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

A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 148 posts

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#101

Post by cthalupa »

DougBTX wrote: post #97
cthalupa wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That’s one case, not a ruling about all AI generated art "Because copyright law as codified in the 1976 Act requires human authorship, the Work cannot be registered." The actual ruling (and a similar USPTO discussions) are about AI generated art and talk extensively about it in the broad case. The stance of these organizations is that AI generated art is not copyrightable. I don't disagree that the line is blurred w…

> quite clearly falls outside of human authorship as recognized by the US Copyright and Patent offices. I think these are answering a slightly different question, as they are asking if the AI itself can hold the copyright on the output. A bit like if someone tried to copyright an image and assign “Photoshop” as the author. The question above is maybe closer to asking if the person using an ML model can get copyright…

>as they are asking if the AI itself can hold the copyright on the output.

Who is?

The original question I replied to: >If someone runs the model on their own hardware, do they "own" the images generated?

This seems to be straightforward - Thaler tried to receive the copyright for the artwork generated by his Creativity Machine. He was denied, because the copyright office does not believe that a neural network generated image has human authorship.

From the Copyright office paper: "he [Thaler] was “seeking to register this computer-generated work as a work-for-hire to the owner of the Creativity Machine.”"

>A bit like if someone tried to copyright an image and assign “Photoshop” as the author.

This is also clearly outside of the scope of copyrightable work per the reasoning given by the copyright office.

Both questions are thoroughly answered at this moment unless Thaler wins his appeal.

Edit: Going through and noting that I'm not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice, don't listen to some random on the internet for legal advice, get a lawyer if you need it.

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#102

Post by mnahkies »

TekMol wrote: post #78
fragmede wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Colab: https://colab.research.google.com/github/WASasquatch/StableD... To run it elsewhere in the cloud, grab a GPU (spot) instance and SSH in.

You mean a VM on a machine with a GPU? Or does it have to be a bare metal machine? What is a good provider of suitable VMs/machines? And what do you do after you SSHed in? The installation instructions seem to be for windows users (click here, then click there ...) is there a linux script that does the installation automatically?

You can also get windows instances with GPU attached and RDP in, though personally I prefer Linux

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/WindowsGuide/accel...

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#103

Post by mnahkies »

cthalupa wrote: post #95
cal85 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s one case, not a ruling about all AI generated art. It won’t be the same for every image involving AI in some way. What if you use AI to fill in a portion of an image, as with Adobe’s content aware fill? What if you use a series of SD steps but with a human selecting outputs and feeding them back in as inputs to get something else the AI could not have come up with on its own? The copyright conversation is only…

>That’s one case, not a ruling about all AI generated art "Because copyright law as codified in the 1976 Act requires human authorship, the Work cannot be registered." The actual ruling (and a similar USPTO discussions) are about AI generated art and talk extensively about it in the broad case. The stance of these organizations is that AI generated art is not copyrightable. I don't disagree that the line is blurred w…

This seems odd, there is still a human authoring the images through the use of prompts etc. How does this differ from using a paint brush?

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#104

Post by cthalupa »

mnahkies wrote: post #103
cthalupa wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That’s one case, not a ruling about all AI generated art "Because copyright law as codified in the 1976 Act requires human authorship, the Work cannot be registered." The actual ruling (and a similar USPTO discussions) are about AI generated art and talk extensively about it in the broad case. The stance of these organizations is that AI generated art is not copyrightable. I don't disagree that the line is blurred w…

This seems odd, there is still a human authoring the images through the use of prompts etc. How does this differ from using a paint brush?

https://www.reddit.com/r/COPYRIGHT/comments/vshypc/the_us_co... talks about a (paywalled) article that discusses this problem.

This was a Style Transfer AI - it takes a source image and recreates it in the style of a painter.

In this case, the person both took the photo that the style was transferred to, and selected the style and a variety of variables. The US Copyright office still felt that his contribution was not distinguishable from the work that the AI did.

I'll note that this is very US specific - there are a lot of counter-examples of other countries allowing for the copyright of work like this, including the EU, UK, Canada, India, etc.

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#105

Post by kierangill »

offsky wrote: post #54

I’m waiting for someone to wrap this up into a desktop app that I can install and run on my Mac.

Same! I wrote a public web app so that I could access the model from my phone [0]. This is how I found Replicate [1]. Their SD model is very cheap to use. While we wait for a native Mac app, I recommend accessing the model straight from their web UI.

[0] https://www.drawanything.app/

[1] https://replicate.com/

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#106

Post by notfed »

Looks great but I use Linux and the README is fairly Windows-centric without warning. It'd be nice if there were clearly deliniated sections for Windows vs *nix.

There's a (very ironically named) "Manual installation" section which might seem to be the answer for Linux, but then it's not immediately obvious which preceding sections are Linux or Windows without doing critical thinking.

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#107

Post by cthalupa »

I've been having a lot of fun with Stable Diffusion and Midjourney.

One thing that is very powerful with Stable Diffusion is using text inversion ( https://textual-inversion.github.io/ ) - you can add additional input samples to further extend the possibilities beyond what is included in the original model.

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#108

Post by tasuki »

fragmede wrote: post #81
offsky wrote: post #54

I’m waiting for someone to wrap this up into a desktop app that I can install and run on my Mac.

https://www.charl-e.com/ There are a few bugs to iron out before it's ready for prime time. For now, create the folder `~/Desktop/charl-e/samples/` manually before you run it.

Funny, it probably does a whole lotta things, but it can't create the `~/Desktop/charl-e/samples/` directory? That seems like it should be relatively trivial...

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#109

Post by Metricon »

Another free offline and easy to use model with a GUI can be downloaded from here: https://grisk.itch.io/stable-diffusion-gui

For some genuinely incredible results try this pattern for instruction:

Portrait of {Name of some type of identity such as "Faerie Princess" or "Dragon Queen"} {Name of a celebrity such as "Scarlett Johansson"}, beautiful face, symmetrical face, tone mapped, intricate, elegant, highly detailed, digital painting, artstation, concept art, smooth, sharp focus, illustration, art by artgerm and Greg Rutkowski and Alphonse Mucha and Boris Vallejo and Johannes Voss and Aleksi Briclot and Michael Komarck.

Run several iterations of the same query as some results will have anomalies.

Re: A Web UI for Stable Diffusion

#110

Post by DougBTX »

cthalupa wrote: post #101
DougBTX wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> quite clearly falls outside of human authorship as recognized by the US Copyright and Patent offices. I think these are answering a slightly different question, as they are asking if the AI itself can hold the copyright on the output. A bit like if someone tried to copyright an image and assign “Photoshop” as the author. The question above is maybe closer to asking if the person using an ML model can get copyright…

>as they are asking if the AI itself can hold the copyright on the output. Who is? The original question I replied to: >If someone runs the model on their own hardware, do they "own" the images generated? This seems to be straightforward - Thaler tried to receive the copyright for the artwork generated by his Creativity Machine. He was denied, because the copyright office does not believe that a neural network genera…

> > as they are asking if the AI itself can hold the copyright on the output.

> Who is?

Thaler is. I’ve only read the intro sections of the documents you linked to, so I may have missed something more fundamental later, but the key points seem to be:

> The author of the Work was identified as the “Creativity Machine,” ... the Work “was autonomously created by a computer algorithm running on a machine”

and:

> Thaler must either provide evidence that the Work is the product of human authorship or convince the Office to depart from a century of copyright jurisprudence. He has done neither.

So in this case they are asking if the AI can be the author.

Whereas the question in this thread was:

> If someone runs the model on their own hardware, do they "own" the images generated?

In that case, a human is providing a prompt to the model (providing creative input), and asking if they themselves count as the author (a human rather than a neural net), so it seems like a significantly different case.

Post reply on HN