edited by AerisVahnEphelia

nowhere in the bio  @VahnAeris 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AerisVahnEphelia said:

So if AI is retarded, you are retarded.
If AI is genius, you are a genius.

What we have is a mirror of ourselves, and the output is only as good as the input.

Completely not the case. It's AI that is retarded and tries to make Goku look like wolf or a dog because the yoga pose has the word dog in it. Or the famous glass of wine full to the brim example, it just can't imagine this.

Here's the pose: 

Zrzut ekranu 2025-10-12 o 18.58.22.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Girzo said:

Completely not the case. It's AI that is retarded and tries to make Goku look like wolf or a dog because the yoga pose has the word dog in it. Or the famous glass of wine full to the brim example, it just can't imagine this.

Here's the pose: 

Zrzut ekranu 2025-10-12 o 18.58.22.png

I won't take an hour on it, 5/10 min and you got a funny video in bonus

( midjourney blocked san goku though, it's all seedream 4 - 4k, beautiful strongest chinese model beyond google if you ask me. )

freepik__do-san-goku-from-dragon-ball-z-like-img2-in-the-po__75232.jpeg

freepik__give-him-his-4-leg__75233.jpeg

( I could have done the first pose with the dog tail, but really I m not doing 1h of it, you get the idea that we can )

& I did you a funny vid of the pose hailuo2 video low quality model :  freepik__the-world-become-a-anime-manga-dragon-ball-forest-__99202.mp4

prompt video : the world become a anime manga dragon ball forest around him as he backflip from the yoga pose

Edited by AerisVahnEphelia

nowhere in the bio  @VahnAeris 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find AI effective at phrasing things in a succinct way. That is so far it's most useful aspect to me. I give it an idea and it'll phrase it much better. You can't really trust it to be truthful, so that's what ends up being it's prime use in my opinion. 

It's also pretty good for funnies. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AerisVahnEphelia That is cool but you are providing the novelty there.

AI is good for refining your own creative work, polishing it up.

I am not saying AI isn't useful. It is. I use AI to polish up my work. But AI cannot replace my work.

Edited by Leo Gura

You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AerisVahnEphelia
 

You’re right that if AI is retarded, you’re retarded to a certain extent. There is also a limit to this, though, because you can only prompt an AI with relatively little detail, compared to the input a human can make a decision with. 

For example, take a writer, who has written millions of words in their career. They’ll  probably have learned hundreds of lessons about writing by that point. If they’re a good writer, all these lessons manifest in a sense of intuition, or feeling-sense. This sense then tells them why one sentence may be better than another, for example. 

Is the writer that’s not able to prompt this level of genius to an AI retarded? 

No, the AI simple can’t compute this way because it isn’t a mind. This is where the intelligence of AI is strongly limited. And — especially true for text — outputs, therefore, will feel ungrounded and unholistic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Basman It is good at that but it also makes the writing feel so bland. It erases all personality. Not all filler is actually bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is every time you are using an LMM, you are using it. It doesn't use itself. ChatGPT doesn't prick you on your shoulder to ask you a question. It doesn't have inbuilt sensory or perceptual structures for how to perceive objects in the real world or a drive to evolve or discover new things. It doesn't have the agency that living breathing intelligent organisms have. It's a computer program. To go from a computer program to a living being with agency, that is a major problem that needs to be solved before we get "real" AGI.

Edited by Carl-Richard

Intrinsic joy = being x meaning ²

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if it had agency it would still not be AGI because it is incapable of true creativity.

It can't do general reasoning. It is faking general reasoning by aping human writings. But reasoning is not aping.

A child can ape like he is doing math by memorizing things, but that's not real math.

Edited by Leo Gura

You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Even if it had agency it would still not be AGI because it is incapable of true creativity.

It can't do general reasoning. It is faking general reasoning by aping human writings.

Some think for agency to occur, you need something resembling the drive for self-preservation, you need complex sense organs, you need complex perceptual structures, essentially you need something that mimics if not is virtually identical to biology.

Abstract thought, the thing we do and experience, is most fundamentally abstracted sensory and perceptual mechanisms. If there is nothing that resembles the concrete sensory-perceptual structures underneath, it's unlikely that there is such a thing as thought, let alone creative thought.

And if creativity of thought relies on or correlates with the spontaneous variation and intelligence that arises from our biology, to reproduce that in machines, you would here too need to make something resembling biology.

Edited by Carl-Richard

Intrinsic joy = being x meaning ²

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Carl-Richard said:

Some think for agency to occur, you need the drive for self-preservation, you need complex sense organs, you need complex perceptual structures, essentially you need something that mimics if not is virtually identical to biology.

I don't think that is necessary.

Self-preservation seems pretty easy to program in. Self-preservation exists in systems without complex sense organs.

There are much deeper challenges here like genuine creativity and intelligence. Can such things be had without consciousness?


You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AerisVahnEphelia ah yes I get it, I think I was misunderstanding 'training' here.

For me to really take AI seriously in a grander sense, I would have to see real creativity independent of human input. 

For now I just use it to render construction images for client proposals.

Depends totally on input 


Deal with the issue now, on your terms, in your control. Or the issue will deal with you, in ways you won't appreciate, and cannot control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now