4 ms·
i wouldn't have any confidence in being able to remove a 0.5 bit watermark (presence/absence). what you see is probably a functional decoy.
by teravor 5mo ago
i wouldn't have any confidence in being able to remove a 0.5 bit watermark (presence/absence). what you see is probably a functional decoy.
- huflungdung 5mo ago[dead]
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- yorwba 5mo agoYou can use the verification tool to check whether the watermark is still detectable and iterate until you successfully removed it . Of course if you need to regenerate the image with an unwatermarked image-generation model to remove it, it more or less still serves its purpose.
- tux3 5mo agoHow confident are you that the verification tool detects all of the watermark, and not just one layer? I would layer two watermarks and let the public remove the most visible one.
- soraminazuki 5mo agoWhat good does a totally imaginary AI watermark that'll never be revealed to the public even do?
- ndr 5mo agoIt might not be intended for the public. Similar to your printer fingerprinting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer_tracking_dots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer_tracking_dots
- PxldLtd 5mo agoYou can reveal it later when you come up with a new mechanism and out all the fake images. Basically the first layer is first defence, second layer is cleanup when releasing a new mechanism. That way your generated images will always be identifiable eventually.
- unglaublich 5mo agoIt's to mark the images for exclusion during training.
- ZiiS 5mo agoA better way of looking at it is you only need to introduce a .5 bit error.