Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT Images 2.0

openai.com

361–370 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0

#361
post #322
post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we get a fresh new cheap way to spread propaganda and lies and erode trust all across society while cementing power and control for a few at the top, and in return get a few measly icons (as if there weren’t literally thousands of them freely available already) and silly images for momentaneous amusement? What a rotten exchange.

AI can also be used to fight propaganda, for instance BiasScanner makes you aware of potentially manipulative news: https://biasscanner.org . So that makes AI a "dual good", like a kitchen knife: you can cut your tomato or kill you neighbor with it, entirely up to the "user". Not all users are good, so we'll see an intense amplification of both good and bad.

AI is certainly a dual good but I think the project is misguided at best.

I put in one of the driest descriptions of the Holocaust I could find and it got a very high score for bias, calling a factual description of a massacre emotional sensationalism because it inevitably contains a lot of loaded words.

It also doesn't differentiate between reporting, commentary, poetry, or anything else. It takes text and spits out a number, which is a very shallow analysis.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0

#362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that the signalling makes sense when human generated work is better than AI generated. Soon AI generated work will be better across the board with the rare exception of stuff the top X% of humans put a lot of bespoke highly personalized effort into. Preferring human work will be luxury status-signalling just like it is for clothing, food, etc.

The issue being, it's not an expression of anything. Merely like a random sensation, maybe some readable intent, but generic in execution, which isn't about anything even corporate art should be about. Are we going to give up on art, altogether? Edit: One of the possible outcomes may be living in a world like in "Them" with glasses on. Since no expression has any meaning anymore, the message is just there being a sig…

Can't the expression come from the person prompting the AI and sometimes taking hours inpainting or tweaking the prompt to try get the exact image / expression they had in their mind? A good use I've found is to be able to make scenes from a dream you had into an image. If that's not an expression of something then I'm not sure anything is.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0

#363

HN submission for a direct link to the product announcement which for some reason is being penalized by the HN algorithm: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47853000

(We eventually merged the threads hither)

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0

#364
post #4

System card link with safety details https://deploymentsafety.openai.com/chatgpt-images-2-0 direct pdf https://deploymentsafety.openai.com/chatgpt-images-2-0/chatg...

Link added to toptext. Thanks!

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0

#366
post #107

Genuine question: what positive use cases are sufficient to accept the harm from image generators? One that i can think of: - replacing photography of people who may be unable to consent or for whom it may be traumatic to revisit photographs and suitable models may not be available, e.g. dementia patients, babies, examples of medical conditions. Most other vaguely positive use cases boil down to "look what image gene…

Every technological advance in this space has caused harm to someone.

The advent of digital systems harmed artists with developed manual artistic skills.

The availability of cheap paper harmed paper mills hand-crafting paper.

The creation of paper harmed papyrus craftsmen.

The invention of papyrus really probably pissed off those who scraped the hair off thin leather to create vellum.

My point is that in line with Jevon's paradox there is always a wave of destruction that occurs with technological transformation, but we almost always end up with more jobs created by the technology in the middle and long term.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0

#367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democratizing visual communication is arguably useful, for instance helping people to create diagrams that illustrate a concept they wish to convey. This is contingent on the tech working sufficiently well that the visuals are more effective at communication than the text that went into producing them though.

Can these people not just create a diagram with their own hands? Literally a pencil and paper. I am at the point where I would prefer a poorly human drawn diagram with terrible handwriting over AI slop.

I do that. My slide decks these days are hand scribbled.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0

#368

It seems to still have this gpt image color that you can just feel. The slight sepia and softness.

I was just wondering about that. Did they embrace it as a “signature look”? it cant be accidental, right?

It's the Stranger Things nostalgia filter. Almost all the sample pictures they had looked like they were vaguely from the 90s-00s era.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0

#369
post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we get a fresh new cheap way to spread propaganda and lies and erode trust all across society while cementing power and control for a few at the top, and in return get a few measly icons (as if there weren’t literally thousands of them freely available already) and silly images for momentaneous amusement? What a rotten exchange.

I wonder what will happen to the entire legal system. It used to be fairly difficult to create convincing photos and videos. AI can probably fool most court judges now. Or the defense can refute legitimate evidence by saying “it’s AI / false”. How would that be refuted?

Multiple data sources, considering the trustworthiness of the source of the information, and accountability for lying.

You might generate an AI video of me committing a crime, But the CCTV on the street didn't show it happening and my phone cell tower logs show I was at home. For the legal system I don't think this is going to be the biggest problem. It's going to be social media that is hit hardest when a fake video can go viral far faster than fact checking can keep up.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0

#370
post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was worried about the complete destruction of truth, but it seems that's not the result of commoditized image generation. False AI-generated images have been widespread for years, and as far as I've seen, society has adapted very well to the understanding that images can't prove anything without detailed provenance. I'd argue that this has been helped , actually, by random people on the Internet routinely generatin…

>society has adapted very well to the understanding that images can't prove anything without detailed provenance Donald Trump is the president of the United States.

I don't understand the response. Do you think that Donald Trump would not be president of the United States if powerful image models hadn't been invented? Or perhaps you're referring to the AI-generated media he's often posted since being elected; when he showed a video of getting in a fighter jet to dump poo on protesters, do you think many people believed that was a real thing he actually did?
Post reply on HN