7 ms·

Surprise, surprise, GitHub took action because of "links on wiki led to sites that contained pictures that didn't align with github's values" and not because of

Surprise, surprise, GitHub took action because of "links on wiki led to sites that contained pictures that didn't align with github's values" and not because of Automatic1111's racist repos. That said, I hope this whole debacle has shown a light on the potentially problematic nature of having the Automatic1111/stable-diffusion-webui project be the go-to UI for using Stable Diffusion. Not just because of the viewpoints implied by Automatic1111's other repos. Automatic1111/stable-diffusion-webui is a mess of a codebase and while it has the largest plethora of features and plugins in the StableDiffusion ecosystem, it's also one of the hardest tools to use. InvokeAI has a much friendlier UI, for comparison. Plus Automatic1111/stable-diffusion-webui has no formally published license, making its codebase a tangled web of legal nightmares. None of that is to degenerate the work of Automatic1111 or the hundreds of contributors to his project. And I'm for the most part not a fan of "censoring" code. But I hope we can agree it's not ideal to have such an important repo side by side with a "WhitesOnly" rimworld mod.

Der_Einzige 4y ago
So it wasn't the fact that large swaths of the wiki, or the sample images for the extensions are using images that are obviously stand ins for lolicon? There's so much icky stuff going on in the generative art community and no one knows just how deep that rabbit hole goes. E.g.: https://github.com/Kahsolt/stable-diffusion-webui-sonar https://github.com/Kahsolt/stable-diffusion-webui-sonar (See bottom of page).
- fpgaminer 4y ago
  I recommend reporting that kind of content on GitHub. But please don't lump the entire generative art community in with "icky stuff".
  - dylan604 4y ago
    > But please don't lump the entire generative art community in with "icky stuff". But it kind of is depending on your definition of icky. The fact that they've trained the models to be extremely proficient forgers should raise all sorts of red flags. I get the concept of homage and every great artist borrows/steals, blah blah, but as these things continue to get better, the lines between legit artist work and forgery will only blur to unknowable. Digital artists will now need to know how to cryptographically sign their work. There have been tools for this that most ignore because of pricing. (and no i'm not talking about NFT nonsense)
  - richbell 4y ago
    > But please don't lump the entire generative art community in with "icky stuff" To be fair, there is substantial interest in using things like Stable Diffusion to generate pornography. There are several projects for hentai, etc. There have also been large threads on /g/ teaching people how to generate hypernerworks with suspiciously young looking subjects since the beginning. The "icky stuff" has a disturbing footprint.
    - fpgaminer 4y ago
      > To be fair, there is substantial interest in using things like Stable Diffusion to generate pornography. There are several projects for hentai, etc. Wanting to making pornography is perfectly normal and healthy; that's not something I consider icky. When I quoted "icky stuff" I thought we were talking about the generation of underage subjects.
      - numpad0 4y ago
        > underage subjects Have you seen ANY legal age subjects? Subjectively, how much fraction of anime pictures do you consider to be portraying individuals able to consent? I mean, if there was an NN code that is returning 0.0120000 for 85% in inference data but ranging evenly between 0.0 to 1.0 in training, intuition shouldn't be that it's the reality that is broken.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- sergiotapia 4y ago
  I don't understand why people give a shit. When did normies invade the spaces of these crazy intelligent lunatics? People purposely go play in filth then complain it's filthy.
  - debacle 4y ago
    Hi, so I looked at the links in the above post and while cartoony they are clearly not okay. It's not a "normie" take that we shouldn't sexualize children, even if they are animated.
    - sergiotapia 4y ago
      It's repugnant, absolutely. But why do you care what those creeps are doing with code? That's what I don't understand.
    - dylan604 4y ago
      You just described a large swath of anime. I worked for a company licensing anime content, and there were some shows that I felt like I needed a shower after having to work with the content. As the parent of a small child during that time, it was very disturbing. I did not last long working for that company, and is the shortest stint for a company on my resume.
    - sillysaurusx 4y ago
      Are we looking at the same images? What’s sexual about https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Kahsolt/stable-diffusion-webui-sonar/main/img/ref.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Kahsolt/stable-diffusion-w... ? I was expecting some of the horrible stuff I’ve seen on 4chan, not something you might see in a mainstream (bad) anime. If anything, it looks like the AI cleaned it up and made it more presentable.
      - numpad0 4y ago
        Yeah, there's rarely the "disgusting child porn that sexualize minors" that people swear on bible to have seen it where they've seen it. It's always chalked up to "local cultural tolerances for molesting children" but ... almost feels like reading the SCP-040-JP creepypasta.
- voldacar 4y ago
  Username does not check out
  - williamscales 4y ago
    I don’t 100% follow, I did a bit of googling and I don’t exactly grasp the problem. Could you point me in the right direction?
    - voldacar 4y ago
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ego_and_Its_Own https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ego_and_Its_Own
      - Der_Einzige 4y ago
        The only reason stirner didn't explicitly defend liberalism is that germany circa the 1840s was really, really garbage. This is why people think he was an "anarchist" It's in my self interest to not see icky things.
forgotpwd16 4y ago
>making its codebase a tangled web of legal nightmares Perfectly suitable for a project about AI content generation. Every related submission also has at least one comment talking about the legality of it.
- saurik 4y ago
  I guess? But that wasn't about the legality of "AI", or of training such against others copyrighted works, but merely the boring/old issue of establishing the copyright pedigree and usage rights of what is presumably (I haven't looked at it: I am just reading the comment <- edit: I have now checked, and while some third-party licenses are included in html/licenses.html, there in fact is no license on the code) a repository of code being maintained by people who are haphazardly pulling from random sources, accepting patches from random people, and who haven't even done the bare minimum of putting a license on their own code in the first place (making it, by default, unable to be used for almost any purpose). It frankly just seems like you are knee-jerking a response to something you have a pet peeve about even when it isn't there :(.
  - forgotpwd16 4y ago
    It was meant as a joke based on the "tangled web of legal nightmares" part and the often written questions/inquiries about the legality of AI generated content. That said, not sure what your point is. It's pretty straightforward from GP that the issue mentioned is about the code licensing rather the content.
hnbad 4y ago
> not ideal to have such an important repo side by side with a "WhitesOnly" rimworld mod Or a "PeacefulProtests" rimworld mod that "adds George Floyd" as a storyteller. It also adds an all-black tribal faction called "peaceful protestors" (with a BLM reference in the source code) that has a high chance of addiction, adds a status effect called "socioeconomic status" that disables all work abilities and creates recurring raids by the aforementioned faction with in-game messages announcing them as peaceful protests and friendly visitors and even showing their names in blue (i.e. friendly). No matter your political leanings, it should be obvious what the joke in this mod is supposed to be. Combined with the "WhitesOnly" mod this certainly gives an impression.
- sli 4y ago
  What joke? I don't see anything in that description that's attempting to be comical.
  - hnbad 4y ago
    It's about as subtle as KZ Manager[0] or your average Stonetoss comic. The punchline in this kind of comedy is the lack of laughter. It's not about making you laugh, it's about making a statement. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KZ_Manager https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KZ_Manager
- kmeisthax 4y ago
  Ugh. This is matching so many stereotypes I had about the AI art community. This has been bugging me for a while. The AI community is morally and ethically bankrupt. Whether it be OpenAI scraping the shit out of FOSS code so they could sell it back to us, Clearview AI scraping people's Facebook photos to train law enforcement tools, or whatever. It's all a "someone else's data" play. At least Stability AI released their model weights to the public that they scraped data from. The whole field is being coopted by grifters, too: you see plenty of videos on how to make "passive income" by reselling low-effort AI art on print-on-demand sites. Yes, it is possible to make actual art with AI, but you need to actually spend time with inpainting and prompt engineering to make it work. This grift is not that. It is literally just "type prompt, spam result, receive bacon". Think like how Amazon marketplace sellers turned Amazon into a shittier flea market. The underlying technology is hilariously exclusionary, too. No we don't have training code for our "open" AI, and if you had it you couldn't use it because you need a rack full of A100s. Let us also not forget that neural networks are basically proprietary software's final form: perfectly functional piles of weights with no extant source code, no way to explain what they're calculating, and basically no reverse-engineering tools. Even in the Actually Libre AI case where we have model weights and reproducible training code, we still can't verify that an AI is doing what we told it to do[1]. I'm not exactly a believer that technology is cursed with the values of the people who created it. You can definitely wrestle good technology out of the hands of bad people. But the converse is definitely true: people who have terribly shit values will curse the technology that they use. Or, more specifically, they will gravitate to whatever they can bend to fit what they want. And it definitely feels like AI art is attracting exactly the kinds of people who don't create, only consume. [1] AI safety experts call this the inner alignment problem.
sillysaurusx 4y ago
I’ll step in and say no, it’s not problematic to have one of the most productive and legendary hackers in AI to be in firm control of the future of the project that he himself created. It sounds like you’re proposing that someone should create their own fork. That’s always an option, and I encourage everyone to. But what else is the proposal here? Forcibly move the repo? It doesn’t really make sense. It’s funny seeing “the code is a mess” presented as a reason why a repo is problematic. It’s code. We all have strong feelings about code. Everyone has their own way of doing things with different engineering and product tradeoffs. In this case, automatic was right for pumping out features as quickly as possible and getting the first mover advantage. So, concretely, what do you feel should be done? I also feel like people haven’t read the actual TOS: > We do not allow sexually themed or suggestive content that serves little or no purpose other than to solicit an erotic or shocking response, particularly where that content is amplified by its placement in profiles or other social contexts. This includes: ...Pornographic content https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/acceptable-use-policies/github-sexually-obscene-content https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/acceptable-use-polici... There’s a larger issue here, far beyond Automatic and this one repo. Those links clearly were not “little to no purpose other than to solicit an erotic or shocking response.” For reference, here’s the diff that got him unbanned: https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/wiki/Textual-Inversion/_compare/bc9a09829dbc90760c8626c83824e05cfab5cb98 https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/wiki...
- fpgaminer 4y ago
  I'm not suggesting someone take control over Automatic1111's repo; that's absurd not to mention illegal. > So, concretely, what do you feel should be done? I'd rather see a more professionally maintained competitor, like InvokeAI, surpass.
  - monkmartinez 4y ago
    "Professionally maintained" reads a lot like gate keeping... What is objectively better about InvokeAI's implementation?
    - 4y ago
rvz 4y ago
> And I'm for the most part not a fan of "censoring" code. Well as many have said years ago, private companies like GitHub can censor anyone at anytime and point at the ToS no matter how vauge, opaque it is. They just have to give you notice, and they can still do it again to anyone else. There is nothing shocking about this. What is really amusing is that people continue to expect a centralized version control management service to not enforce 'censorship' on their own services and products and when they do, everyone here is throwing a tantrum about it. There is always an option to self-host your own GitLab, Gitea instance if you don't like what GitHub is doing.
sieabahlpark 4y ago
[dead]

Der_Einzige 4y ago

So it wasn't the fact that large swaths of the wiki, or the sample images for the extensions are using images that are obviously stand ins for lolicon? There's so much icky stuff going on in the generative art community and no one knows just how deep that rabbit hole goes. E.g.: https://github.com/Kahsolt/stable-diffusion-webui-sonar https://github.com/Kahsolt/stable-diffusion-webui-sonar (See bottom of page).

fpgaminer 4y ago
I recommend reporting that kind of content on GitHub. But please don't lump the entire generative art community in with "icky stuff".
- dylan604 4y ago
  > But please don't lump the entire generative art community in with "icky stuff". But it kind of is depending on your definition of icky. The fact that they've trained the models to be extremely proficient forgers should raise all sorts of red flags. I get the concept of homage and every great artist borrows/steals, blah blah, but as these things continue to get better, the lines between legit artist work and forgery will only blur to unknowable. Digital artists will now need to know how to cryptographically sign their work. There have been tools for this that most ignore because of pricing. (and no i'm not talking about NFT nonsense)
- richbell 4y ago
  > But please don't lump the entire generative art community in with "icky stuff" To be fair, there is substantial interest in using things like Stable Diffusion to generate pornography. There are several projects for hentai, etc. There have also been large threads on /g/ teaching people how to generate hypernerworks with suspiciously young looking subjects since the beginning. The "icky stuff" has a disturbing footprint.
  - fpgaminer 4y ago
    > To be fair, there is substantial interest in using things like Stable Diffusion to generate pornography. There are several projects for hentai, etc. Wanting to making pornography is perfectly normal and healthy; that's not something I consider icky. When I quoted "icky stuff" I thought we were talking about the generation of underage subjects.
    - numpad0 4y ago
      > underage subjects Have you seen ANY legal age subjects? Subjectively, how much fraction of anime pictures do you consider to be portraying individuals able to consent? I mean, if there was an NN code that is returning 0.0120000 for 85% in inference data but ranging evenly between 0.0 to 1.0 in training, intuition shouldn't be that it's the reality that is broken.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
sergiotapia 4y ago
I don't understand why people give a shit. When did normies invade the spaces of these crazy intelligent lunatics? People purposely go play in filth then complain it's filthy.
- debacle 4y ago
  Hi, so I looked at the links in the above post and while cartoony they are clearly not okay. It's not a "normie" take that we shouldn't sexualize children, even if they are animated.
  - sergiotapia 4y ago
    It's repugnant, absolutely. But why do you care what those creeps are doing with code? That's what I don't understand.
  - dylan604 4y ago
    You just described a large swath of anime. I worked for a company licensing anime content, and there were some shows that I felt like I needed a shower after having to work with the content. As the parent of a small child during that time, it was very disturbing. I did not last long working for that company, and is the shortest stint for a company on my resume.
  - sillysaurusx 4y ago
    Are we looking at the same images? What’s sexual about https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Kahsolt/stable-diffusion-webui-sonar/main/img/ref.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Kahsolt/stable-diffusion-w... ? I was expecting some of the horrible stuff I’ve seen on 4chan, not something you might see in a mainstream (bad) anime. If anything, it looks like the AI cleaned it up and made it more presentable.
    - numpad0 4y ago
      Yeah, there's rarely the "disgusting child porn that sexualize minors" that people swear on bible to have seen it where they've seen it. It's always chalked up to "local cultural tolerances for molesting children" but ... almost feels like reading the SCP-040-JP creepypasta.
voldacar 4y ago
Username does not check out
- williamscales 4y ago
  I don’t 100% follow, I did a bit of googling and I don’t exactly grasp the problem. Could you point me in the right direction?
  - voldacar 4y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ego_and_Its_Own https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ego_and_Its_Own
    - Der_Einzige 4y ago
      The only reason stirner didn't explicitly defend liberalism is that germany circa the 1840s was really, really garbage. This is why people think he was an "anarchist" It's in my self interest to not see icky things.

forgotpwd16 4y ago

>making its codebase a tangled web of legal nightmares Perfectly suitable for a project about AI content generation. Every related submission also has at least one comment talking about the legality of it.

saurik 4y ago
I guess? But that wasn't about the legality of "AI", or of training such against others copyrighted works, but merely the boring/old issue of establishing the copyright pedigree and usage rights of what is presumably (I haven't looked at it: I am just reading the comment <- edit: I have now checked, and while some third-party licenses are included in html/licenses.html, there in fact is no license on the code) a repository of code being maintained by people who are haphazardly pulling from random sources, accepting patches from random people, and who haven't even done the bare minimum of putting a license on their own code in the first place (making it, by default, unable to be used for almost any purpose). It frankly just seems like you are knee-jerking a response to something you have a pet peeve about even when it isn't there :(.
- forgotpwd16 4y ago
  It was meant as a joke based on the "tangled web of legal nightmares" part and the often written questions/inquiries about the legality of AI generated content. That said, not sure what your point is. It's pretty straightforward from GP that the issue mentioned is about the code licensing rather the content.

hnbad 4y ago

> not ideal to have such an important repo side by side with a "WhitesOnly" rimworld mod Or a "PeacefulProtests" rimworld mod that "adds George Floyd" as a storyteller. It also adds an all-black tribal faction called "peaceful protestors" (with a BLM reference in the source code) that has a high chance of addiction, adds a status effect called "socioeconomic status" that disables all work abilities and creates recurring raids by the aforementioned faction with in-game messages announcing them as peaceful protests and friendly visitors and even showing their names in blue (i.e. friendly). No matter your political leanings, it should be obvious what the joke in this mod is supposed to be. Combined with the "WhitesOnly" mod this certainly gives an impression.

sli 4y ago
What joke? I don't see anything in that description that's attempting to be comical.
- hnbad 4y ago
  It's about as subtle as KZ Manager[0] or your average Stonetoss comic. The punchline in this kind of comedy is the lack of laughter. It's not about making you laugh, it's about making a statement. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KZ_Manager https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KZ_Manager
kmeisthax 4y ago
Ugh. This is matching so many stereotypes I had about the AI art community. This has been bugging me for a while. The AI community is morally and ethically bankrupt. Whether it be OpenAI scraping the shit out of FOSS code so they could sell it back to us, Clearview AI scraping people's Facebook photos to train law enforcement tools, or whatever. It's all a "someone else's data" play. At least Stability AI released their model weights to the public that they scraped data from. The whole field is being coopted by grifters, too: you see plenty of videos on how to make "passive income" by reselling low-effort AI art on print-on-demand sites. Yes, it is possible to make actual art with AI, but you need to actually spend time with inpainting and prompt engineering to make it work. This grift is not that. It is literally just "type prompt, spam result, receive bacon". Think like how Amazon marketplace sellers turned Amazon into a shittier flea market. The underlying technology is hilariously exclusionary, too. No we don't have training code for our "open" AI, and if you had it you couldn't use it because you need a rack full of A100s. Let us also not forget that neural networks are basically proprietary software's final form: perfectly functional piles of weights with no extant source code, no way to explain what they're calculating, and basically no reverse-engineering tools. Even in the Actually Libre AI case where we have model weights and reproducible training code, we still can't verify that an AI is doing what we told it to do[1]. I'm not exactly a believer that technology is cursed with the values of the people who created it. You can definitely wrestle good technology out of the hands of bad people. But the converse is definitely true: people who have terribly shit values will curse the technology that they use. Or, more specifically, they will gravitate to whatever they can bend to fit what they want. And it definitely feels like AI art is attracting exactly the kinds of people who don't create, only consume. [1] AI safety experts call this the inner alignment problem.

sillysaurusx 4y ago

I’ll step in and say no, it’s not problematic to have one of the most productive and legendary hackers in AI to be in firm control of the future of the project that he himself created. It sounds like you’re proposing that someone should create their own fork. That’s always an option, and I encourage everyone to. But what else is the proposal here? Forcibly move the repo? It doesn’t really make sense. It’s funny seeing “the code is a mess” presented as a reason why a repo is problematic. It’s code. We all have strong feelings about code. Everyone has their own way of doing things with different engineering and product tradeoffs. In this case, automatic was right for pumping out features as quickly as possible and getting the first mover advantage. So, concretely, what do you feel should be done? I also feel like people haven’t read the actual TOS: > We do not allow sexually themed or suggestive content that serves little or no purpose other than to solicit an erotic or shocking response, particularly where that content is amplified by its placement in profiles or other social contexts. This includes: ...Pornographic content https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/acceptable-use-policies/github-sexually-obscene-content https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/acceptable-use-polici... There’s a larger issue here, far beyond Automatic and this one repo. Those links clearly were not “little to no purpose other than to solicit an erotic or shocking response.” For reference, here’s the diff that got him unbanned: https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/wiki/Textual-Inversion/_compare/bc9a09829dbc90760c8626c83824e05cfab5cb98 https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/wiki...

fpgaminer 4y ago
I'm not suggesting someone take control over Automatic1111's repo; that's absurd not to mention illegal. > So, concretely, what do you feel should be done? I'd rather see a more professionally maintained competitor, like InvokeAI, surpass.
- monkmartinez 4y ago
  "Professionally maintained" reads a lot like gate keeping... What is objectively better about InvokeAI's implementation?
  - 4y ago

rvz 4y ago

> And I'm for the most part not a fan of "censoring" code. Well as many have said years ago, private companies like GitHub can censor anyone at anytime and point at the ToS no matter how vauge, opaque it is. They just have to give you notice, and they can still do it again to anyone else. There is nothing shocking about this. What is really amusing is that people continue to expect a centralized version control management service to not enforce 'censorship' on their own services and products and when they do, everyone here is throwing a tantrum about it. There is always an option to self-host your own GitLab, Gitea instance if you don't like what GitHub is doing.

sieabahlpark 4y ago

[dead]