Earlier quoted context omitted.
2-2-1-2-2-2-1
I still feel like most humans would fail, haha.
Maybe, but anyone who knows what a chromatic scale is should be able to reason it out. E# == F, B# == C, so no black keys between those.
Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
391–400 of 504 posts
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
#392I can imagine an automated blackmail bot that scrapes image, video, voice samples from anyone with the most meagre online presence, which then creates high resolution videos of that person doing the most horrid acts, then threatening to share those videos with that person's family, friends and business contacts unless they are paid $5000 in a cryptocurrency to an anonymous address. And further, I can imagine some per…
I’m more bullish on cryptographic receipts than on AI detectors. Capture signing (C2PA) plus an identity bind could give verifiable origin. The hard parts, in my view, are adoption and platform plumbing.
If we have a trust worthy way to verify proof-of-human made content than anything missing those creds would be red flags.
https://iptc.org/news/googles-pixel-10-phone-supports-c2pa-u...
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
#393There is one thing Gemini 2.5 Flash Image can do that no other edit model can do: incorporate multiple images simultaneously without shenanigans due to its multimodality, e.g. for Flux Kontext, if you want to "put the person in the first image into the second image", you have to concatenate them pre-VAE which can be unwieldly, but this model doesn't have that issue. You can even incorporate more than two images, but…
it can't put two images of people together in one photo, this model still has the issue, also, I have seen cases where Flux Kontext works better in things like removing objects
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since API currently is not working (seems rate limits not set for Image Generation yet) I tried on fal. Definitely inferior to results I see on AI Studio and image generation time is 6s on AI Studio vs 30 seconds on Fal.AI
> Definitely inferior to results Quality or latency?
Latency. Started using API.
Gets response directly on Gemini API in under 6 seconds. Fal.ai takes about 30 seconds.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
#395this is amazing. I just wish models would have more non-textual controls. I don't want to TYPE my instructions. We need a better UI for editing images with AI.
You want to use a mouse and keyboard and learn 20 buttons like it's 1990?
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
#396This feels like a real inflection point for image editing models. What stood out to me isn’t just the raw generative quality, but the consistency across edits and the ability to blend multiple references without falling apart. That’s something people have been hacking around with pipelines (Midjourney → Photoshop → Inpainting tool), but seeing it consolidated in one model/API makes workflows dramatically simpler.
That said, I think we’re still in the “GPT-3.5” phase of image editing: amazing compared to what came before, but still tripping over repeated patterns (keyboards, clocks, Go boards, hands) and sometimes refusing edits due to safety policies. The gap between hype demos and reproducible results is also very real; I’ve seen outputs veer from flawless to poor with just a tiny prompt tweak.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
or my "hands with palms facing down" test.... no matter how hard I try it just can't get open hands, palms down.
It's probably just a matter of rerolling a few times. I was able to get it around 25% of the time. https://imgur.com/a/H9gH3Zy
that's pretty good. I was using a cartoon girl as an example of a dance move for kids.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
#398I can imagine an automated blackmail bot that scrapes image, video, voice samples from anyone with the most meagre online presence, which then creates high resolution videos of that person doing the most horrid acts, then threatening to share those videos with that person's family, friends and business contacts unless they are paid $5000 in a cryptocurrency to an anonymous address. And further, I can imagine some per…
[deleted]
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to victim-shame or anything, but that sounds more like more than one safety mechanism failed, the convincing tech only being a rather small part of it?
I think the biggest failure is on the part of the companies hosting these streams. Its been a while, but I remember seeing streams for Elon offering to "double your bitcoin" and the reasoning was he wanted to increase the adoption and load test the network. Just send some bitcoin to some address and he will send it back double! But the thing was it was on youtube. Hosted on an imposter Tesla page. The stream had been…
What are your thoughts on this being solved by the negative of the situation? So, instead of having to vet every single stream, tweet etc to check if it's legit, basically the idea is that you shouldn't "trust" what you are seeing unless it's explicitly endorsed via a signature from the original creator.
Obviously, if it's coming from their official channels the "signature" can be more obvious, but a layer that facilitates this could do a lot of good imo.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash Image
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
I got scammed similarly (although $10, because I tested first), because 1. it was on YouTube, on a channel called "SpaceX" with verified logo 2. with hundreds of thousands of viewers live 3. with a believable speech from Mr. Musk standing next to its rockets (and knowing his interest in cryptocurrencies). This happened as I was genuinely searching for the actual live stream of SpaceX. I am ashamed, even more so becau…
Yes, this is the exact same scam.
@knicholes & @pil0u - I am working on a system that would prevent this exact same scenario. I appreciate the docs write up, given that you were personally impacted by this and are passionate about it, I'd love to speak.
I feel like the scale at which this is happening cross-internet must be staggering but because this is small-scale and un-reportable theft - who would the average person even go to, if they willingly sent the money, and they'd also have to get over the embarrassment of having fallen for it.
What really got me thinking about the scale of this is watching the deepfake discussion at 1:51:46 in this video (at 1:52:00 he says his team spends 30% of their time sorting through deepfake ads, to the extent he had to hire someone whose exclusive job is to spot these scam videos and report them to FB etc):