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

Search 5.8B images used to train popular AI art models

haveibeentrained.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–187 of 187 posts

Re: Search 5.8B images used to train popular AI art models

#181

Post by throw_m239339 »

quantified wrote: post #179
throw_m239339 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sex with another person is difficult to come by for many, and only comes sporadically for many more. You don't sound like you've been married for 20 years and bound by oath to not have sex with anyone other than someone who's physically lost all libido. I recommend some empathy. You keep on making assumptions about your interlocutor, stick to the matter discussed. I'd recommend you stop trying making things persona…

You conflate porn with sex trafficking. May as well conflate girl's gymnastics with sex abuse. Because there is certainly sex abuse in girl's gymnastics. Heck, in society as a whole. You have a very warped definition of pornography. You talk about sexual stimulation for people that can't have sex with other humans as though it's a bad thing. That's just being a prude.

> You conflate porn with sex trafficking. May as well conflate girl's gymnastics with sex abuse. Because there is certainly sex abuse in girl's gymnastics. Heck, in society as a whole. You have a very warped definition of pornography. > You talk about sexual stimulation for people that can't have sex with other humans as though it's a bad thing. That's just being a prude.

You conflate sex with porn, then try to paint porn sick individuals as "victim" because they are not entitled to have sex, while being completely oblivious to the real victims of porn production and trade, trying to paint pornography as any other thing than violence, grotesque and vulgar and you have the audacity to call me prude because I'm against sexual violence and its effects on society? If that's being "prude" in the mind of porn sick individuals trying to paint their fetish as art, then I'll be "prude" all day.

Re: Search 5.8B images used to train popular AI art models

#182

Post by bdowling »

MacsHeadroom wrote: post #175
bdowling wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Commercial use isn't required for copyright infringement.

Regardless, there is no copyright infringement occurring when I use my memory of having seen someone else's copyrighted materials to produce my own wholly new but similar looking works. Likewise there is no copyright infringement occurring when an ML model is trained on copyrighted works. Stable Diffusion is a 5GB matrix of floating-point numbers trained on 240TB of data. It does not, and cannot, contain infringing d…

> ... when I use my memory of having seen someone else's copyrighted materials to produce my own wholly new but similar looking works.

That's called "non-literal" copyright infringement. Plaintiffs win on the claims and appeals courts uphold the judgments. (See, e.g., the "Blurred Lines" case. https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/music/robin-thicke-pharr...).

A person could infringe the copyright in an original image if they painted their own version by hand. The AI is basically irrelevant.

Re: Search 5.8B images used to train popular AI art models

#183

Post by thfuran »

Kye wrote: post #145
ma2rten wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those images are not really "labeled". They just scraped the alt text. A lot of the recent advances in AI have been by using lower quality large scale web data, instead of hand labeling. The noise will average out. Hand labeled data can be used for finetuning.

This is the same thinking that leads to incredible astrophotography using stacked long exposure images that appear to be pure noise individually.

Not really. There's sound theoretical basis for that approach in astrophotography. The sort of bias and or noise introduced by systemically poor labeling is much less reliably averaged out.

Re: Search 5.8B images used to train popular AI art models

#184

Post by NicoleJO »

XorNot wrote: post #107
NicoleJO wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyright owners have the right to control when, where, how and by whom their content may be used. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106

This is very much not what your link says - quoting: --- Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following: (1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords; (2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work; (3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale…

None of this stuff is being used as fair use (criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, research, etc.) nor is it used verbatim -- a fair use requirement.

I really don't know why people bother bringing it up other than to create an uninformed distraction.

Re: Search 5.8B images used to train popular AI art models

#185

Post by NicoleJO »

Permit wrote: post #106
NicoleJO wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how this works. Copyright owners have the right to control when, where, how and by whom their content may be used. Not you https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106

Isn’t this fair use? Copyright holders don’t get to opt out of fair use, correct?

Fair use doesn't apply here.

Re: Search 5.8B images used to train popular AI art models

#186

Post by Permit »

NicoleJO wrote: post #185
Permit wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t this fair use? Copyright holders don’t get to opt out of fair use, correct?

Fair use doesn't apply here.

It’s clearly transformative so I cannot see a good argument for why it does not apply here. Do you have one?

Re: Search 5.8B images used to train popular AI art models

#187

Post by aaimnr »

newswasboring wrote: post #110
gigel82 wrote: post #9

It's surprising how poorly labeled these images are; who is curating this collection? Can't they crowd-source a proper labeling project - I wonder how much better things like Stable Diffusion would be if its training would include correct, complete labels for the images. I'm sure lots of folks would willingly spend a few minutes here and there to aid with the labeling if it means they get to enjoy the model for free.

So stable Diffusion has a img2prompt mode. I wonder if that can be used somehow. The prompts it has yielded for my personal images have been very descriptive and good. It would be interesting to see how different the img2prompt output is for the training images. I would love to measure it but I don't even know how to calculate this distance.

That would be circular, no new information would be provided to the model.
Post reply on HN