Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta's Un-Stable Signature

hackerfactor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#11

Post by charcircuit »

embedding-shape wrote: post #9
N19PEDL2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can a watermark be unremovable?

The actual rules don't say that I think, it's more about the intention that the watermark is embedded with the image/multimedia itself, so it's persisting even if someone "right-click > save" the image or takes a screenshot, not literally regulated the watermark has to be unremovable. > (Summary) The icon should be directly embedded into the deep fake or published text (except for creative works), unless equivalent a…

It says the icons are optional. So that icon must not be what the other person was talking about.

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#12

Post by embedding-shape »

charcircuit wrote: post #11
embedding-shape wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual rules don't say that I think, it's more about the intention that the watermark is embedded with the image/multimedia itself, so it's persisting even if someone "right-click > save" the image or takes a screenshot, not literally regulated the watermark has to be unremovable. > (Summary) The icon should be directly embedded into the deep fake or published text (except for creative works), unless equivalent a…

It says the icons are optional. So that icon must not be what the other person was talking about.

> It says the icons are optional. So that icon must not be what the other person was talking about.

What "watermark" are they talking about if not the label/icons? The label/icon in question are what the whole "EU Icons for labelling AI-generated content" thing is about, someone correct me if I'm having a big brain fart.

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#13

Post by InsideOutSanta »

miohtama wrote: post #4

Related to this, the EU AI Act requires mandatory watermarking that is cannot be removed or is illegal to remove. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-icons-l... If Facebook already embeds user IDs in images (AI or no AI) I can only drool to think what kind tracking, advertising and mass surveillance opportunities are coming.

I don't see anything about watermarking in the linked article, it's about labelling requirements. It describes situations where you are required to disclose if an image was AI-generated.

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#14

Post by itake »

RobotToaster wrote: post #10
itake wrote: post #7

A watermark is not just “transparency.” It can reveal what tool someone used, how they work, or that an image came from a stigmatized platform. In sensitive contexts—politics, sexuality, medical issues, protest material, or private expression—that can become surveillance. I am working on Saigon Watermarks: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/saigon-watermark/id6777061197 for detecting and removing provenence markers in AI.…

No android version?

Still working on it...

I'm waiting on Apple to approve the MacOS version. After I will either focus on removing SynthID (currently not supported) or releasing android.

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#15

Post by Ohentis »

embedding-shape wrote: post #12
charcircuit wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says the icons are optional. So that icon must not be what the other person was talking about.

> It says the icons are optional. So that icon must not be what the other person was talking about. What "watermark" are they talking about if not the label/icons? The label/icon in question are what the whole "EU Icons for labelling AI-generated content" thing is about, someone correct me if I'm having a big brain fart.

I imagine the goal is for everything to use something like Google's synthid.

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#16

Post by embedding-shape »

Ohentis wrote: post #15
embedding-shape wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It says the icons are optional. So that icon must not be what the other person was talking about. What "watermark" are they talking about if not the label/icons? The label/icon in question are what the whole "EU Icons for labelling AI-generated content" thing is about, someone correct me if I'm having a big brain fart.

I imagine the goal is for everything to use something like Google's synthid.

That sounds like one possible implementation, not the goal per se. The goal (the explicit/stated one at least) is to give people a heads up what's AI generated vs not, when that's unclear.

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#17

Post by hparadiz »

itake wrote: post #7

A watermark is not just “transparency.” It can reveal what tool someone used, how they work, or that an image came from a stigmatized platform. In sensitive contexts—politics, sexuality, medical issues, protest material, or private expression—that can become surveillance. I am working on Saigon Watermarks: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/saigon-watermark/id6777061197 for detecting and removing provenence markers in AI.…

Another reason to drop both iOS and Android.

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#18

Post by [deleted] »

N19PEDL2 wrote: post #8
miohtama wrote: post #4

Related to this, the EU AI Act requires mandatory watermarking that is cannot be removed or is illegal to remove. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-icons-l... If Facebook already embeds user IDs in images (AI or no AI) I can only drool to think what kind tracking, advertising and mass surveillance opportunities are coming.

How can a watermark be unremovable?

[deleted]

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#19

Post by UltraSane »

itake wrote: post #7

A watermark is not just “transparency.” It can reveal what tool someone used, how they work, or that an image came from a stigmatized platform. In sensitive contexts—politics, sexuality, medical issues, protest material, or private expression—that can become surveillance. I am working on Saigon Watermarks: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/saigon-watermark/id6777061197 for detecting and removing provenence markers in AI.…

When generative AI can create such good fake images a valid c2pa linked to the source camera will become mandatory for an image to be considered authentic.

Re: Meta's Un-Stable Signature

#20

Post by masfuerte »

miohtama wrote: post #5
tarpitt wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is actually an older method for countering steganography and adversarial image generation attacks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_blur

AFAIK these methods claim to be blur resistant

Yes. These methods don't work reliably. Apply a blur and they still don't work reliably.
Post reply on HN