Google’s DeepMind unit is unveiling today a new method it says can invisibly and permanently label images that have been generated by artificial intelligence.

      • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        You heard of stable difusion? They got 1 line installs nowadays then all you have to enter is a prompt and go.

        Entirely open source so anyone could improve the model or not, and it’d be more than legal to release a non watermarked version (if a watermarked version even ever appeared).

        I saw down the chain it was compared to deuvono, which I’d argue is a bad analogy - cause whos gonna run a rootkit on their PC just to create an image, especially when there’s a million options not to (unlike games which are generally unique)

          • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I see what you mean yes, but of course such large resources are required to train the model - not run it. So reasonably as long as a bunch of users can pool resources to compete with big tech, there will always be an ‘un-watermark-able’ crowd out there, making all the watermakrs essentially useless because they only got half the picture.

            And how training these models works is insanely parallel, so reasonably - if (ideally a FOSS) project pops up allowing users to donate cpu time to train the model as a whole - users could actually have more computational power than the big tech companies

              • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think youre mixing together a couple angles here to try n make a point.

                ‘Unless the open source model is the best…theyre using proprietary code’ youre talking about a hypothetical program hypothetically being stolen and referencing it as a definite?

                As per the companies, of course they only use certain resoures, theyre companies they need returns to exist. A couple million down the drain could be some CEO’s next bonus, so they won’t do anything theyre into sure they’ll get something from (even if only short term)

                As per the 4chan, was that a coincidence or are you referencing unstable diffusion? Cause they did do almost exactly that (before of course it got mismanaged cause the nsfw industry is always been a bit ghetto)

                And like sure fold it at home or donate for aws, same end result really doesn’t matter what the user’s are comfortable with

                And whew finally sure ms bought github but like you think stable diffusion bought the internet? Courts have proven webscraping is legal…

                Ik this is a wall of text but like I said these arguments all feel like a bunch of thoughts tangentially related

  • cybirdman@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    TBF, I don’t think the purpose of this watermark is to prevent bad people for passing AI as real. It would be a welcome side-effect but that’s not why google wants this. Ultimately this is supposed to prevent AI training data from being contaminated with other AI generated content. You could imagine if the data set for training contains a million images generated with previous models having mangled fingers and crooked eyes, it would be hard to train a good AI out of that. Garbage in, garbage out.

    • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      So theoretically, those of us who put original images online could add this invisible watermark to make AI models leave our stuff out of their “steal this” pile?

      • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        iirc AI models becoming worse after being trained with AI generated data is an actual issue right now. Even if we (or the AI) can’t distinguish them from real images there are subtle differences that can be compounded into quite large differences if the AI is fed its own work over several generations and lead to a degraded output.

    • SkySyrup@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure that’s the case. For instance, a lot of smaller local models leverage GPT4 to generate synthetic training data, which drastically improves the model’s output quality. The issue comes in when there is no QC on the model’s output. The same applies to Stable Diffusion.

  • djmarcone@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Spoiler - they will secretly have all humans in ai generated art have slightly messed up hands.

    Mind blown!