12 ms·
My deepfake DALL-E 2 vacation photos passed the Turing Test
- hnthrowaway0328 4y agoI think the Turing Test is more than that?
- dekhn 4y agoThe turing test isn't very useful. At its core, it merely tests whether a computational agent can imitate a humnan agent well enough to fool an typical individual. Which tells us nothing at all.
- lupire 4y agoWe are so blase about the amazing progress in computation.
- dekhn 4y agoThere's nothing in the turing test or systems that solve it that are really amazing progress. To me they are just an expected and obvious outcome of the general improvement of scientific modelling of reality. Here's something that I'm not blase about: AlphaFold. That is one of the crowning achievments of humanity. It solved a problem that people have been working hard on for 40 years using an algorithm that is less than 5 years old on a computational framework that's a couple years old, on hardware with ML training powers orders of magnitude higher than anything that existed 5 years ago, and conclusively demonstrated that evolutionary sequence information, rather than physical modelling, is sufficient to predict nearly all protein structures. And, once the best competitor had a hint how it was done, they were able to reproduce (much of) the work in less than a year. Now that's amazing. World-class. Nobel-prize worthy. Totally unexpected for at least another 10 years, if ever. Completely resets the landscape of expectations for anybody doing biological modelling. However, it also won't transform drug discovery any time soon.
- killerstorm 4y agoTuring did not mention a "typical individual". The question is whether it's possible to make AI which is indistinguishable from a human. Obviously, it makes sense if an interrogator comes prepared if we want to test this.
- gopher_space 4y agoWe had AI indistinguishable from a bored teen who isn't really into the conversation decades ago. It's also really easy to pass a turing test if your model is a pissed off friend who won't respond to your texts. Who are we trying to talk to, I wonder?
- killerstorm 4y agoWell, Turing explicitly formulated it as a _game_, and for a game to be meaningful, players have to understand rules and have a desire to win. And given that the question was "Can machines think?", a human playing the game should have a good thinking ability. Game with bored, disinterested players would be entirely meaningless.
- gopher_space 4y agoIt's looking more like "how can I tell if I'm talking to a machine unless the potential person on the other end is strapped into a torture chair and forced to respond rationally to my inane philosophical ramblings." And I'd like it more as a Gedankenexperiment if people weren't talking about it as a tool or metric. That kind of thinking gains momentum.
- dredmorbius 4y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31426512 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31426512
- nullc 4y ago> It still struggles with faces I believe they intentionally hobbled it in this respect for "safety" (iow to keep themselves out of a scandal when someone asks it to create "President Biden accepting Bribes" or whatnot...) Certainly far simple diffusion models trained including faces do just fine at creating photorealistic faces.
- guerrilla 4y agoWhy do you believe that?
- melissalobos 4y agoIt was mentioned in the DALL-E github repo.
- egeozcan 4y agoComing up with ok-looking generated faces is not ground-breaking in the ML world and when the state-of-the-art model botches it completely, you start looking for the reason.
- lupire 4y agoAnd coming up with very good looking modifications/poses of known actual faces is very well achieved.
- shadowgovt 4y agoHow compose-able are ML solutions? I'm wondering if coming up with ok-looking generated headshots (face at a specific, known, predetermined angle, in a neutral and standardized context, independent of background features) is not ground-breaking, but embedding that capability in a dynamic image generator with myriad other objects, headgear, lights and shadows, etc. may be.
- gwern 4y agoFacebook's Make-A-Scene, which looks almost as good as DALL-E 2, does something very much like that, using face-specific targeting to boost the quality of that part of images: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.13131#facebook https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.13131#facebook
- non_sequitur 4y agoMore accurately, “DALLE2 made me realize no one cares about or looks closely at your vacation photos”
- alx__ 4y agoThe snarky side of me wants to say it's because people take boring photos But really it's just information overload, most things on social media I just scan the thumbnail and move on. Only my family would care to see my vacation photos :D
- B1FF_PSUVM 4y agoOne, or three, carousels of vacation slides used to be an effective way of putting a party to sleep ...
- teaearlgraycold 4y agoMy rule of thumb: never share more than one photo per vacation unless asked for more.
- ars 4y agoYou don't need DALL-E 2 to make those photos, you can just download generic underwater photos from other people. In fact how do you know DALL-E actually created them, and did just regurgitate some it was trained with?
- LeanderK 4y ago> In fact how do you know DALL-E actually created them, and did just regurgitate some it was trained with? I think DALL-E is not released so researchers are unable to take it apart yet, but this question was already researched a lot in the context of other generative models and so far they really did generalise (assuming a well trained model, the can overfit).
- gus_massa 4y agoI tried to search in Google the images (during 10 minutes), but I didn't find any of them. The image of the fish is strange. I found a few photos of similar fishes with vertical stripes but the fish in the image has squares.
- drewzero1 4y agoThe head is a very odd shape as well. If I saw a grouper that looked like that I'd be watching out for nearby barrels of nuclear waste on the seabed.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- tedunangst 4y agoWhere did dall-e find a photo of a scuba diver with incorrect hoses?
- jhfds 4y agoJust ask? "photo of a scuba diver with incorrect hoses" :-)
- stavros 4y agoIs DALL-E still invite-only?
- _just7_ 4y agoYep, though from what I heard they are planning to role it out quicker than gpt-3, with a full launch this summer
- raldi 4y agoWouldn’t a proper Turing test be one where people knew some of the photos were artificial and were asked to figure out which ones they were?
- dredmorbius 4y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31426512 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31426512
- thfuran 4y agoAnd also they were marine biologists and local dive masters.
- cyberlurker 4y agoThat The Fifth Element (1997) scene linked in the article actually holds up well.
- chris_va 4y agoAmusingly I think most of that is not actually CGI (as we now define it). They had a giant warehouse with a toy NYC that they flew a camera through with little models... pretty nuts given how movies are made now. The making of Fifth Element is a pretty great watch.
- dekhn 4y agoTake a look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UENRVfdnGxs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UENRVfdnGxs 3:48-4:02. 5 seconds of screen time tell more story than many science fiction movies do in 2 hours. Detail in https://www.reddit.com/r/sciencefiction/comments/53p7gw/original_4k_matte_painting_of_new_york_city_from/ https://www.reddit.com/r/sciencefiction/comments/53p7gw/orig...
- gwern 4y agoI don't buy the argument we'll just automatically learn to see the CGI as fake. This is a selection effect: you see as fake only the CGI you see as fake; if it just looks real and fools you, how will you ever know you were fooled? Early CGI was bad, but it kept getting better every year. When I watch documentaries or CGI breakdowns, I'm routinely shocked at how things I would never in a million years have predicted were fake were fake. When someone shows a clip of a glowing floating space alien octopus, you can know it's fake because you know there are no space alien octopuses in real life; but when it's some box in a corner with some stuff on it which the director added in prod because he realized he needed a more homey and cluttered feeling for that scene...
- 101008 4y agoThe images look great but I think the experiment was helped by the fact that most of us can see any image, being told that the image is underwater and we'll believe it. Most of the people don't know about deep waters, and the plans and animal that live there. I suspect the experiment would have been different if the vacations were in a city or a beach or something like that.
- twiceaday 4y agoThis is off topic but horny people are by far the most interested in conjuring up custom images. DALL-E trained on porn would be huge.
- rootusrootus 4y agoPorn seems to quietly power the Internet, in so many ways. I imagine people are already getting creative with fake porn, and it's only going to intensify over time. Especially on the types of imagery that are illegal to possess.
- colinmhayes 4y agoThis might be horrible to say, but could this be a solution to csam? From what I've seen most people who enjoy csam do genuinely feel bad for the children, but they're sick, and can't control themselves. Might they be willing to indulge in fake csam instead?
- teddyh 4y agoIIUC, fake CSAM is also illegal.
- intrasight 4y agoCorrect. Differs from, for example, rules protecting cruelty to animals. You can fake such cruelty without consequence - as is done in movies regularly. More interesting question is this. Is it a crime if you generate CSAM just for ones own consumption?
- rootusrootus 4y ago> Is it a crime if you generate CSAM just for ones own consumption? Yep. If it isn't obviously fake (i.e. a cartoon) the possession is illegal whether you produce it yourself or not. Though it's probably safe to say that you're unlikely to get caught if you're not sharing those images with other people.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- killerstorm 4y agoIt's not a Turing test if a judge is not actively trying to discern.
- VikingCoder 4y agoRight, and Moore's Law doesn't say X, Y, or Z. We get it. But it's a pretty close analogue.
- jascii 4y agoThe article claims (in a screenshot without quoting sources, so take it for what it's worth) that "A recent blog post pointed out that GPT-3-generated text already passes the Turing test if you're skimming and not paying close attention". This is certainly debatable, and I agree that it is pushing the limit a bit. I think in the end, the "Turing test" was devised as a thought experiment, not as a final definition of AI. So I guess some freedom of interpretation is reasonable.
- bryanrasmussen 4y ago>if you're skimming and not paying close attention Also, if I'm drunk and reading nonsense I might not realize it.
- killerstorm 4y agoWell, as a thought experiment, it suggests a concrete scheme: it's a game where everybody is trying to do their best. If it's a game where nobody cares, it's a stupid game, and results are meaningless.
- woojoo666 4y agoResults are not meaningless if in the real world, everybody is skimming anyways.
- Dylan16807 4y agoIt's a bend of the scenario if the judge is skimming and not paying close attention. This "pushes the limit". It's a break of the scenario if they didn't go in with the goal of detecting fakery. This makes it useless as a "Turing test".
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y agoIt is easy to pass Turing tests when the subject material is unfamiliar to people. As other posters have mentioned, most people have only a vague idea of specific underwater plants and animals and vague ideas of how the water distorts light. I bet I can come up with a simple generator that generates galaxies/nebula pictures and if I interspersed those in with NASA Hubble generated images, most people could not pick out the real Hubble images from my generated images.
- ducktective 4y agoOne cool application of DALL-E could be generating a painting or sketch for each paragraph or sentence of novels. Imagine listening to an audio book of famous novels with visuals/cartoons made by AI. Hope someone with invite access could do this for Moby Dick or Sherlock Holmes stories or 1984.
- freemint 4y agoDALL-E so far has no way to create consistent characters across multiple pictures. However good news if this discriminator approach https://blog.salesforceairesearch.com/gedi/ https://blog.salesforceairesearch.com/gedi/ caries over to images such constraints could be imposed. This is just a handful of follow up publications away.
- ducktective 4y agoThanks!
- freemint 4y agoActually i need to correct myself. Something along these lines. The mechanism of DALL-E is a bit different but a discriminator approach should work anyway although maybe some magic might be needed to ensure the spatial invariance of the discriminator.
- Gigachad 4y agoThere was an anime art generator posted here recently which could do this. If I understood correctly, they manually went through all the parameters and worked out which ones correlated with things like hair color, face type and built a web UI which could fix certain known meaningful parameters and allow the user to design a character and then the final step showed the same character in a bunch of different poses.
- gwern 4y agoYes, you reverse-engineer the latent. This is a very old approach in GANs by this point, going back probably to like 2015. (The canonical examples were making faces smile or adding sunglasses.) If you want to see it done for a lot of different models, check out Artbreeder: that's how all of the editing attributes are done. Diffusion models don't really have a latent but the CLIP embedding would serve the same function. The problem is, OA would have to implement it themselves. There's no way you can implement it as a user with the current interface. (This is also true of alternative methods like gradient ascent or GEDI etc.)
- karpierz 4y agoPassing the Turing test requires, for any human judge: 1. This judge is aware that they have to discern whether the 'bot' is real or a machine. 2. The judge cannot discern whether the 'bot' is real or a machine better than random chance. This failed 1. And even given that advantage, might have failed 2 as well? Often I see headlines along the lines of "X fools people and beats the Turing test!". But the point of the Turing test isn't to trick a person, it's to make it functionally impossible for a person to distinguish between the real and simulated thing, no matter how hard they try. For something to pass a Turing test, it would need to be able to pass the following: "Anyone can play as judge any number of times. You can take as long as you want, and if you're successful in breaking it under controlled conditions (IE, you don't cheat and use an out-of-band communication protocol with the 'bot'/human), we'll give you a 10,000,000$." The "One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Million_Dollar_Paranormal_Challenge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Million_Dollar_Paranormal_...) is a solid example of a Turing test for magic.
- VikingCoder 4y agoHow often have we run a Turing Test, where we asked the judge how confident they were in their final answer, except both participants were humans?
- IshKebab 4y agoIt doesn't really matter for the purposes of the test how confident they say they are. If you're asking "do people often imagine they can confidently distinguish things when they actually can't" then the answer is a solid yes - things like audiophile and wine testing have proven that again and again.
- godelski 4y agoI think another important factor here is that it is unclear if the OP cherry picked photos or used the first ones given. Dall-E 2 has a bias to be better at real world scenes since it can just pull (near) memorized images, but I also wouldn't be surprised if these images were downselected from a larger set.
- taylorius 4y agoYour holiday photos are memories. If you create fake images, and mix them with genuine ones, don't be surprised if in the future, you yourself forget what is real and what is not.
- WoodenChair 4y agoShocking—photos made out of a data set of existing photos look like photos!
- yes_i_can 4y agoI'm wondering if we'll ever get to a point where we can invoke fake vacation / travel experiences, like We Can Remember It for You Wholesale (more popularly, Total Recall), by creating ML-generated images of the trip rather than inducing a dream. It seems plausible.
- nautilus12 4y agoEvery marketing company making money off influencers and organic content like this just silently screamed.
- marmada 4y agoHacker News has this surprising tendency to cling to the past. People here are nitpicking over the definition of the Turing test. What actually matters here is that, if not already now, but certainly in 1-5 years neural nets will most certainly be good as the 99th percentile artist. Does that mean AGI is here? Probably not. But we are missing the forest for the trees.
- ethanbond 4y agoNothing more "missing the forest for the trees" than implying that 99th percentile artistry is about producing photorealistic representations of unreal things.
- optimalsolver 4y agoIt would be in concept art. Also note that DALL-E isn't limited to photorealistic styles.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- IshKebab 4y ago> Hacker News has this surprising tendency to cling to the past. Definitely, but this isn't an example of that, it's an example of people on Hacker News not wanting things to be wrong. The title is clearly wrong.
- Terry_Roll 4y agoSo when are you vacating on the Moon or better still, can you beat Elon Musk to Mars?
- cookingrobot 4y agoThe images look great because only the last 4 pictures on this blog are the fake ones. All the first impressive looking shots at the top of this article are real.
- phdelightful 4y agoI want to see a fully-synthetic multimodal social media influencer that is nearly indistinguishable from reality. She does the same thing as the real ones except everything is completely artificially generated (housing, clothes, vacations, social circle). All text/image/video posts are completely synthetic but internally-consistent with this fabricated persistent universe. The only real things would probably be product placement. If you’re a brand, you’d just make a new online influencer instead of finding an organic one.
- anotheryou 4y agoIt's kind of an alien world to us, no lighting like we know it, all organic shapes with a lot of unidentifiable stuff, blue tint etc. It all helps to make it an easier case. dalle-e is still impressive, but taking this to the extreme it would be like making it simulate pictures of TV noise and show we couldn't tell it from the real thing.
- mproud 4y agoThis is a flawed experiment. If I see a bunch of photos, and many of them look real at first glance, I’m not instantly going to critique whether all of them were real, unless I was given specific instructions to do so. Also, underwater photos are not something many people have personal experience seeing. Most of us don’t live underwater. We may not be equipped well enough to tell the difference, where above water, especially urban photos, we will likely notice better.
- trinovantes 4y agoHow will our legal systems cope if one day you can conjure up any "evidence" you want? We're still safe today but the future will be scary.
- aftbit 4y ago>Could I use DALL-E 2 to create a fake vacation? Or, more ethically, could I use DALL-E 2 to recreate events from my vacation that actually happened, but I was unable to get a good photo of them? What would be unethical about creating a fake vacation? As long as you're not defrauding anyone, I don't see who would be hurt by this.
- cowpig 4y ago> My deepfake DALL-E 2 vacation photos passed the Turing Test Most people didn't notice that some of my vacation photos were fake, therefore it passed the Turing Test... why is this clickbait nonsense getting so much attention? Can someone who upvoted this article explain why you upvoted it? Did the fact that the title is flatly false not bother you? If someone wrote an article about cracking some encryption algorithm and titled it "I proved P=NP" would you upvote it?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- groos 4y agoJust nitpicking but the 'Turing test' can only be failed, not passed, which is quite apt given another problem associated with Turing: the halting problem.
- spchampion2 4y agoDiver here. I'm looking at these four pictures after the fact, so I already know they're fake. They're good, but they also have some weird flaws. That said, I don't think I would have immediately recognized any of these as wrong on Facebook (maybe the diver photo). - The nudibranch (slug thing) on the green coral doesn't look like anything I've seen in the Caribbean before, and the coral also looks odd for the region. That said, this is probably the most difficult photo for me to differentiate. I would have accepted this as a cool find of something I haven't seen before. - The grouper (big fish) photo is actually pretty good, although DALL-E has misplaced its eyes a bit. That said, the lit foreground and dark noisy background are exactly the look I would expect for someone using a basic camera + lights with wonky post-processing. - The diver photo is a horror show. There's a hose going nowhere on her back. It looks like she's blowing out of a harmonica instead of a regulator. Bubbles are collecting around the top of her mask for some reason. Her fins look like they were badly Photoshopped. Nothing looks right here. - The lobster photo has a real but subtle flaw: Caribbean lobsters don't have big claws. It also looks like it's under a rock like you would find in cold waters around Massachusetts and Maine instead of the Caribbean. Interesting stuff though. It will force me to be more skeptical when I look at people's photos in the future.
- joshthecynic 4y ago
- llaolleh 4y agoIt's not a Turing test if you don't tell them that it's a test.
- zone411 4y agoFun idea. We're about test out melodies I've created together with a generative neural net and see how they're rated computer to real melodies. The plan is use Amazon's Mechanical Turk but one problem is what to do about real melodies that people will mark as already familiar to them. I think making it a comparison with unfamiliar melodies should be fine?
- boom1303 4y ago