
Knitters teamed up with a neural-network creator to generate new shapes - cardamomo
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/03/the-making-of-skyknit-an-ai-yarn/554894/?single_page=true
======
allenz
More pictures: [https://www.ravelry.com/patterns/library/skyknit-the-
collect...](https://www.ravelry.com/patterns/library/skyknit-the-collection)

~~~
wool_gather
Thanks for sharing that link. There are some really beautiful pieces in there!
Natural, but with a strange edge. Regular enough to be pleasing, but
unpredictable enough to be interesting.

This one in particular [https://www.ravelry.com/patterns/library/skyknit-the-
collect...](https://www.ravelry.com/patterns/library/skyknit-the-
collection/slideshow?fullscreen=1&start=74308574) reminds me of Wolfram's
timeplot CA renderings.

------
mkl
It would be interesting to see this combined with simulation [1], which might
itself need another neural network (or manually written "fixer") to interpret
the ambiguous instructions.

[1] Kaldor et al - "Simulating Knitted Cloth at the Yarn Level"
[https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~srm/publications/SG08-knit.html](https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~srm/publications/SG08-knit.html)

------
bhouston
It seems like overly optimistic interpretations of crappy/noisy neural network
output. I could be wrong though.

~~~
justonepost
Weirdly high rated though. Lots of pictures. Clearly someone likes this.
Something is happening here. Any knitters that can explain?

~~~
cimmanom
Why do we like Conways game of life? Why are we interested in AI-generated
art?

I found the outcomes delightful and hilarious (there are lots of photos in one
of the other sites linked to from the article).

Perhaps more interesting is the collaboration between humans and AI to turn
the AI's "imagination" into something that physically exists.

------
paulie_a
I am usually not a fan of puns, but skyknit is gold

------
gajeam
In this piece, Alexis Madrigal gives one of the all time most straightforward
descriptions of how neural nets work. Kudos.

