Be careful at work...it sometimes generates a realistic nude even with clothing selected.
AI real-time human full-body photo generator
191–200 of 421 posts
Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator
#192The only thing I changed from the default parameters was Age == Teenager. That resulted in this error: We detected that generated image contains nude content. Try changing parameters. Not sure what to make of this, but it feels wrong, somehow? Edit: This was the prompt it generated for me on page load: "Minerva McGonagall in Hogwarts, wearing Hogwarts robe and witch hat" - https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e…
Over self-censoring
Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
> everyone knows GANs don't work because they're too unstable Is that a wide spread myth? I thought it’s widely accepted that GAN is really good generating these artificial pictures (it’s what started DeepFake after all) when you know your model’s “button”. Similar to how this uses GAN since they have a model “boundary condition”. While humans are diverse, we have a set of repeatable features (two legs, two arms, etc…
It is very widespread. You will see people in this very thread dismissing GANs as fundamentally failed, and hotly objecting to any kind of parity, even if they have to fall back to 'well ok GANs do scale, but they're more complicated'. I also have some representative quotes in my linked draft essay from various papers & DL Twitter discussions. (Another way to put it would be: when was the last time you saw someone be…
Sounds very important to you that you don’t have to change the premise of your essay or ever admit you’re wrong.
No one is dismissive of GAN’s here without justification. They’re fine. They don’t beat diffusion, but they’re fine.
You come across as severely, _severely_ biased and reactionary.
Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator
#194What I find sketchy is that it is not easy to find out who is behind this service. The norm is an about us or a link to a parent site. Briefly skimmed the legalese (ToS & Privacy) and still not clear who these people or where they operate from. The linkedin link shows 8 people working there, mostly in BD from outside the US. I don't think there is a nefarious purpose going on, i.e. getting people to sign up and steal…
It's also prominently asking you to upload a picture of your face along the rest of the controls
Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator
#195Why is it impossible to generate a male model wearing anything other than rolled denim jean shorts? I've tried things like "long pants" or "ankle-length pants," but I cannot get it to stop putting them all in denim shorts!
Scroll down to the text field at the bottom and delete everything in it. Then go back and reselect clothing.
Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
To expand on what I take as your implied argument- Some (small) percentage of people are pedophiles, meaning they're attracted to children. Presumably they can't help that, just as others can't change their sexual preferences. Clearly acting on this urge with an actual child is wrong. That's true whether it's directly assaulting a child, or consuming child porn, as that market encourages others to exploit children to…
It's interesting to notice when utilitarian arguments are accepted and when they're rejected. The argument offered in favor of abortion without limits tends to be that women will get abortions regardless, they will just be dangerous. Presumably the greater good is served by allowing abortions despite the moral issues surrounding killing fetuses/unborn children. I have no trouble imagining many people supporting such a utilitarian argument for abortion but not for generated CP. Though I have a hard time making the distinction intelligible.
Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator
#197really easy to jailbreak nudes
Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looking at the poses, it feels optimized for generating porn, but one example someone showed had a child's face (good god please don't let your "AI" system generate child anything if you want to sell it for porn purposes), and another user noted that their attempt error'd out because it "detected nudity", even though other users get given a nude model by default.
[flagged]
Under English law creating a rough hand-drawn child porn sketch for your own amusement is a serious crime. I don't understand the rationale for this, but people should be aware that if they use a porn generator and it spits out an image that looks like CP then they will have committed an offence in England.
Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looking at the poses, it feels optimized for generating porn, but one example someone showed had a child's face (good god please don't let your "AI" system generate child anything if you want to sell it for porn purposes), and another user noted that their attempt error'd out because it "detected nudity", even though other users get given a nude model by default.
[flagged]
1. You are potentially giving a shield of deniability to people who create or distribute real CSAM because now they could claim that the images are just AI generated and therefore "harmless"
2. Efforts to stamp out real child abuse may be undermined by a flood of AI-generated false positive imagery
3. When people see something over and over again they start to think that it's normal. AI generation of this kind of material (something which can be done at a huge scale) risks normalizing the sexual abuse of children.
I'm sure there are many other arguments beyond these.
Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator
#200Default human is a "Young Adult" woman, and the default "add something" was "woman with tatoos". I changed ONE filter (from young to Senior). It spun for about 20 seconds and then gave me the same woman's face but older. She is also topless. I'm impressed (?)
I had very different default settings, so I think there's some randomization going on here.