3 ms·

I wonder if it's a matter of the relative usage of those tools being very small compared to what already exists, and the few artists that want to muddy their wo

I wonder if it's a matter of the relative usage of those tools being very small compared to what already exists, and the few artists that want to muddy their work fir it. But even if it was significant, I'm sure the next thing to release would be AI models designed to try and revert nightshade/glaze changes into something that works again. I wonder if one could do something to protect images in a similar way that Anubis protects webpages from scrapers. Where the data sent from the server is mathematically obfuscated such that the client has to do some heavy calculating to get the final product. It wouldn't stop an individual from collecting a small sample set, but it would discourage mass scraping.

dale_glass 10mo ago
> But even if it was significant, I'm sure the next thing to release would be AI models designed to try and revert nightshade/glaze changes into something that works again. I don't think it's even "reverting". Glaze isn't generically anti-AI, Glaze tries to exploit flaws in one particular image AI implementation, by actually testing its reaction to a disturbance in the image. The approach only works if the model at all cares about the type of disturbance being created. Other models likely don't notice anything at all, there's nothing for them to revert. > It wouldn't stop an individual from collecting a small sample set, but it would discourage mass scraping. IMO, if they want to, they will do it. AI training already requires mass amounts of CPU/GPU power. They can also use it to solve your calculation challenge, and anyone training models will have enough horsepower available as to dwarf anything any reasonable client machine could deal with.