10 ms·

The most interesting part, to me, of a release like this is the amount of "please don't abuse this technology" pleading. No licence will ever stop people from d

• oifjsidjf 4y ago
  This. They just have to cover their asses, any sane dev would make the same license due to the power of this tech. On some level I can't stop laughing since OpenAI really got smoked. "OpenAI" my ass, this is what open TRULY means! Cheering for these devs.
• skybrian 4y ago
  It seems inevitable like it's "inevitable" that they Photoshop your face onto porn. Yes, of course it will happen but maybe not to most people? I'd guess inevitable for many celebrities.
  • croes 4y ago
    It will be more now. Photoshop needs some skills. With AI it gets easier and easier.
    • eastbound 4y ago
      But even today, we deal correctly with it. Fakes and real photos are mingled together in 9Gag/LatestNews reports about Ukraine. Under the fakes (and the real), people ask for confirmation. Someone says it’s true, no-one believes him, until a link to a newspaper is dropped. And 9Gag isn’t the highest IQ community around, so yes, general population does distrusts photos by default until proven. They are laughed at anyway if they tell a story coming from a forged photo. Sure, newspapers could forge stories, display pictures with, I don’t know, Biden’s son with a crackpipe, and make the populace believe untrue stories. But guess what, they already do it anyway, newspapers already “spin” (as they say, i.e. forge, suggest without literally saying) stories all the time. The world deals correctly with fakes.
      • gabereiser 4y ago
        The problem comes from the early adult newsroom interns responsible for sourcing content. They don’t know it’s fake, it sounds like a good click-baity article to them, so they run it. It happens.
        • eastbound 4y ago
          I wouldn’t shift responsibility on the shoulders of the last newcomer. The top of the management has had ample time to diagnose this. If it remains like this, it’s by design.
      • croes 4y ago
        I have a quite different perception of 9gag. Yes, some ask for confirmation but it depends very much on the topic. Wrong topic and facts get downvoted and the fake news prevail. And not all links to newspaper are considered valid, especially if it's about "woke culture". Then you have to search the reasonable needle in the haystack of transphobia, homophobia and misogyny.
• wwwtyro 4y ago
  > Politics will be influenced. You can't trust anything you see anymore I've been wondering for a while now if this will lead to an unexpected boon: perhaps people will be forced to pay attention to a speaker's content instead of simply who is speaking.
  • dbingham 4y ago
    The problem with this is that you will never know who is actually speaking. Deep fakes are already a thing, but as they get better and more accessible we will approach a world where anyone can make anyone say anything and make it hyper believable. In that world, it will be very difficult to tell what is real.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • bluejellybean 4y ago
      My personal hunch is that this will end up leading to a situation in which presenters do a cryptographic handshake that works to verify and prove authenticity. This isn't a new idea, and it has some very obvious drawbacks, but I don't see much of a way around the issue. The handshake could work great for something like official news releases, but for other instances that might come up in court, say, dash cam footage of an accident, it seems to me that the legal system is going to face some serious issues as these programs progress.
      • nelsondev 4y ago
        Looking forward to a future where all a politician’s quotes are on a blockchain, signed by their private key, and they chose to do so voluntarily out of fear of deep fakes. Will remove all the useless “I didn’t say that”
        • dinosaurdynasty 4y ago
          Do politicians understand blockchains?
• gjsman-1000 4y ago
  I had a thought for a utopian/dystopian world. One day these image generators will also get video support... and pornography support. When that happens, a few things may occur that I think are reasonable to predict: EDIT: Original post was way too wordy, TL;DR: When AI-generated pornography becomes available, it could be likely that demand for "real" pornography disappears because the AI will match and surpass the "real." When that occurs, the "real" will become increasingly regulated and legally risky, and may just outright be as good as banned.
  • suby 4y ago
    There will be a huge and unkillable market for non-AI generated pornography, even if people cannot tell the difference in an AB test. The demand will be too strong and I don't think there will be much outcry to ban it if it's all consenting adults.
    • tastemykungfu 4y ago
      Curious as to how you arrived at that conclusion.
      • derac 4y ago
        A quick Google shows an estimate that it was a 100 billion dollar market in 2017. Seems there is a lot of demand.
        • thfuran 4y ago
          But what portion of that demand is specifically for artisinally handcrafted authentic sex rather than for apparent sex acts?
          • derac 4y ago
            Oh sorry, the OP was worded differently when I saw it. That's not what I meant.
• croes 4y ago
  Perhaps we should have started with artificial wisdom instead of artificial intelligence
• ForrestN 4y ago
  I wonder/hope if a downstream effect of this technological change will be the end of the idea of a "shameful" or "humiliating" image. We all have bodies, we all have sex, and I agree that soon images of ourselves being nude/having sex etc. will proliferate because they'll be generated instantly via Siri shortcut as part of casual banter. In a world where every celebrity is having sex with gorillas, doesn't such an image lose its charge? Will Norms and values around sex/body shaming change?
  • Fauntleroy 4y ago
    If we get to the point where we can't tell AI generated images from reality, I'm not sure "body shaming" will be on society's collective radar anymore.
    • ForrestN 4y ago
      Why?
      • TylerE 4y ago
        Much bigger fish to fry. Think things like forged evidence in trials.
        • telesilla 4y ago
          It's the right time to get into the digital forensics business.
          • 867-5309 4y ago
            ..and the Berlin gorilla nightscene
            • mmmpop 4y ago
              I second this.
• OmarIsmail 4y ago
  We do a decent job of banning child pornography. And bringing the two ideas together, is child pornography that is provably created by an AI still illegal?
  • causi 4y ago
    As far as I'm aware countries fall broadly into two camps. Camp 1, USA for example, is concerned purely with the abuse of children, i.e., anything that depicts or is constructed of pieces of real children is illegal but other things such as drawings, stories, adults role playing, etc is not. Camp 2 outlaws any representation of it whether or not a child was involved. Nowhere will a training set featuring pictures of naked children be legal.
    • 16890c 4y ago
      >Nowhere will a training set featuring pictures of naked children be legal. True, but generalizing beyond the training set is precisely the point of machine learning. A good generative model will be able to produce such images, no matter how heinous the content is.
    • OmarIsmail 4y ago
      > Nowhere will a training set featuring pictures of naked children be legal. Appropriately from the recent news stories, but it's easy to imagine at least portions of such pictures being available for medical diagnostic purposes. I've sent pictures of my children to my doctor, so presumably in the future it's easy to imagine sending pictures to an AI to diagnose which would require a suitably fleshed out (pardon the pun) training set.
      • notahacker 4y ago
        I imagine the AI which diagnoses your children won't be the same AI your neighbours use to make pictures with.
  • seydor 4y ago
    Actually ... we just did a good job of making generated child pornography ubiquitous.
• narrator 4y ago
  As someone who witnessed AI Dungeon's GPT-3 model with an unlimited uninhibited imagination for erotica I would download everything now before they cripple the models. I would not be surprised if they very shortly completely stop downloads due to "abuse" and pursue a SAAS model. I think it's funny how Yandex, a Russian company, releases these big language models without all the AI safety handwringing in their press releases. The Russians have a tradition of releasing technology without giving a lot of worry about what happens to it, for better or for worse. For example, they made between 75 and 100 million ak-47s, a not in any way limited machine gun, and it spread to every corner of the world. They even gave out all the plans and technical assistance so any one of the organizations they worked with could produce their own. 20 different countries make ak-47s currently. Of course you had to register every xerox machine in the Soviet Union, so maybe they just had different priorities? The west is absolutely fascinated these days with the control of advanced technology. Drones, Blockchain, and AI models seem to be the latest things that the west is determined to exercise control over. For example: "Many of the technological advances we currently see are not properly accounted for in the current regulatory framework and might even disrupt the social contract that governments have established with their citizens. Agile governance means that regulators must find ways to adapt continuously to a new, fast-changing environment by reinventing themselves to understand better what they are regulating. To do so, governments and regulatory agencies need to closely collaborate with business and civil society to shape the necessary global, regional and industrial transformations." -Klaus Schwab, "The Fourth Industrial Revolution", Page 70.
  • RandomLensman 4y ago
    It's not about control of advanced technologies but rather making such technologies look more powerful by pointing out real or imagined destructive capabilities. If you want funding or "big up" a topic, claim it has the power to bring down the world (anyone remembering gray goo?).
    • PcChip 4y ago
      The RTS game?
• fpgaminer 4y ago
  If I recall from the interview with Stability.ai's founder, he has more or less the same opinion, and that humans will adapt to the new technology as we always have. I figure "please don't abuse this technology" warning stickers are more CYA. It'll make the vast majority of judges look at a motion to dismiss and not blink an eye.
  • gitfan86 4y ago
    Historically, he is correct. It is easy to find people that were against TVs, Cars, Trains, Electric Cars. Those people were not entirely wrong with their logic. Trains and cars did make it much easier for scammers to come into a town and then leave quickly.
    • theptip 4y ago
      In terms of the equilibrium, this is certainly a true observation. However, historically speaking new technology can be extremely disruptive in the short-term as society figures out the new norms, and the power-structures are disrupted and then re-equilibrate. Concretely, it's probably true that children born with this technology will have adapted to many of the negative (and positive) aspects of it. But the current generation of elites, politicians, and voters might have a harder time adapting.
    • permo-w 4y ago
      are we even sure that TVs are a good thing?
• patientplatypus 4y ago
• naillo 4y ago
  I much prefer a company that asks me to not abuse it but lets me, then a company that treats me like child and force filters it out for me.
  • astrange 4y ago
    That's not the only issue with NSFW; the larger problem is when you don't ask for it and get it anyway. Especially because this model is not particularly good at it and you'll get body horror.
    • naillo 4y ago
      Well it comes with an NSFW filter that's activated by default so that's a non-issue (but importantly you can turn it off if you're ok with accidentally seeing stuff like that without explicitly asking for it).
• choppaface 4y ago
  Really, the licensing is most interesting? There’s a lot of public info about training and development too. The license itself is pretty irrelevant. What people will actually do with the training blueprints, and how fast things will evolve.. now that’s interesting.
• mdcds 4y ago
  > you can fully expect your asshole friends to grab a dozen photos of you from Facebook and then make a hyperrealistic pornographic image of you with a gorilla my prediction is that, as a result, people will start assuming pics online are fake until proven otherwise.
  • lern_too_spel 4y ago
    > my prediction is that, as a result, people will start assuming pics online are fake until proven otherwise. "That worked well for quotations." — Abraham Lincoln
• indymike 4y ago
  Corollary: If you did not make it, someone else would have anyway.
• cypress66 4y ago
  > Why bother asking people not to? I guess if it helps you sleep at night that you tried, I guess? They obviously are aware. They just put all that so they don't get "canceled". It's just virtue signaling and covering your ass.
• tgv 4y ago
  You’re right. They call this an “ethical release”, but what ethics, I may ask. A profitable IPO is more likely to have been their consideration. As other researchers before them, they are willingly releasing something with the potential to do harm, or pave the way for it, washing their hands in innocence.
• Geee 4y ago
  I think the actual problem is that this gives plausible deniability against photographic evidence, which might result in increase of bad behavior. Even cameras which cryptographically sign their output can't prove that the input was actually photographed from the real world, or if it's just an image of an image.
• seydor 4y ago
  I think that s a hopeful message. At first we will see a lot of "prompt censoring mobs" that will try to "stop abusers because children and terrorists", but as the images multiply, and they will multiply, the line between real and fake photos will become hard to spot, for real. This is i think a pivotal and great moment, because everyone can now claim plausible deniability to any picture. No revenge porn will be believable anymore, nor will anyone know if that Bezos's weiner pic is real or not.
• nootropicat 4y ago
  This is great news for those that actually have sex with a gorilla, because now they can claim it's an ai photo. :) Kidding aside, I think this is actually good. Humans need ephemerality. We are never getting the full version of it back, but with photorealistic ai video and image creation some freedom returns. I think without it a society in which everyone has a camera all the time would mean absolute ossification of social norms. Right now it's very, very new - I mean multiple generations living with the current, or better (eg. recording eye implants) technology.
• aortega 4y ago
  >make a hyperrealistic pornographic image of you with a gorilla[0] I don't understand this irrational fear. This can be done today, just need some minutes instead of some seconds to create a good Photoshop. Also, seriously this is the thing you fear? fake porn? there are much worse thing you can do with this tech, like phising, falsifications, etc. Not mentioning leaving millions of graphic designers out of job.
  • peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    Unfortunately Anything that can go wrong will go wrong Photoshop is a skill, not very widespread as we assume. Typing something is literally at everyone's fingertips.
    • notahacker 4y ago
      Photoshop is a skill possessed by more than enough people for the world to have already been transformed by Photoshops of famous people and anybody else graphic designers wanted to embarrass, if moderately-convincing images were that transformational a technology for adversarial use. I agree that it's much easier to do low effort stuff to wind friends up, but universal access and low effort don't make it more likely to be impactful and believable.
  • cerol 4y ago
    That's what I was thinking. Whether a pornographic picture of me and a gorilla was made by photoshop or AI is irrelevant. People's reactions will be the same, and repercussions will be mostly the same (which doesn't means there will be consequences). If someone really wants to hurt you, not having AI isn't going to stop them.
    • aortega 4y ago
      The real effect will be that you can publish a real picture of you fucking a gorilla and nobody would believe it because it's trivial to generate it with an AI.
  • deleted 4y ago
• matheusmoreira 4y ago
  > you can fully expect your asshole friends to grab a dozen photos of you from Facebook and then make a hyperrealistic pornographic image of you with a gorilla ... Someone is gonna do this to children. This technology is gonna end up on the news. Maybe they'll even try to ban it.
• hahajk 4y ago
  Like you mentioned near the end, all this has been possible with photoshop, with amateur level skill. Hollywood can CGI the entire Captain Marvel movie, so as far as state-level efforts go, AI can really only be an incremental improvement at best. I think this is all just trendy popular sentiment moralizing AI.
  • trention 4y ago
    Scale and access (≈quantity) matter.
• earth_walker 4y ago
  I think you don't give enough emphasis on the "if you even could before" part. Sure, this makes realistic fakes easier and more available to to the masses. So what? We've had the technology to 'frame' people in similar ways for decades now, and other than entertain the 4chan teens it does squat. There's enough money interest in bringing down certain politicians, if faking a sex tape or back-room conversation would make any difference to the world it would have been done already. Hell, politicians pretty much admit publicly that they are rapists and we don't do anything about it. Who's gonna care about a couple of gorilla-pics of a normie? People don't and never have trusted any evidence that doesn't reaffirm their world view, regardless of how true that evidence is. More realistic evidence won't change that.
  • AJ007 4y ago
    These images are good for satire, spoofs, and comedy but they definitely won't be fooling anyone.
• mrshadowgoose 4y ago
  > The most interesting part, to me, of a release like this is the amount of "please don't abuse this technology" pleading. > Why bother asking people not to? I guess if it helps you sleep at night that you tried, I guess? I've perceived this as them doing the necessary amount of virtue-signaling and ass-covering to avoid the ire of groups that are loud/powerful enough to cause issues for them in the short-term. I've been following the developments in this space for a while now, and I don't get the impression that Stability AI cares too much about forcing Western ideals of "correctness" onto the public. It's plainly obvious that this is going to be immediately used to produce content considered obscene, offensive and/or illegal by various groups of people. And it is what it is, we're going to just have to figure out how to live with it as a society. It's going to get far far worse (from certain points of view) as we continue to replicate functionality previously exclusively featured in human brains.
  • AJ007 4y ago
    I never saw it create anything more NSFW than female boobs. It won't generate penises or genitals besides mounds of hair. Right now the "NSFW" flag/filter is 99%+ false positives. This is stuff that used to be allowed in G-rated movies in the US. True to both Stable Diffusion and Dalle2, the more encompassing the content of your image is, the more incorrect the detail is. Both generally will make fantastic faces but anatomy and consistency starts falling apart with full bodies. Contorted limbs, missing fingers, too many limbs, etc. No one is going to be fooled here. Of course the models could be trained on offensive images and over a long enough time period eventually will. But, for now, someone is going to have to spend millions of dollars on compute and have the human expertise behind it too. Then again, if we had an image generator making pictures of [insert X offensive thing] that is a whole lot less disgusting than the plentiful real photos and videos of that thing in reality.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • numpad0 4y ago
      It feels sometimes that there has to be small, influential group of people on some jihad against generated pornography on the Internet, with impacts in the order of $10-100mil. I'm sure this is not a view shared by everyone, but it is a straightforward course of action to add such disclaimers in cases where you do agree with it and not wanting to be targeted and blacklisted from payment networks(that seems amongst their weaponry).
• emporas 4y ago
  Well we will be able to generate satirical political images of politicians, of religions easily and quickly. So there are some upsides for the technology to be given to every comedian out there. Politicians and religions, did have an easy ride the last few years, so we must set the record straight from now on. Some fear porn was thrown out when GPT-3 was released. I love GPT-3, i used it just yesterday it is very good. I am just wondering when the total destruction of the world will happen because of GPT-3.
• skellyclock 4y ago
  Seems less likely that everyone will "just be cool with" having pornographic images of themselves with gorillas spread everywhere and more likely that this is the impetus for demagogues to issue a digital ID for access to the internet.
• crazypython 4y ago
  Setting norms of asking folks not to abuse it reduces the likelihood people will step out of line with those norms.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• yarg 4y ago
  Significant progress has been made on video - inter-frame preservation of the surface level spatial invariants in 3D environments has been achieved. But preservation of transtemporal spatial invariants requires understanding far more than that - dynamic lighting, density, flexibility, rigidity and momentum, the viscosity of the air, the skeletomuscular system, the flow of the fluids within, and so on ad infinitum. And a lot of that is tacitly understood by the human mind (even when the human mind would struggle to generate a scene, it can often detect that something is wrong - try turning on the lights in a lucid dream). It's going to be quite some time before it reaches the point where a human cannot detect that video was generated (or altered) and even longer before computers can't. But then, it's going to be a shit-show - and I'm not talking about the bestiality videos. Evidence, as we know it, will be meaningless - the implications for the legal system are terrifying.
• sfifs 4y ago
  Isn't it good if people learn not to trust photos and images shared in social media and learn to treat them as entertainment. So much productivity gains :-)
• alan-stark 4y ago
  > Politics will be influenced. You can't trust anything you see anymore How much could you trust media content previously? Staged footage, false narration, biased coverage are nothing new. A counter-intuitive side-effect of opening the Pandora's box could be a realization that media is a form of simulation. Perhaps this will lead more people to filter what they see through a prism of critical thinking.