Right, but this library is designed only to be used with a fast.ai model (and the hope is that fast.ai practitioners will find it helpful). I suppose you could create your own backend that worked with another library if you wanted to take the time, but that's not how it's designed.
EDIT: Regardless, I've updated some of the language on the readme to be more clear that this is not an official fast.ai product (and made it more clear in the header that it uses fast.ai models), because I do think your criticism had some validity and I really do appreciate the feedback.
Hi! I can see where you're coming from; however, since this product is initially intended to tightly work in conjunction with Render, which uses the fast.ai name in it's repo (https://github.com/render-examples/fastai-v3) and the fact that this model (to my limited knowledge) only works with models produced by fast.ai, making a clear naming distinction was crucial so that someone creating models using another library would realize they couldn't use this. If you have a suggestion for how to make that distinction in a clear and concise manner without coming across as an official product I would definitely be willing to hear you out!
Good question! Like I mentioned in the readme, I'm hoping to add a flask server soon; however, render is recommended on the fast.ai website and is the simplest way to get a model running (https://course.fast.ai/deployment_render.html), so I thought connecting my app to render would be the most helpful way for fast.ai practitioners to get started.
OP here: I shouldn't have added the word 'etc' to the list of things it classified, but have changed the readme to show a full list of objects that the demo works with. My intent was not to make a classifier for any and all objects, to serve as a demonstration of what someone could use the app for.
EDIT: Regardless, I've updated some of the language on the readme to be more clear that this is not an official fast.ai product (and made it more clear in the header that it uses fast.ai models), because I do think your criticism had some validity and I really do appreciate the feedback.