@Evia@lemmy.world avatar
SpudNoodle avatar

I guess a third hand would make it easier to deal with working directly from the skein?? It kinda reminds me of all the cheap product listings where knitting needles are pictured with crochet fabric/being modeled like crochet hooks (& vice versa)...

@Evia@lemmy.world avatar

I didn’t even notice the third hand! I was too busy worrying about her crooked needles and the 10-row drop stitches at her wrist. I definitely see what you mean re. poor advertising. It’s like when a character’s knitting on tv and they clearly don’t know what they’re doing!

SpudNoodle avatar

One giant drop stitch is a good description for the fabric, with maybe some macrame in the middle there...

@Evia@lemmy.world avatar

Believe it or not, it didn’t improve with refinement. AI just isn’t there yet


This is amazing. I sent the link to a buddy of mine who has been using chatGPT to help with simple coding things (which he’s not supposed to, so shhh). It has the same problem as AI “art”. At first it looks OK, then the more you look at it, the freakier it gets. Then it just becomes unhinged.


Wow, this looked okay in the thumbnail, but the more I zoom in, the more wtf it gets. It reminds me a little bit of those pictures of webs spun by spiders who had been given psychoactive substances.

SpudNoodle avatar

I thought about that also! In a proper lace weight yarn it would look like a web made by a spider on drugs. Halloween decoration, maybe?


Ooh, that would be fun! Now I’m just wondering if I have anything in my stash that would work. I think the closest I have to lace weight right now is embroidery floss, which would be a mess, but that might be a plus for Halloween purposes.

@thegiddystitcher@lemm.ee avatar

Haha, this thread is amazing. I mean, it’s not surprising given that AI apparently can’t even do basic sums, but I’m so here for the dedication to Science.

Glad to know our mad lace skillz will still be in demand, if nothing else!


I asked ChatGPT to give me a pattern for a cabled shawl. I had to heavily modify it because each row was a different # of stitches, but even after I got uniformity on stitches… it just looked atrocious.

I wanted a cabled shawl, I got a scarf made of yarn intestines.

SpudNoodle avatar

Oh wow yeah, that’s pretty bad! (Although your stitches are gorgeous) Did you finish making it?


I did not, it was just something to keep me busy waiting for my fancy yarn to come in for another project. Plus it was kind of awful trying to cable, it was so tight a stretch in spots! All in all a very unenjoyable pattern.


I admire all of you who are taking the time to knit these monstrosities. Pattern designers are still safe!

SpudNoodle avatar

Another pic here

Remember SkyKnit? The hilariously bad attempt at generating knitting patterns with a neural network? (link on Ravelry)

Well, ChatGTP is here to remind us all that AI is still terrible at knitting.

I asked it to generate a couple patterns for me, and it did indeed spit out some patterns that didn't look terribly off... The needle size and stich counts looked okay for what appeared to be a toe-up/gusseted sock pattern. I'm not a super fast knitter, and can't exactly bang out a sock just to see what happens, so I asked for something simpler. How about a lace pattern over a 12 stitch by 8 row repeat?

I got the following:

Row 1: k1, yo, k2tog, k2, ssk, yo, k1, p1, k1, p1; repeat from * to * to end of row. Row 2: p1, k1, p1, k3, p3, k1, p1, k1, p1; repeat from * to * to end of row. Row 3: k1, yo, k2tog, k1, ssk, yo, k3, yo, ssk, k1, k2tog, yo, k1, p1; repeat from * to * to end of row. Row 4: p1, k1, p1, k2, p5, k1, p1, k1, p1; repeat from * to * to end of row. Row 5: k1, yo, k2tog, yo, ssk, k2, k2tog, yo, k3, yo, ssk, yo, k1, p1; repeat from * to * to end of row. Row 6: p1, k1, p1, k1, p7, k1, p1, k1, p1; repeat from * to * to end of row. Row 7: k1, yo, k3tog, yo, k3, yo, ssk, k2tog, yo, k3, yo, k3tog, yo, k1, p1; repeat from * to * to end of row. Row 8: p1, k1, p1, p9, k1, p1, k1, p1; repeat from * to * to end of row.

Aside from the fact that I hugely prefer charts over written instructions, that didn't look too bad, so I happily cast on a couple dozen stitches to see what AI lace would look like. And almost immediately realized it was much worse that it looked. Here's the breakdown I ended up with:
Row 1: 11 sts in the repeat
Row 2: 13 sts
Row 3: 16 sts
Row 4: 14 sts
Row 5: 17 sts in the repeat, and an extra YO that isn't balanced with a decrease (+1 st every time the row is worked)
Row 6: 15 sts
Row 7: 19 sts
Row 8: 16 sts

In the sample I ended up working, I just worked the repeat as much as I could until I got through 24 sts for each, and then worked 4-5 repeats of Rows 1-8. I cast it off, held it up to the light, and burst out laughing. It's chaos.

(In an unfortunate misstep, my partner said it looked pretty good, "like the stuff you usually make." I did forgive him for this.)

It is a short repeat lace in the end, so there is a regularity to the pattern, and it did seem like the AI understood that YOs and decreases are often near each other, but it just couldn't organize into anything pleasing.

I tried again a few days later, spending some time to confirm that ChatGTP understood the knitting terms and the concept of stitch counts before asking for additional lace patterns. It never got there. Stitch counts continued to fluctuate wildly. Turns out, the large language models are really, really bad at math.

There are definitely parameters to lace patterns, and with some specified rules it seems like it should be easy for AI to come up with something workable. But it can't, because AI doesn't actually think. It doesn't even know how to count.

Knitting patterns are often compared to programming - both are just lines of instructions. But what makes knitting as a hobby so wonderful is the human element. Someone somewhere sits down and comes up with a pattern, arranges it into a series of symbols (or letters if you insist on written instructions), and then I can come along and create something out of that with my hands. The item doesn't exist without my effort, and it's clear that AI doesn't have any place on the other end of the deal.

So that's it. AI still can't knit. We're still safe from SkyKnit.

(It's ironic in a way that I'm posting this here on the Fediverse, instead of the site which shall not be named, due to changes that were in part blamed on LLM/AI data scraping. It's also been fun to explain to my fellow engineers that I don't trust ChatGTP's "technical" answers very much because it can't knit.)

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • knitting@lemmy.world
  • tester
  • magazineikmin
  • khanakhh
  • InstantRegret
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • everett
  • mdbf
  • slotface
  • ngwrru68w68
  • DreamBathrooms
  • kavyap
  • osvaldo12
  • rosin
  • JUstTest
  • Durango
  • tacticalgear
  • modclub
  • cubers
  • GTA5RPClips
  • ethstaker
  • normalnudes
  • cisconetworking
  • Leos
  • megavids
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • lostlight
  • All magazines