this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
570 points (86.4% liked)

Technology

59322 readers
4428 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A new tool lets artists add invisible changes to the pixels in their art before they upload it online so that if it’s scraped into an AI training set, it can cause the resulting model to break in chaotic and unpredictable ways.

The tool, called Nightshade, is intended as a way to fight back against AI companies that use artists’ work to train their models without the creator’s permission.
[...]
Zhao’s team also developed Glaze, a tool that allows artists to “mask” their own personal style to prevent it from being scraped by AI companies. It works in a similar way to Nightshade: by changing the pixels of images in subtle ways that are invisible to the human eye but manipulate machine-learning models to interpret the image as something different from what it actually shows.

(page 3) 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

this is so dumb and clear it wont work at all. thats not the slightest how ai trains on images.

you would be able to get around this tool by just doing the nft thing and screenshot the image and boom code in the picture is erased.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What a dumb solution to a problem that doesn't need a solution. The problem isn't AI, it's the lack of understanding for the tech that has people thinking AI is theft.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is it not theft? These "AI" are trained on other people's work, often without their knowledge or permission.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is why I think people don't know what they are talking about.

You can look at a picture from an artist without it being considered theft, so are your memories and impressions theft? That's what training data does, it teaches AI what something looks like, with many samples. It's literally what your brain does, the way you see multiple dogs and know what a dog looks like is the same way that AI trains pattern recognition.

It's completely reasonable and desirable to have AI consume all available images, regardless of copyright the way your eyes and brain can do the same. Training data isn't theft no more than going to a museum and looking at art is theft.

This take that this is bad is completely unhinged and indicates people don't understand AI.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd be careful with claiming who does and does not understand things.

First of all, a person can't go to a museum, see a piece of art then go home and reproduce that art or style. Given enough time, sure they might be able to learn to replicate the style. Those that are particularly good at reproduction might even become forgers which is a crime.

Second, these llms aren't AI. They can't think in terms of how a living being can, only regurgitate information. They're glorified search engines in a way.

Lastly, I can assume that you aren't a creative person. You probably type in some prompt to an image generator and think "I made this". It's easier for someone like you to overlook issues because they don't effect you because you lack depth, which I know is hard to accept. Maybe one day you'll gain some insight into your own lack of understanding... But I doubt it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I used to be a musician, I also used to paint. I think my thought processes are no more complex than most computers, and I genuinely don't believe human creativity is special even a little bit, like consciousness, it's a subjective illusion.

I do not believe in things like copyright, or intellectual property, or even ownership of these things, I think these things should be collectively owned by society.

I don't disagree with you from lack of experience, I disagree from fundamentally different ideological underpinnings.

I believe there is nothing special about human perception and experience, and I can see the ways that technology maps near perfectly to the way we think. AI shouldn't be limited, it should replace us.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Okie dokie, doc. If you think the human brain isn't "special" then I don't know what to tell you.

Also, you can't know how we think when we as a species don't know, but you being the smartest person in the room is clearly very important to you so I'll leave you to it!

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›