4 ms·

Is this a big deal? I'm a layman here so this seems like a needed product but I have a feeling I'm missing something.

clueless 2y ago
this is one of the primary communication methods of oversea agents in CIA, interesting to have it be used more broadly </joke>
- dangsux 2y ago
  [dead]
- bagels 2y ago
  Do you have a source? I'd be interested in reading more about this.
  - edm0nd 2y ago
    of course not, check their username.
  - cozmorado 2y ago
    It's a form of Steganography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography
    - bagels 2y ago
      Was referring specifically to the claim about the CIA, I'm aware of steganography.
mintplant 2y ago
My assumption is that this will be used to watermark images coming out of cloud-based generative AI.
- jsheard 2y ago
  And they'll say it's to combat disinformation, but it'll actually be to help themselves filter AI generated content out of new AI training datasets so their models don't get Habsburg'd.
  - muppetman 2y ago
    I wondered why they'd be doing this NOW and this makes perfect sense!!
  - Y_Y 2y ago
    > their models don't get Habsburg'd. You mean develop a magnificent jawline, or continue to influence Austrian politics?
    - selimthegrim 2y ago
      I was reading an article lately about how a lot of that was really just immensely dumb luck on their inbreeding part - that is, they ended up picking just exactly the worst sort
    - glenneroo 2y ago
      How do they still influence Austrian politics? Do you have any links or sources? I'm genuinely curious!
  - leemailll 2y ago
    >so their models don't get Habsburg'd. Nice metaphor
- Animats 2y ago
  Why? Those are not copyrightable.
  - xd1936 2y ago
    Because downstream consumers of the media might want to know if an image has been created or manipulated by AI tools.
Jach 2y ago
Various previous attempts at invisible/imperceptible/mostly imperceptible watermarking have been trivially defeated, this attempt claims to be more robust to various kinds of edits. (From the paper: various geometric edits like rotations or crops, various valuemetric edits like blurs or brightness changes, and various splicing edits like cutting parts of the image into a new one or inpainting.) Invisible watermarking is useful for tracing origins of content. That might be copyright information, or AI service information, or photoshop information, or unique ID information to trace leakers of video game demos / films, or (until the local hardware key is extracted) a form of proof that an image came from a particular camera...
- mananaysiempre 2y ago
  ... Ideal for a repressive government or just a mildly corrupt government agency / corporate body to use to identify defectors, leakers, whistleblowers, or other dissidents. (Digital image sensors effectively already mark their output due to randomness of semiconductor manufacturing, and that has already been used by abovementioned actors for the abovementioned purposes. But that at least is difficult.) Tell me with a straight face that a culture that produced Chat Control or attempted to track forwarding chains of chat messages[1] won’t mandate device-unique watermarks kept on file by the communications regulator. And those are the more liberal governments by today’s standards. I’m surprised how eager people are to build this kind of tech. It was quite a scandal (if ultimately a fruitless one) when it came out colour printers marked their output with unique identifiers; and now that generative AI is a thing stuff like TFA is seen as virtuous somehow. Can we maybe not forget about humans?.. [1] I don’t remember where I read about the latter or which country it was about—maybe India?
  - baltimore 2y ago
    > ... for a repressive government ... Why shouldn't a virtuous and transparent government (should one materialize somehow, somewhere) be interested in identifying leakers?
    - Jerrrrrrry 2y ago

this is one of the primary communication methods of oversea agents in CIA, interesting to have it be used more broadly </joke>

dangsux 2y ago
[dead]
bagels 2y ago
Do you have a source? I'd be interested in reading more about this.
- edm0nd 2y ago
  of course not, check their username.
- cozmorado 2y ago
  It's a form of Steganography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography
  - bagels 2y ago
    Was referring specifically to the claim about the CIA, I'm aware of steganography.

mintplant 2y ago

My assumption is that this will be used to watermark images coming out of cloud-based generative AI.

jsheard 2y ago
And they'll say it's to combat disinformation, but it'll actually be to help themselves filter AI generated content out of new AI training datasets so their models don't get Habsburg'd.
- muppetman 2y ago
  I wondered why they'd be doing this NOW and this makes perfect sense!!
- Y_Y 2y ago
  > their models don't get Habsburg'd. You mean develop a magnificent jawline, or continue to influence Austrian politics?
  - selimthegrim 2y ago
    I was reading an article lately about how a lot of that was really just immensely dumb luck on their inbreeding part - that is, they ended up picking just exactly the worst sort
  - glenneroo 2y ago
    How do they still influence Austrian politics? Do you have any links or sources? I'm genuinely curious!
- leemailll 2y ago
  >so their models don't get Habsburg'd. Nice metaphor
Animats 2y ago
Why? Those are not copyrightable.
- xd1936 2y ago
  Because downstream consumers of the media might want to know if an image has been created or manipulated by AI tools.

Jach 2y ago

Various previous attempts at invisible/imperceptible/mostly imperceptible watermarking have been trivially defeated, this attempt claims to be more robust to various kinds of edits. (From the paper: various geometric edits like rotations or crops, various valuemetric edits like blurs or brightness changes, and various splicing edits like cutting parts of the image into a new one or inpainting.) Invisible watermarking is useful for tracing origins of content. That might be copyright information, or AI service information, or photoshop information, or unique ID information to trace leakers of video game demos / films, or (until the local hardware key is extracted) a form of proof that an image came from a particular camera...

mananaysiempre 2y ago
... Ideal for a repressive government or just a mildly corrupt government agency / corporate body to use to identify defectors, leakers, whistleblowers, or other dissidents. (Digital image sensors effectively already mark their output due to randomness of semiconductor manufacturing, and that has already been used by abovementioned actors for the abovementioned purposes. But that at least is difficult.) Tell me with a straight face that a culture that produced Chat Control or attempted to track forwarding chains of chat messages[1] won’t mandate device-unique watermarks kept on file by the communications regulator. And those are the more liberal governments by today’s standards. I’m surprised how eager people are to build this kind of tech. It was quite a scandal (if ultimately a fruitless one) when it came out colour printers marked their output with unique identifiers; and now that generative AI is a thing stuff like TFA is seen as virtuous somehow. Can we maybe not forget about humans?.. [1] I don’t remember where I read about the latter or which country it was about—maybe India?
- baltimore 2y ago
  > ... for a repressive government ... Why shouldn't a virtuous and transparent government (should one materialize somehow, somewhere) be interested in identifying leakers?
  - Jerrrrrrry 2y ago