4 ms·

So it is the opposite of attribution. It just makes up a plausible-looking story of attribution and passes it off as the truth. If you passed it a hand-painted

So it is the opposite of attribution. It just makes up a plausible-looking story of attribution and passes it off as the truth. If you passed it a hand-painted image from 1850 which was not in SD's training dataset, it can happily declare that it was inspired by someone's piece from 2019. There's no actual causal inference going on. It has more in common with using an AI language model as a "bullshit generator" than it has with human attribution. Which isn't a coincidence, since nearest neighbour similarity searches ARE a type of machine learning, just a much simpler one than SD. Anti AI people who are upset about attribution, should learn the technology and try to create an actual attribution model: one that has a notion of causality, which could say who influenced who. Causal model requires causal assumptions, but you can probably get far with the simple assumption that "works from the future do not influence works from the past".

jfoster 4y ago
You can literally take a photo right now, upload it, and it will find similar photos from the SD dataset.
- Aransentin 4y ago
  As an obvious example, I uploaded a photograph I took of a painting I have by Julie Hagen-Schwarz* that's been in private possession since 1882 and never put online: https://www.stableattribution.com/?image=7730efac-bf52-4077-8bfc-9141bd4bff22 https://www.stableattribution.com/?image=7730efac-bf52-4077-... It still finds ostensible "source images" for the art. So, yes, it's clear this service is pretty much bogus. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Wilhelmine_Hagen-Schwarz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Wilhelmine_Hagen-Schwarz
wilimitis 4y ago
Why do you close the space for people who are pro-ai AND pro-attribution? The entire ai space wreaks of this divisiveness, and is likely why it will continue to die out as another "art-fad". There is seemingly little willingness to integrate into the existing art world in good faith.
- vintermann 4y ago
  I close the space for liars, whether they are pro or anti, and this service lies about attribution. Lying about attribution will just make everything worse.
  - wilimitis 4y ago
    I carefully did not mention this service, but rather pointed it to your sentiment which AGAIN seems to be binary in this pro/anti idea which is unnecessarily rigid and resistant to furthering discussion on the topic.

jfoster 4y ago

You can literally take a photo right now, upload it, and it will find similar photos from the SD dataset.

Aransentin 4y ago
As an obvious example, I uploaded a photograph I took of a painting I have by Julie Hagen-Schwarz* that's been in private possession since 1882 and never put online: https://www.stableattribution.com/?image=7730efac-bf52-4077-8bfc-9141bd4bff22 https://www.stableattribution.com/?image=7730efac-bf52-4077-... It still finds ostensible "source images" for the art. So, yes, it's clear this service is pretty much bogus. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Wilhelmine_Hagen-Schwarz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Wilhelmine_Hagen-Schwarz

wilimitis 4y ago

Why do you close the space for people who are pro-ai AND pro-attribution? The entire ai space wreaks of this divisiveness, and is likely why it will continue to die out as another "art-fad". There is seemingly little willingness to integrate into the existing art world in good faith.

vintermann 4y ago
I close the space for liars, whether they are pro or anti, and this service lies about attribution. Lying about attribution will just make everything worse.
- wilimitis 4y ago
  I carefully did not mention this service, but rather pointed it to your sentiment which AGAIN seems to be binary in this pro/anti idea which is unnecessarily rigid and resistant to furthering discussion on the topic.