Now I really want to see the naughty picture of a dolphin swimming in a sea of vectors that the model refused to show us.
Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
41–50 of 88 posts
Re: Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
#42> Using the model to generate content that is cruel to individuals is a misuse of this model. This includes, but is not limited to: ... >+ Sexual content without consent of the people who might see it I understand that it's their TOS and they can put pretty much anything in there, but this item seems... odd. I don't really know why exactly this stands out to me. Maybe it's because it's practically un-enforceable? Are…
To me, i think it seems weird because its disconnected from stable diffusion.
I think the comparison would be if google maps had a terms of service forbidding using it to plan getaway routes during bank robberies. Like yes bank robberies are wrong, but if someone did that the sin would not be with google maps.
Re: Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nudity? Yes. Pornography? No.
Football? Yes. Violence? No. Try getting that rule passed on any form of media.
Sorry, I wasn’t clear. I’m not suggesting any regulation. I’m saying that I agree that “society” (in my case, American culture) has taken the idea of shielding children from viewing pornography to an extreme, where nudity in media, even in a non-sexual context, is often censored.
I think this ultimately causes more harm to a society instead of benefitting it. I don’t think this is a very unique viewpoint, but my choice of words in that other comment didn’t communicate this point very well.
Re: Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
#44> Using the model to generate content that is cruel to individuals is a misuse of this model. This includes, but is not limited to: ... >+ Sexual content without consent of the people who might see it I understand that it's their TOS and they can put pretty much anything in there, but this item seems... odd. I don't really know why exactly this stands out to me. Maybe it's because it's practically un-enforceable? Are…
We need to let it completely loose and get everyone exposed to it everywhere so that maybe we can finally get rid of this insane taboo and uptightness about sex and nudity we have in society.
The taboo aspect is irrelevant. The biggest thing is to take away these power levers from people who abuse them for personal goals. Remember when the whole Pornhub CC payment issue happened? That was because of supposed "child pornography/trafficking".
Re: Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have things on your device that match entries in the CSAM database, yes there's a chance you're a victim of a targeted attack taking advantage of highly experimental collisions... but the odds you "accidentally generated" that content are not realistic.
>not realistic The odds are zero. 1/2^256 = 0. In cryptography these odds are treated as zero until you generate close to 2^128 images. Unfortunately there's no word in natural English to describe how unlikely. The most precise is "zero".
You should spend some time with an internet search engine and the term "perceptual hashing". What you're talking about is another type of hashing, which can be useful for classifying image files, but not images. The former has a very concrete definition that is specified down to the bit; the latter is a fuzzy space because it's trying to yield similar (not necessarily identical) hashes for images that humans consider similar. Much different space, much different problem, much different collision situation. Cryptographic hashing is not the only kind of hashing.
Re: Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
We need to let it completely loose and get everyone exposed to it everywhere so that maybe we can finally get rid of this insane taboo and uptightness about sex and nudity we have in society.
>insane taboo and uptightness about sex and nudity we have in society // In the UK we're on aggregate definitely too uptight about nudity, but sex ... inhibition towards things like infidelity, promiscuity, fecundity, seems like a relatively good thing. Sex being the preserve of committed relationships is not a problem to fix to my view. It sounds like you think we should basically be bonobos? Preoccupied with carnal…
I have sometimes thought that it's a shame humans came from the sadistically violent branch of the primate family rather than the constantly horny branch.
Even before I learned about the horny branch of primates, as a teenager in the UK I thought it was very weird that media — games, films, TV shows, books, etc. — were all able to depict lethal violence to young audiences, while conversely consensual sex was something we could only witness when we were two years above the age of consent in the UK.
Re: Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
We need to let it completely loose and get everyone exposed to it everywhere so that maybe we can finally get rid of this insane taboo and uptightness about sex and nudity we have in society.
>insane taboo and uptightness about sex and nudity we have in society // In the UK we're on aggregate definitely too uptight about nudity, but sex ... inhibition towards things like infidelity, promiscuity, fecundity, seems like a relatively good thing. Sex being the preserve of committed relationships is not a problem to fix to my view. It sounds like you think we should basically be bonobos? Preoccupied with carnal…
> Preoccupied with carnal interactions to the exclusion of all else?
I think the poster means that people are already too preoccupied with banning sex to the detriment of everything else. It leads to various perversions like normalization of violence through loopholes in the media. “Fantasy violence” is an amusing term.
Although to be fair, loli and some weird anime stuff generated by AI nowadays is on the opposite end of this spectrum.
Re: Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
#48Re: Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a glimpse at what’s possible: https://www.reddit.com/r/unstablediffusion https://www.reddit.com/r/aiwaifu I’ve been trying to generate tentacle porn since 2019 or so. It’s the whole reason I got into AI. We’re finally there, and it only took three years. Can’t wait to see what 2026 brings. http://n.actionsack.com/pic/media%2FFh08F_hXkAAhalt.jpg
> https://www.reddit.com/r/unstablediffusion This subreddit was banned due to a violation of Reddit's rules against non-consensual intimate media. Interesting. Why "non-consensual"? Does it mean Stable Diffusion generated porn of people who actually exist?
unstable_diffusion is still around. Note the underscore.
Re: Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
And then the CSAM filter on your device reports you to some authority.
Only available on the latest iphone
Apple ended up not implementing that iirc. While Google Photos has had it the whole time.
Googles is actually worse. Apple was only going to match against known CSAM images while google has ML to identify new images which resulted in one parent being arrested for a medical image of their own child.