stability-ai/stable-video-diffusion – Run with an API on Replicate
SVD is a research-only image to video model
From toy to tool: DALL-E 3 is a wake-up call for visual artists—and the rest of us
King_Kamala61
:mjlit: A Fat Black Nasty MFer :mjlit:
stability-ai/stable-video-diffusion – Run with an API on Replicate
SVD is a research-only image to video modelreplicate.com
You can eventually make creator owned shorts with AI...this is major
Data poisoning: how artists are sabotaging AI to take revenge on image generators
As AI developers indiscriminately suck up online content to train their models, artists are seeking ways to fight back.
theconversation.com
T.J. Thomson, Author provided
Data poisoning: how artists are sabotaging AI to take revenge on image generators
Published: December 17, 2023 2:17pm EST
Authors
T.J. Thomson
Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Digital Media, RMIT University
Daniel Angus
Professor of Digital Communication, Queensland University of Technology
Disclosure statement
Imagine this. You need an image of a balloon for a work presentation and turn to a text-to-image generator, like Midjourney or DALL-E, to create a suitable image.
You enter the prompt: “red balloon against a blue sky” but the generator returns an image of an egg instead. You try again but this time, the generator shows an image of a watermelon.
What’s going on?
The generator you’re using may have been “poisoned”.
We believe good journalism is good for democracy and necessary for it.
Learn more
What is ‘data poisoning’?
Text-to-image generators work by being trained on large datasets that include millions or billions of images. Some generators, like those offered by Adobe or Getty, are only trained with images the generator’s maker owns or has a licence to use.
But other generators have been trained by indiscriminately scraping online images, many of which may be under copyright. This has led to a slew of copyright infringement cases where artists have accused big tech companies of stealing and profiting from their work.
This is also where the idea of “poison” comes in. Researchers who want to empower individual artists have recently created a tool named “Nightshade” to fight back against unauthorised image scraping.
The tool works by subtly altering an image’s pixels in a way that wreaks havoc to computer vision but leaves the image unaltered to a human’s eyes.
If an organisation then scrapes one of these images to train a future AI model, its data pool becomes “poisoned”. This can result in the algorithm mistakenly learning to classify an image as something a human would visually know to be untrue. As a result, the generator can start returning unpredictable and unintended results.
Symptoms of poisoning
As in our earlier example, a balloon might become an egg. A request for an image in the style of Monet might instead return an image in the style of Picasso.
Some of the issues with earlier AI models, such as trouble accurately rendering hands, for example, could return. The models could also introduce other odd and illogical features to images – think six-legged dogs or deformed couches.
The higher the number of “poisoned” images in the training data, the greater the disruption. Because of how generative AI works, the damage from “poisoned” images also affects related prompt keywords.
Read more: Do AI systems really have their own secret language?
For example, if a “poisoned” image of a Ferrari is used in training data, prompt results for other car brands and for other related terms, such as vehicle and automobile, can also be affected.
Nightshade’s developer hopes the tool will make big tech companies more respectful of copyright, but it’s also possible users could abuse the tool and intentionally upload “poisoned” images to generators to try and disrupt their services.
Is there an antidote?
In response, stakeholders have proposed a range of technological and human solutions. The most obvious is paying greater attention to where input data are coming from and how they can be used. Doing so would result in less indiscriminate data harvesting.
This approach does challenge a common belief among computer scientists: that data found online can be used for any purpose they see fit.
Other technological fixes also include the use of “ensemble modeling” where different models are trained on many different subsets of data and compared to locate specific outliers. This approach can be used not only for training but also to detect and discard suspected “poisoned” images.
Audits are another option. One audit approach involves developing a “test battery” – a small, highly curated, and well-labelled dataset – using “hold-out” data that are never used for training. This dataset can then be used to examine the model’s accuracy.
Strategies against technology
So-called “adversarial approaches” (those that degrade, deny, deceive, or manipulate AI systems), including data poisoning, are nothing new. They have also historically included using make-up and costumes to circumvent facial recognition systems.
Human rights activists, for example, have been concerned for some time about the indiscriminate use of machine vision in wider society. This concern is particularly acute concerning facial recognition.
Systems like Clearview AI, which hosts a massive searchable database of faces scraped from the internet, are used by law enforcement and government agencies worldwide. In 2021, Australia’s government determined Clearview AI breached the privacy of Australians.
Read more: Australian police are using the Clearview AI facial recognition system with no accountability
In response to facial recognition systems being used to profile specific individuals, including legitimate protesters, artists devised adversarial make-up patterns of jagged lines and asymmetric curves that prevent surveillance systems from accurately identifying them.
There is a clear connection between these cases and the issue of data poisoning, as both relate to larger questions around technological governance.
Many technology vendors will consider data poisoning a pesky issue to be fixed with technological solutions. However, it may be better to see data poisoning as an innovative solution to an intrusion on the fundamental moral rights of artists and users.
Artificial intelligence (AI)
DALL-E 2
MidJourney
Generative AI
Last edited:
010101
C L O N E*0690//////
art isn't a necessity & your attachment to it is just a learned habit
you should not send yourself into a emotional crisis over entertainment
whether sourced from natural intelligence or artificial intelligence enjoy it the same
*
you should not send yourself into a emotional crisis over entertainment
whether sourced from natural intelligence or artificial intelligence enjoy it the same
*
010101
C L O N E*0690//////
life before art life after art..........*
2 Up 2 Down
Veteran
Spooky
Interested to see how creatives react to it.
Interested to see how creatives react to it.
Paintings used to be the highest form of art. Like, those big ass murals on chapel ceilings. That was the I Max of the time.
Photography reallllllly fukced up the painting game. Painters still could do fancy things, but when it comes to reproducing something you can see with eyesight, but you want to capture... such as a portrait or what a far off city look like or an undiscovered spider you happen across... photography kills the need to try to draw something you wanna "remember". So about 90% of the reason to sketch something out as a record is gone. Especially with the cell phone cam.
As we develop new tech: computer animation replaces hand drawn frames.
I CANNOT understand why paintings are still being made. And I was an art minor in college. I've sold artwork.
An art gallery or museum is the most boring place on Earth to me. Even if the artist can draw something that looks like a photo. I done care. I've seen 38289 artists that can do that.
Of course movies are our thing now. Art has reached its highest form to date in cinema. There's visual design. Choreography. Architecture. Fashion. Music. Sound design. Acting. Basically every form of art goes into a movie.
The AI thing is replacing "graphic design" in a way. If you need a quick image to communicate to others you can throw it in the AI and make... Like a flyer for the company Christmas party. Or a greeting card. Or something kinda useless that would have taken a human a couple hours tho create. The AI does it in moments.
I believe the human touch will be valuable, still. Cause one thing the AI cannot do is CREATE. AI literally gathers all images of "pickles" and "plates" on the whole web (or whatever it draws from) then gives you a VERY good amalgamation.. average.. composite.? of the existing information.
The human has to be the force that has walked around taking pictures of pickles and plates and up loading them to the Internet in the first place.
The AI will never generate the source material. It can only do a highly advanced form of photocopy
Photography reallllllly fukced up the painting game. Painters still could do fancy things, but when it comes to reproducing something you can see with eyesight, but you want to capture... such as a portrait or what a far off city look like or an undiscovered spider you happen across... photography kills the need to try to draw something you wanna "remember". So about 90% of the reason to sketch something out as a record is gone. Especially with the cell phone cam.
As we develop new tech: computer animation replaces hand drawn frames.
I CANNOT understand why paintings are still being made. And I was an art minor in college. I've sold artwork.
An art gallery or museum is the most boring place on Earth to me. Even if the artist can draw something that looks like a photo. I done care. I've seen 38289 artists that can do that.
Of course movies are our thing now. Art has reached its highest form to date in cinema. There's visual design. Choreography. Architecture. Fashion. Music. Sound design. Acting. Basically every form of art goes into a movie.
The AI thing is replacing "graphic design" in a way. If you need a quick image to communicate to others you can throw it in the AI and make... Like a flyer for the company Christmas party. Or a greeting card. Or something kinda useless that would have taken a human a couple hours tho create. The AI does it in moments.
I believe the human touch will be valuable, still. Cause one thing the AI cannot do is CREATE. AI literally gathers all images of "pickles" and "plates" on the whole web (or whatever it draws from) then gives you a VERY good amalgamation.. average.. composite.? of the existing information.
The human has to be the force that has walked around taking pictures of pickles and plates and up loading them to the Internet in the first place.
The AI will never generate the source material. It can only do a highly advanced form of photocopy
Or...art is life and art imitates life
What?! You clearly know nothing about AI art and have never used it yourself. You see all these Leonardo and Dall-E posts on social media but don't understand that there are so many other AI's that produce different styles and you can use prompts and seeds to get the same style art from any artist you can name. May not be perfect yet but extremely close.Can't create art in the style of my favorite artists so why would they be threatened, they're getting hired for their specific style, a.i. would have to copy their shyt specifically, pretty sure they'd be able to take the company to court
It's ass backwards to use a.i. for things that are actually fun anyway,idk why that's what people are pushing for, use that shyt to handle all of the boring tedious aspects of adult life instead so everyone can enjoy actually having enough free time to do creative hobbies
010101
C L O N E*0690//////
poetic but that doesn't make it facts
life is naturally occuring
art is a product of human activity imagination inginuity..........
*
