Live data from Hacker News

Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

imagen.research.google

371–380 of 500 posts

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#371

The concern trolling and gatekeeping about social justice issues coming from the so-called "ethicists" in the AI peanut gallery has been utterly ridiculous. Google claims they don't want to release Imagen because it lacks what can only be called "latent space affirmative action". Stability or someone like it will valiantly release this technology, again and there will be absolutely no harm to anyone. Stop being so to…

Ironically nearly all ML demos like Stable Diffusion are setup and run for free on Google's Colab, so to claim they don't want to help the field is a little silly.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedantically, Stable Diffusion v1.4 is the one model where weights were open sourced and released. Stable Diffusion v1.5, announced September 8th and live on their API, was to be released in "a week or two" but still has yet to be released to the general public. https://discord.com/channels/1002292111942635562/10022921127...

Even more pedantically, SD weights are in fact not open source, they're under a source available license.

* If weights are copyrightable in your jurisdiction (who knows!)

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#373

The concern trolling and gatekeeping about social justice issues coming from the so-called "ethicists" in the AI peanut gallery has been utterly ridiculous. Google claims they don't want to release Imagen because it lacks what can only be called "latent space affirmative action". Stability or someone like it will valiantly release this technology, again and there will be absolutely no harm to anyone. Stop being so to…

Imaginably, if the model produced sufficient propaganda against Hindus, the model would be feted for its social-justice creds.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that they are arbiters of morality and truth -- it's that they have a _responsibility_ to do the least harm. They spent money and time to train these models, so it's also up to them to see that they aren't causing issues by making such things widely available. They won't be using the models they train to commit crimes, for example. Someone who gets access to their best models may very well do that. It'd be r…

Ahh, how silly of me. Here I was thinking that Google kept their models private because they were hoping to monetize them. But now that you say it, it's obvious that this is just Google being morally responsible. Thanks Google! I'm sorry to be sarcastic. I generally try not to be, but I just can't fathom the level of naivete required to think that mega-corps act out of their moral responsibility rather than their pro…

I'm sorry you feel so cynical about this. It's absolutely true that Google is profit-seeking, that these models are very expensive to build, and that if there's a competitive advantage to be had, Google should probably try to retain it.

But even with that all being true, real people (typically some thoughtful researchers) build these models. And my point is: _there really are ethical reasons to keep large generative models trained on flawed data away from the general public until better safeguards are in place._ You can verify this for yourself by reading about ML bias and safety. Don't let cynicism keep you from internalizing that fact. OpenAI didn't make GPT-3 widely available for the same reason.

At the end of the day, Google doesn't need an excuse like "we have ethical qualms" to not release the models. Stuff that is really secret sauce you won't hear about until many years later when it's not a competitive advantage anymore. Google _does_ need to cover its ass and not deal with its employees yelling that it helped perpetuate algorithmic racism, or surveillance state, or increased levels of inauthenticity on the internet.

When I said "Google has a responsibility" -- I don't mean that the faceless entity feels responsibility, I mean the people who work on the specific things have a responsibility and they do feel & act on that. If you work on lifesaving drugs that could also be dangerous / addictive, it's kind of on you to be thoughtful about how to make them generally available, no?

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#375

The concern trolling and gatekeeping about social justice issues coming from the so-called "ethicists" in the AI peanut gallery has been utterly ridiculous. Google claims they don't want to release Imagen because it lacks what can only be called "latent space affirmative action". Stability or someone like it will valiantly release this technology, again and there will be absolutely no harm to anyone. Stop being so to…

Scrappy startups soak up all the liability; Google retains its technical edge and earns some goodwill.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#376

Google continues to blow my mind with these models, but I think their ethics strategy is totally misguided and will result in them failing to capture this market. The original Google Search gave similarly never-before-seen capabilities to people, and you could use it for good or bad - Google did not seem to have any ethical concerns around, for example, letting children use their product and come across NSFW content…

Google has no practical way to address ethics at Google-scale. Their ability to operate at all depends as ever upon outsourcing ethics to machine learning algorithms.

IIUC you're saying Google's algorithmic implementations of policy enforcement do not robustly or adequately address ethical concerns. Isn't the same true for, iono, the whole web? Human-based ethics don't scale either and can be worse (I mean, isn't that the issue with hiring pipelines? Juries?)

I think it's gotten a ton better vs 10 years ago, and is getting better still.

More on topic -- when folks here complain that Google can't release these models, it's not like they're just sitting there using that as an excuse -- Google has entire teams dedicated to ML safety trying to figure out how to filter out bad stuff, make models fairer, and avoid situations like M$FT's "Tay" (or worse).

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#377

The concern trolling and gatekeeping about social justice issues coming from the so-called "ethicists" in the AI peanut gallery has been utterly ridiculous. Google claims they don't want to release Imagen because it lacks what can only be called "latent space affirmative action". Stability or someone like it will valiantly release this technology, again and there will be absolutely no harm to anyone. Stop being so to…

Scrappy startups soak up all the liability; Google retains its technical edge and earns some goodwill.

good will? are we talking about the same Google?

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#378

The concern trolling and gatekeeping about social justice issues coming from the so-called "ethicists" in the AI peanut gallery has been utterly ridiculous. Google claims they don't want to release Imagen because it lacks what can only be called "latent space affirmative action". Stability or someone like it will valiantly release this technology, again and there will be absolutely no harm to anyone. Stop being so to…

Ironically nearly all ML demos like Stable Diffusion are setup and run for free on Google's Colab, so to claim they don't want to help the field is a little silly.

Stable diffusion can run anywhere

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#379
post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to take an unpopular position: there's no harm being done. It's not putting people in positions they would rather not be in, but putting their likeness into those situations. It's a key difference: if someone makes a paper mache of a naked Trump to use in a protest, is harm being done to him? The idea that it's "doing harm" is simply inventing a new form of lèse-majesté. Verbally, we regularly do the same:…

Be serious for a moment. If I circulated a convincing-looking video of Rick fucking goats to his parents, partner and his boss at the school where he works, that could easily do considerable harm to Rick.

How? Rick says I did not do this, it's an ai fake and I'm being harassed. At that point, assuming people believe Rick, then it's likely he'll receive sympathy and support rather than considerable harm.

So there seems to be an implicit assumption here that the risk is faked material where people don't believe it's fake, for some reason. And the fix for that would be to ensure that the easy to use versions of generators are watermarking or otherwise recording what they made, so it's easy to find out if something was faked. That doesn't help of course if you're up against a programmer who can make awesome deepfakes locally with open source software and a great GPU but then we're back to the debate about costs because of course, if you to against well funded experts they could already do this sort of thing. In reality it doesn't happen.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#380
post #266

The concern trolling and gatekeeping about social justice issues coming from the so-called "ethicists" in the AI peanut gallery has been utterly ridiculous. Google claims they don't want to release Imagen because it lacks what can only be called "latent space affirmative action". Stability or someone like it will valiantly release this technology, again and there will be absolutely no harm to anyone. Stop being so to…

There is a clear risk from these sorts of models as they get better - I mean recreating specific individuals’ likenesses in compromising images (or even worse, video). We’re not at that point yet, but these things are getting better fast, so it’s only a matter of time. The problem is that there’s no way to mitigate those risks except to keep the model behind an inference-only API, or not release it at all - as soon a…

> I mean recreating specific individuals’ likenesses in compromising images (or even worse, video). We’re not at that point yet

Yes, we are. Open source stable diffusion can be trained on any person's images, as long as you have around 20 from different angles. Costs around 50 cents on rented GPUs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqeo3oDP6Qg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m__xadX0z0

Post reply on HN