DLSS 4 introduced a transformer model architecture with NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50 Series GPUs. That enabled a leap in image quality over our previous convolutional neural network. The second-gen transformer model for DLSS 4.5 Super Resolution uses 5x more compute and is trained on an expanded data set, so it has greater context awareness of every scene and more intelligent use of pixel sampling and motion vectors.
“It AlTeRs ThE fINaL iMaGe So It GeNeRaTeS iMaGe DaTa” at this point. I don’t think you are even bothering to check just how many things you could call image generation at that point.
you took Nvidia’s news post’s wording as gospel.
“ThE dEvElOpEr Is LyInG!”
NVIDIA might be many things, in marketing particularly so, but in this particular blog it is not. Then again, it’s like what I said:
Perhaps what you are actually referring to is the tendency for people to justify lying and throwing shade about a thing if they hate the thing associated with it enough.
Ergo, now nothing NVIDIA says can be trusted now. If you were going to be this reductive, not sure why you didn’t open with this. It’s a clear win from your perspective, but I don’t think there’s any hope of a shared reality between us. It’s all a lie by big corpo, after all.
It’s funny how you complain about me not providing more links, while calling the most direct ones lies. All I would have done is having to subject a creator to the same sort of shade you are trying to throw at me. After all, if the primary source of information is lying, those reporting it are just spreading lies.
Not gonna subject other people to downvotes and harassment from assholes, they get enough of that already. I’m afraid you’ll just have to disingenuously act as if you can’t perform searches yourself or that they exist.
I already was pretty certain nothing that I said could convince you, but it’s going to be so funny when in a few months this take becomes so obviously bad. I like to type and edit, sue me, although it’s also funny how quickly you also decided to participate in the endeavor. Call it a chance to disengage.
It’s just tragic how having the capacity to know better, some people fool themselves. This is not image generation, buddy, and that’s what AI slop typically refers to. The term AI has long preceded the term AI slop.
Sorry, gonna have a wonderful day.
I call it how I see it - close minded because of how set you are arguing against something that seems rather evident, an asshole because you downvote first and don’t provide explanations without an ordeal of an interaction that immediately begins with belittling me with false claims (there was plenty of backing up you skipped over with your downvotes across the threads), and compared to MAGA because they are just such an evident example of people stuck in their own bubble through extreme confirmation bias and closed mindedness. I could be more respectful, but were you?
I think at this point in time, we have to come up with a term for these sort of threads: circlejerk slop. Guys, stop making generative AI look good, as bad as it is I’d choose it any day of the week over these circlejerk hallucinations. Do not expect them to carry across time and place.
I’ve actually just been corrected, this was referred to employ some form of generative AI by Jensen, who presumably did not lie in this instance. It’s also significantly different enough to what I generally thought of as AI slop and my issues with it that it could also be said that I am a supporter of generative AI now. I am surprised by the application of the label, but it does prove me wrong.
My guy you literally linked some guy fucking around in Special K as supposedly an explanation of the tech, you misread a marketing headline as being technically descriptive, and yourself even admit that it uses AI to generate which is the common usage nowadays for the label.of slop.
I definitely appreciate being called close minded, an asshole, and compared to MAGA for not agreeing with your personal stick up your ass about what you think is proper terminology though.
Is relying on the NVIDIA release and developer blogs as the primary source the misinformation? Because that’s what I’m relying on my basis. If not, could you clear it up, what is the misinformation I’m spreading?
I just want to make sure what you consider misinformation, because it might be something I consider fact, and it might just be a controversial opinion under the circumstances. If it is something I consider fact, I’m not going to argue it, but you are going to have to tell me what it actually is so that I censor myself.
In regards to my attitude, I’ll be nicer and just suffer the downvotes for relying on primary sources, it’s partly my fault since I already suspected that the conversation would not be fruitful, given the downvotes and initial premise.
Is it a limited to this particular community, or to the account?
NVIDIA ACE is a suite of AI technologies—spanning models, developers tools, and on-device inference—that’s designed to help middleware and game developers build knowledgeable, actionable, and conversational in-game characters. The NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 model is now available through NVIDIA ACE as an In-game Inferencing (IGI) SDK plugin. It simplifies the integration within your gaming pipeline and optimizes simultaneous AI inference and graphics processing for accelerated game performance
“Twenty-five years after NVIDIA invented the programmable shader, we are reinventing computer graphics once again,” said Jensen Huang, founder and CEO of NVIDIA. “DLSS 5 is the GPT moment for graphics — blending handcrafted rendering with generative AI to deliver a dramatic leap in visual realism while preserving the control artists need for creative expression.”
NVIDIA’s entire page is AI summaries and AI xyz tool, sdk, etc. Clearly they’re marketing this and are not hiding it.
Again, please take some time to reconsider before making condescending trollish posts. This kind of behavior is not tollerated on our instance.
Final warning. If you consider continuing to act in bad faith you will be banned.
I stand corrected, I would not have referred to the process being described as generative AI, and neither did the sources I watched. Thank you for the clarification. I wasn’t acting in bad faith, which unfortunately means I will have to take greater care, as something that I did not intend to seems to be happening, and it is under a rather broad definition. I’ll lay off of the topic, and thank you for the rather direct rebuttal, I would like to think I would have accepted it had it been offered elsewhere in the thread.
Feel free to bring up any other concerns, specially in case your warning extends beyond any other behavior beyond the current topic.
Confirmation bias and closed mindedness it is.
https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-dlss-4-5-delivers-super-resolution-upgrades-and-new-dynamic-multi-frame-generation/
(DLSS 4.5)
“It AlTeRs ThE fINaL iMaGe So It GeNeRaTeS iMaGe DaTa” at this point. I don’t think you are even bothering to check just how many things you could call image generation at that point.
“ThE dEvElOpEr Is LyInG!”
NVIDIA might be many things, in marketing particularly so, but in this particular blog it is not. Then again, it’s like what I said:
Ergo, now nothing NVIDIA says can be trusted now. If you were going to be this reductive, not sure why you didn’t open with this. It’s a clear win from your perspective, but I don’t think there’s any hope of a shared reality between us. It’s all a lie by big corpo, after all.
It’s funny how you complain about me not providing more links, while calling the most direct ones lies. All I would have done is having to subject a creator to the same sort of shade you are trying to throw at me. After all, if the primary source of information is lying, those reporting it are just spreading lies.
Not gonna subject other people to downvotes and harassment from assholes, they get enough of that already. I’m afraid you’ll just have to disingenuously act as if you can’t perform searches yourself or that they exist.
I already was pretty certain nothing that I said could convince you, but it’s going to be so funny when in a few months this take becomes so obviously bad. I like to type and edit, sue me, although it’s also funny how quickly you also decided to participate in the endeavor. Call it a chance to disengage.
It’s just tragic how having the capacity to know better, some people fool themselves. This is not image generation, buddy, and that’s what AI slop typically refers to. The term AI has long preceded the term AI slop.
Sorry, gonna have a wonderful day.
I call it how I see it - close minded because of how set you are arguing against something that seems rather evident, an asshole because you downvote first and don’t provide explanations without an ordeal of an interaction that immediately begins with belittling me with false claims (there was plenty of backing up you skipped over with your downvotes across the threads), and compared to MAGA because they are just such an evident example of people stuck in their own bubble through extreme confirmation bias and closed mindedness. I could be more respectful, but were you?
I think at this point in time, we have to come up with a term for these sort of threads: circlejerk slop. Guys, stop making generative AI look good, as bad as it is I’d choose it any day of the week over these circlejerk hallucinations. Do not expect them to carry across time and place.
I’ve actually just been corrected, this was referred to employ some form of generative AI by Jensen, who presumably did not lie in this instance. It’s also significantly different enough to what I generally thought of as AI slop and my issues with it that it could also be said that I am a supporter of generative AI now. I am surprised by the application of the label, but it does prove me wrong.
My guy you literally linked some guy fucking around in Special K as supposedly an explanation of the tech, you misread a marketing headline as being technically descriptive, and yourself even admit that it uses AI to generate which is the common usage nowadays for the label.of slop.
I definitely appreciate being called close minded, an asshole, and compared to MAGA for not agreeing with your personal stick up your ass about what you think is proper terminology though.
Have a rotten day.
Please refrain from spreading misinformation and toxic trolling. We do not condone this kind of behaviour on our instance.
Is relying on the NVIDIA release and developer blogs as the primary source the misinformation? Because that’s what I’m relying on my basis. If not, could you clear it up, what is the misinformation I’m spreading?
Is the misinformation present here? - https://lemmy.ca/post/61897561/22253720
Or here? - https://lemmy.ca/post/61900649/22251320
I just want to make sure what you consider misinformation, because it might be something I consider fact, and it might just be a controversial opinion under the circumstances. If it is something I consider fact, I’m not going to argue it, but you are going to have to tell me what it actually is so that I censor myself.
In regards to my attitude, I’ll be nicer and just suffer the downvotes for relying on primary sources, it’s partly my fault since I already suspected that the conversation would not be fruitful, given the downvotes and initial premise.
Is it a limited to this particular community, or to the account?
From your own link
and on NVIDIA’s own DLSS 5 announcement page:
NVIDIA’s entire page is AI summaries and AI xyz tool, sdk, etc. Clearly they’re marketing this and are not hiding it.
Again, please take some time to reconsider before making condescending trollish posts. This kind of behavior is not tollerated on our instance.
Final warning. If you consider continuing to act in bad faith you will be banned.
I stand corrected, I would not have referred to the process being described as generative AI, and neither did the sources I watched. Thank you for the clarification. I wasn’t acting in bad faith, which unfortunately means I will have to take greater care, as something that I did not intend to seems to be happening, and it is under a rather broad definition. I’ll lay off of the topic, and thank you for the rather direct rebuttal, I would like to think I would have accepted it had it been offered elsewhere in the thread.
Feel free to bring up any other concerns, specially in case your warning extends beyond any other behavior beyond the current topic.