Emerging technology – Social Blog

No ratings yet.

I have tried Dall·E after reading so many posts about how it would revolutionize someone’s business and I was very disappointed.

Dall·E is a project developed by OpenAI, the same organization behind models like GPT-3 (ChatGPT). Dall·E in opposition to ChatGPT creates images from prompts that were given to it (OpenAI, n.d.). It uses deep learning technology such as Variational Autoencoders (VAEs) and Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs). VAEs allow to represent complex data in a more compact form and the GANs are used to create as realistic images as possible by constantly creating fake images and putting them to the test by a discriminator that will discard the image if it deems it fake (Lawton, 2023; Blei et al., 2017). The business world and most of the LinkedIn posts I saw were idolizing such technology and explained how this could enhance humans in several ways. One way that was relevant to me was the creation of images, signs or pictograms that will enhance the potential of PowerPoint presentations.

After writing my thesis last year, I had to create a PowerPoint to present the main points of my thesis. I thought it would be a great way to start using Dall·E and tried creating my own visuals to have a clear representation of what my thesis entailed. After many tries, even with the best prompts I could write, even with the help of ChatGPT, none of the visuals that came out of it looked real or defined, it was just abstract art that represented nothing really.

Reflecting on that experience, I thought that sometimes, the fascination people have for groundbreaking technology clouds its practical applications. I do not doubt that Dall·E can create great visuals and can be fun to play with, however, it does not always adapt seamlessly to specific creative needs.

Ultimately, using Dall·E made me remember that we should always stay critical and manage expectations when it comes to groundbreaking emerging technology. It is appealing to listen to all the promises that come with disruptive technologies but sometimes we realize that no tool is one-size-fits-all.

References

Blei, D. M., Kucukelbir, A., & McAuliffe, J. D. (2017). Variational inference: A review for statisticians, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 112 (518), pp. 859–877.

Lawton, G. (2023) ‘GANs vs. VAEs: What is the Best Generative AI Approach?’, Techtarget.
Retrieved from: https://www.techtarget.com/searchenterpriseai/feature/GANs-vs-VAEs-What-is-the-best-generative-AI-approach

OpenAI. (n.d.). Dall·E 2. DALL·E 2. https://openai.com/dall-e-2/

No ratings yet. CabinetCo*, a children’s design furniture company, struggles with the problem of high lead time and production costs. The bottleneck in the production process are the window frames of the cabinets. Due to the labour-intensive nature of these window frames, the supplier repeatedly exceeds the agreed delivery time. To solve this problem CabinetCo considers a 3D-printing solution that has recently been proposed by a 3D printing company. We consult CabinetCo by investigating the possibilities of 3D printing. Two alternatives are considered:

The first one is 3D printing a high injection mould for the window frames. By injecting these steel moulds with plastic material, window frames can be produced quickly. In order to create window frames that are similar to the current wooden window frames wood-plastic-composite material can be used to mimic the natural material wood.

The second alternative is to print the window frames with an 3D printer. “The downside of 3D printing is that it is limited to a narrow range of plastic, ceramic, biological and metal materials compared to traditional manufacturing processes” (Basiliere, 2016). Therefore we evaluated this solution for two kinds of materials: plastic and wood filament. Wood filament is a mix of plastic and wood fibres that tries to imitate the natural material wood.

Our findings suggest that CabinetCo should not consider 3D printing of the window frames, as this technique will not reduce costs or lead time. The better alternative is the development of a high injection mould, after which the window frames will be constructed of wood-plastic-composites. This will reduce the yearly production costs. Also, it will reduce the lead time with 3 weeks. However, this solution contains a high risk of damaging the authentic image of CabinetCo because the cabinets will be not made out of 100% handmade wood anymore. Therefore, an investment in 3D printing is not recommended. Laser cutting and water jetting are raised as alternative possibilities that require further research.

*Note: Due to a confidence agreement we replaced the company’s name by a fictive name

Source:

Basiliere, P. (2016) What 3D Printing Means for Your Supply Chain [Online] http://blogs.gartner.com/pete-basiliere/2016/04/12/what-3d-printing-means-for-your-supply-chain/

Digital Transformation Project – 3D printing technology

13

Please rate this

21

Please rate this

13

Please rate this