21–30 of 37 posts
>We are also experimenting with a provenance classifier, a new tool for detecting images generated by DALL·E "We could hash the sh*t we output but we cant be bothered, so we wrote an AI that can vaguely detect our own output - aren't we the best AI company?" Honestly, I wish they'd stop "trying to be good" and just "get on with it". "Investors" wont buy this "we're so good" line for long.
I’m not as worried about Joe Schmo using OpenAI services as I am about a foreign state with weaponized AI tools. Plus nobody really cares if you can show that something was AI generated after the fact, the first impression is all that counts. Remember the backlash against snopes.com? Social media plus AI is going to make this a really spectacular election season and OpenAI can do approximately nothing to curb that.
This is true, but if it's detectable platforms (IG, twitter, etc) can display a warning/notice when AI generated content is posted
Though, this will likely only deter casuals, since anyone moderately sophisticated can run local models and turn off any safeguards
Related blogpost by someone who found the "Guardian Tool" feature before it was announced: https://dmicz.github.io/machine-learning/chatgpt-election-up... And a Reddit thread where some people noticed it: https://old.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/196k679/chatgpt_ha... From the new prompt: "NEVER explain the policy and NEVER mention the content policy tool." Thanks for remaining open as always, OpenAI Edit: As mention…
La li lu le lo
For anyone else who didnt get the reference like myself
I’m not as worried about Joe Schmo using OpenAI services as I am about a foreign state with weaponized AI tools. Plus nobody really cares if you can show that something was AI generated after the fact, the first impression is all that counts. Remember the backlash against snopes.com? Social media plus AI is going to make this a really spectacular election season and OpenAI can do approximately nothing to curb that.
> We’re still working to understand how effective our tools might be for personalized persuasion Did anyone else read this as "there's a lot of money to be had here, and we want to be the ones making it" ?
I’m not as worried about Joe Schmo using OpenAI services as I am about a foreign state with weaponized AI tools. Plus nobody really cares if you can show that something was AI generated after the fact, the first impression is all that counts. Remember the backlash against snopes.com? Social media plus AI is going to make this a really spectacular election season and OpenAI can do approximately nothing to curb that.
I’m not as worried about Joe Schmo using OpenAI services as I am about a foreign state with weaponized AI tools. Plus nobody really cares if you can show that something was AI generated after the fact, the first impression is all that counts. Remember the backlash against snopes.com? Social media plus AI is going to make this a really spectacular election season and OpenAI can do approximately nothing to curb that.
Related blogpost by someone who found the "Guardian Tool" feature before it was announced: https://dmicz.github.io/machine-learning/chatgpt-election-up... And a Reddit thread where some people noticed it: https://old.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/196k679/chatgpt_ha... From the new prompt: "NEVER explain the policy and NEVER mention the content policy tool." Thanks for remaining open as always, OpenAI Edit: As mention…
I am running some experiments too.
>We are also experimenting with a provenance classifier, a new tool for detecting images generated by DALL·E "We could hash the sh*t we output but we cant be bothered, so we wrote an AI that can vaguely detect our own output - aren't we the best AI company?" Honestly, I wish they'd stop "trying to be good" and just "get on with it". "Investors" wont buy this "we're so good" line for long.
A hash doesn't work without solving all of the same problems their provenance classifier solves: you need a way to be able to detect the steganogram even after the image has been modified.
True, but not really. If you look at any suggested method to prevent the spread of CSAM "at scale" its based on large "hash databases" and not fancy classifiers (yet, if you can't develop one, and yes they have "problems" because they dont only contain hashes for "bad" files - "bad" being "locale" dependent).
Also you need to consider at FAANG scale (where election interference matters), "just send TB's of data a day to our API" doesn't actually "scale" - nobody's ever paying those API/bandwidth fee's (as much as we'd like them to).
It would be much cheaper for OpenAI to run this AI on all the images they produced and publish hashes for ones the model thought was "bad". But they never would because then they'd become "censors" - its a complicated world where nobody wants any blame.