71–80 of 467 posts
Edit: Actually trivial to test, just save an image of all black and see if it suddenly has other values on save.
The AI aspect of this is a red herring. The real problem is that they're secretly adding in a unique identifier into every image you create. If somebody does not like your meme, they can just send a copyright subpoena to Microsoft to instantly get your full name, address, email, phone number, and any other data associated with your Microsoft account. Just like age verification, this is another weapon in the war again…
No - there is a huge difference between "this AI created this image" and "this user did it" - the first we need more of, and the second is a big privacy concern. The article does not say anything about identifying a user.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is broadly impractical for the average citizen. A scalable solution would be to make this sort of thing illegal.
> This is broadly impractical for the average citizen. No it's not. Sign up for a virtual mailbox for $15-$25/month. > A scalable solution would be to make this sort of thing illegal. I'm posting this in the genuine interest of people being able to maintain anonymity from data leaks, privacy leaks, and in general not needing to tell businesses more personal information than is necessary to render services. This is in…
or make it illegal to ask for address, etc. definitely a little more effective than mailboxes
The AI aspect of this is a red herring. The real problem is that they're secretly adding in a unique identifier into every image you create. If somebody does not like your meme, they can just send a copyright subpoena to Microsoft to instantly get your full name, address, email, phone number, and any other data associated with your Microsoft account. Just like age verification, this is another weapon in the war again…
No - there is a huge difference between "this AI created this image" and "this user did it" - the first we need more of, and the second is a big privacy concern. The article does not say anything about identifying a user.
so unless you want to draw a distinction between 'user' and 'machine' , yeah it is for identifying users.
to believe otherwise, especially with Microsoft involved, would be incredibly naive to their history.
The AI aspect of this is a red herring. The real problem is that they're secretly adding in a unique identifier into every image you create. If somebody does not like your meme, they can just send a copyright subpoena to Microsoft to instantly get your full name, address, email, phone number, and any other data associated with your Microsoft account. Just like age verification, this is another weapon in the war again…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No - there is a huge difference between "this AI created this image" and "this user did it" - the first we need more of, and the second is a big privacy concern. The article does not say anything about identifying a user.
Article literally says it adds a guid, not a binary field indicating that the image is ai generated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Paint.net is named after the dot net framework and is not referring to a URL or the internet as I understand it.
ah, right, i vaguely recall that now. But why/how would it know AI was used, outside of a local LLM, weird it would say that AI was used (unless it's referring to the software itself).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is broadly impractical for the average citizen. No it's not. Sign up for a virtual mailbox for $15-$25/month. > A scalable solution would be to make this sort of thing illegal. I'm posting this in the genuine interest of people being able to maintain anonymity from data leaks, privacy leaks, and in general not needing to tell businesses more personal information than is necessary to render services. This is in…
I think they meant make what Microsoft is doing illegal? or make it illegal to ask for address, etc. definitely a little more effective than mailboxes
I fully agree that businesses should not be asking for addresses. Non-financial businesses don't need to KYC in the first place, and financial institutions can KYC without needing to know where you sleep.
I got triggered because people seem to always want to come out of the woods and say "addresses should be public record" or things of that sort and I vehemently disagree in the interest of privacy, in a country where a stalker can just look you up, terrorize you, and the police will do nothing about it.
This reminds me that in the USSR they had typewriters that added an identifier somehow that could be traced back to that particular typewriter (and who it was sold to)
I wonder whether Arthur Conan Doyle had the idea before the police started using typewriter typeface wear and tear for forensics.