I think main idea is to open source whatever trained on this thing.

Open ai want to share their datasets and train new gpt? Well, nice for everyone.

Well we usually expect it from not really ds peoples like biologists using ds methods and making such a trivial mistake.

It doesnt seems hard to search matches in text. Unlike other data types.

Idk, internet is big.

Don't trust my sample, try yourself.

Idk

So its all im2im?

Colab.

But yeah, usually such big models are tested on huge scales.

Some cherry picked comparisons with tens samples shows nothing.

>so it appears they mostly removed human anatomy, weapons, certain contemporary artists, celebrity faces, etc.

Ah, appears.

How many data samples you tested for this conclusion?

"accuse of censorship" was about worst artists styles prompts.

And gived how some artists whined about model, some peoples on stable diffusion subbredit started conspiracy about due "legal issues they’re facing" they removed (censored) some artists from data and gave us lobotomized model.

Which probably doesnt happened to my opinion, gived they said they changed text encoder.

>The model is censored for NSFW content

I mean not related to porn things like greg rudkowski prompt.

>is because they were included in Clip's training set

Basically what i said.

To add to it, non random weight might be worse for tiny/simple models.

But modern vision models should be fine with it.

Like bert text weights is a good starting point for images classification.

I like how community overreact because some prompts have reduced quality (probably due to the new text encoder) and accuse of censorship.

Just rescale it to -1, 1 like people do for image

> and you may be better off starting from scratch.

Basically you compare random wights and good trained weights. Why latter should be worst?

Just replace gru with transformer and keep cnn as positional encoding.