Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

imagen.research.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 500 posts

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

#461

Post by kranke155 »

adamsmith143 wrote: post #96
kranke155 wrote: post #15

I’m going to post an Ask HN about what am I supposed to do when I’m “disrupted”. I work in film / video / CG where the bread and butter is short form advertising for Youtube, Instagram and TV. It’s painfully obvious that in 1 year the job might be exceedingly more difficult than it is now.

Learn how to use these models is the easiest answer. Prompt Engineering (getting a model to output what you actually want) is going to be something of an art form and I would expect it to be in demand.

I really don’t think the skillset moat will be comparable. It took me 10 years to go from young lad studying film at school to delivering content for major clients like Apple. Knowing my industry (profits squeeze everywhere) I think they’ll get young interns to do AI prompt engineering.

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

#462

Post by virgildotcodes »

inkblotuniverse wrote: post #415
azinman2 wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not how human nature works. Show a video that fits cognitive bias, and the non-technical non-sophisticated people of the world will believe it. And that’s assuming it’s even technically feasible to solve, which it likely isn’t.

Give it a generation, and the new norm will be that video on the internet is as likely to be a lie as text.

Yet people today still whole heartedly believe so many lies communicated in text.

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

#463

Post by boilerupnc »

concordDance wrote: post #428
zhynn wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trolling terrifies me. Trolling someone by creating awful video (just think about how deeply, photo-realistically, awful it could be - porn is just the tip of the iceberg) is going to get really bad. I am not sure how this is going to shake out. The easiest will be video of famous people doing awful things. A little harder is doing a custom training on a particular person's likeness, and videos of that person doi…

"The relationship between tyranny and surveillance means we need better governments, not more anonymity." "Better governments" is not actionable, people have been wanting that since Socratese. Might as well wish for the second coming. The real answer is to just let people know about the fakery, then they'll stop believing every video and the trolls will be defanged.

This. Like most tech misuse, there will be counters that will evolve to help reduce the negative impacts. There’s an emerging opportunity for the detection and identification of these faked images and videos. These may also require models to match the sophistication required to be effective validators. Perhaps the most cpu intensive models are only used as a shared societal resource on a particular tier of influencers and general compute detector models are available to all to run or tweak or rebuild. There would need to be a root to this validation trust tree, but we’ve figured this out before with cyphers and certs. Let the push and pull begin :-)

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

#465

Post by fassssst »

sbierwagen wrote: post #296
atty wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>There is a clear risk from these sorts of models as they get better - I mean recreating specific individuals’ likenesses in compromising images And the risk behind that is...? If you drill down with such claims the core is always "someone might use this to lie online" and the proposed solution every single time is: more surveillance. End anonymity. Have a Facebook account required to use the internet. Real name and…

Watch the great BBC show “The Capture” for an entertaining look at one way this could plausibly be abused by governments.

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

#466

Post by fassssst »

concordDance wrote: post #429
melagonster wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but when everyone see him, there is always the photo in their brain. this is about goat, but they fake pedo photo? Rick will lose his job first.

That's true only for the first few hundred Ricks. Then people wide up and ignore the child rape videos. It's inevitable and frankly a hundred Ricks is a price worth paying.

You just described the “boy who cried wolf” dilemma…

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

#467

Post by AbrahamParangi »

mola wrote: post #425
i_like_apis wrote: post #261

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…

1. How do you know there will be no harm or is no harm? These issues are not manifesting in a timeline of a few weeks. 2. Why do you think the ethical reasoning is disengenious in Google's case? Even in OpenAI case it could be that originally the ethicist won some battles where business ppl eventually prevailed. 3. Why do you use quotes around a something which is your original phrasing? That's pretty disengenious. 4…

Affirmative action (like google’s moral imperatives here) are fairly unpopular, so many view their actions as a kind of encroaching cultural imperialism. When Google talks about “safety” it means enforcing a very specific set of beliefs that frankly a large majority of people disagree with.*

It isn’t impermissible for Google to do this, but nobody has to like it, or agree with it.

*for instance, affirmative action is disapproved of by 70-80% of Americans and couldn’t win on a ballot in California in 2020 which is pretty exceptional.

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

#468

Post by CuriouslyC »

eurasiantiger wrote: post #388
fny wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it doesn't matter how ethicists want "the general public" to use AI Something tells me these pricks will end up arguing for a reversion to thin-client compute. It is in their financial interest too after all.

You mean like the apps are all running on a server and we only have a client used to… browse them?

Except that web apps have become pretty thick, with most of the computation going on in the browser in many cases.

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

#469

Post by i_like_apis »

mola wrote: post #425
i_like_apis wrote: post #261

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…

1. How do you know there will be no harm or is no harm? These issues are not manifesting in a timeline of a few weeks. 2. Why do you think the ethical reasoning is disengenious in Google's case? Even in OpenAI case it could be that originally the ethicist won some battles where business ppl eventually prevailed. 3. Why do you use quotes around a something which is your original phrasing? That's pretty disengenious. 4…

It not only isn’t technically feasible, it also isn’t rational, or even ethical to be portraying a warped version of the world.

What they want is for results of “software engineer” to be equally likely to show black females. This is not fair to Eskimos and Aboriginals. And what about the mentally handicapped? Is it not unfair that people with Downs Syndrome are not Wall Street stock brokers? How are you going to find all of these “affluent” categories and claim to be able to balance them?

And are you going to claim racism again when to ask for prison inmates and you don’t find any Asians? Should you start putting latent space Asians in latent space prisons?

Because this is a main harp of the social justice “ethicists” - that if you ask these models for “gang member” you get “People Of Color!!” … as if they simply don’t understand the statistics of situation. How would you even “solve” that? Should you decide when and where certain ethnic groups should be taken down a peg?

Latent space affirmative action is technically absurd, an completely ironic as “ethical” behavior.

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

#470

Post by tomp »

atty wrote: post #322
sbierwagen wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There is a clear risk from these sorts of models as they get better - I mean recreating specific individuals’ likenesses in compromising images And the risk behind that is...? If you drill down with such claims the core is always "someone might use this to lie online" and the proposed solution every single time is: more surveillance. End anonymity. Have a Facebook account required to use the internet. Real name and…

I strongly suspect you’ve never been on the end of an internet doxxing/hate brigade if you can’t imagine how this could be used to make someone’s life a living hell. I’ll explain again that I think they can be used for bad actions, and also that they should still be released, because the benefits will outweigh the negatives. It does not hurt to admit that some things can be dangerous when used in nefarious ways. No o…

> I strongly suspect you’ve never been on the end of an internet doxxing/hate brigade if you can’t imagine how this could be used to make someone’s life a living hell.

Sounds like you're saying the even without advanced AI, online bullying is already somewhat harmful?

So what exactly is the additional harm of AI?

Post reply on HN