4 ms·
The author of https://haveibeentrained.com/ https://haveibeentrained.com/ made an article about it: https://spawning.substack.com/p/we-tested-glaze-art-cloaking
by GaggiX 4y ago
The author of https://haveibeentrained.com/ https://haveibeentrained.com/ made an article about it: https://spawning.substack.com/p/we-tested-glaze-art-cloaking https://spawning.substack.com/p/we-tested-glaze-art-cloaking
What surprises me most is that the paper does not consider the most obvious case: resizing of images before training; people usually train an SD model on resolutions of 512/768, so the noise is destroyed to a large extent even without realizing it. Why resizing the images is so effective is shown in this article about adversarial attacks: https://towardsdatascience.com/know-your-enemy-7f7c5038bdf3 https://towardsdatascience.com/know-your-enemy-7f7c5038bdf3, the model after being trained with adversarial training learns independently to rescale the images as an adversarial defence.
They also not consider in the Countermeasures section the fact that people can use diffusion models for what they are trained to do, denoising the images, if you put adversarial noise on it you can use img2img to remove it (maybe even canny controlnet just to guide it even more).
Final detail (maybe) is that the paper do not address the fact this only works on models trained with a VAE and not on diffusion-only models like Dalle 2, Karlo, Imagen (maybe MJ, who knows).
The software that applies the "protection" do not run on the GPU even though it runs SD and gradient descent, so it could even take 40 mins to apply it on a single image; it also violated the GPL license of DiffusionBee: https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/11sqkh9/glaze_is_violating_gpl/ https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/11sqkh9/gl...
In case it's necessary to remove the adversarial noise, the simplest way: https://github.com/lllyasviel/AdverseCleaner https://github.com/lllyasviel/AdverseCleaner (16 lines of Python)
- josephcsible 4y ago> it also violated the GPL license of DiffusionBee: https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/11sqkh9/glaze_is_violating_gpl/ https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/11sqkh9/gl... Are there plans for any DiffusionBee contributors to sue or file a DMCA takedown against Glaze?
- GaggiX 4y agoI think that the authors of Glaze released the code after it was discovered. Edit: https://mobile.twitter.com/ravenben/status/1636439335569375238 https://mobile.twitter.com/ravenben/status/16364393355693752..., he is talking about releasing the code behind the front-end even if the back-end also violates the license.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- zarzavat 4y agoIs DiffusionBee AGPL? If not, they don’t have to release any backend code if they are not distributing it as binaries or obfuscated code. GPL says: if you distribute something that is based upon GPL code, then you must be prepared to offer the full code to the thing you distributed, on demand. You can even charge a reasonable fee to cover your costs. Someone asked them for the code, they responded by publishing it, so there has been no GPL violation. There is only a violation if they refuse a valid request.
- GaggiX 4y agoThe backend is obfuscated using Pyarmor.
- j16sdiz 4y ago> it also violated the GPL license of DiffusionBee. Isn't "critic" / "research" / "education" good fair-use cases?
- GaggiX 4y agohttps://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLFairUse https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLFairUse I don't know how small the snippet has to be to be considered fair in court, but it looks like they copied large portion of code.
- bawolff 4y agoWhether this counts as that seems like a complex question. Certainly i don't see how this is a critique.
- p_l 4y agoThis is creation of derivative art and publishing it in violation of license. Fair use is violated by the scale of copy-paste involved, and well, none of "critic", "research", or "education" are the uses involved in the release of the derived art. (Writing a paper would fall under "research", iirc)
- ShamelessC 4y agoI am skeptical of this research. But, it amazes me the degree to which GPL proponents are willing to threaten the livelihoods of what are _clearly_ people with good intentions without even trying to understand the situation or inspect intentions. These are grad students and artists. It was probably a mistake - or they found it was covered under fair use. But, nope! Stallman wouldn’t approve! Canceled!
- Kim_Bruning 4y agoThey claimed they had made a tool to prevent plagiarism. On closer inspection, it turns out the tool itself was plagiarized. That was certainly a mistake.
- ShamelessC 4y agoThat seems like intentionally broadening the scope of their claims in order to fit a pre-defined narrative that falls apart upon closer inspection.
- kazinator 4y agoYou're just playing word games. Whether a tool prevents plagiarism has nothing to do with whether it is itself plagiarized. Plagiarism is a misconduct whereby someone else's work is presented as one's own. Falling afoul of the GNU Public License in some way isn't ipso facto plagiarism.
- Kim_Bruning 4y agoI'm actually just summarizing what the sources say here. "Plagiarism is the fraudulent representation of another person's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions as one's own original work." [1] Tool claims to prevent plagiarism, paper uses "plagiarism" language throughout. [2] Writers of tool used substantial portions of a different tool without acknowledgement. Source explicitly calls this out as plagiarism in first paragraph [3]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism [2] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.04222.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.04222.pdf [3] https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/11sqkh9/glaze_is_violating_gpl/ https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/11sqkh9/gl... (edit) To be sure: somewhat later, authors do seem to be correcting their behavior, but only after having been called out. ( https://mobile.twitter.com/ravenben/status/1636439335569375238 https://mobile.twitter.com/ravenben/status/16364393355693752... )
- danaris 4y ago> it also violated the GPL license of DiffusionBee ...and as soon as this was brought to their attention, the authors took out the infringing code and reimplemented it from scratch.