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

Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

nightshade.cs.uchicago.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 710 posts

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#21

Post by galleywest200 »

Kuinox wrote: post #14
Quanttek wrote: post #10

This is fantastic. If companies want to create AI models, they should license the content they use for the training data. As long as there are not sufficient legal protections and the EU/Congress do not act, tools like these can serve as a stopgap and maybe help increase pressure on policymakers

> they should license the content they use for the training data You mean like OpenAI and Adobe ? Only the free and open source models didn't licensed any content for the training data.

Adobe is training off of images stored in their cloud systems, per their Terms of Service.

OpenAI has provided no such documentation or legal guarantees, and it is still quite possible they scraped all sorts of copyright materials.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#23

Post by devmor »

galleywest200 wrote: post #21
Kuinox wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they should license the content they use for the training data You mean like OpenAI and Adobe ? Only the free and open source models didn't licensed any content for the training data.

Adobe is training off of images stored in their cloud systems, per their Terms of Service. OpenAI has provided no such documentation or legal guarantees, and it is still quite possible they scraped all sorts of copyright materials.

There is in fact, an extreme amount of circumstantial evidence that they intentionally and knowingly violated copyright en mass. It’s been quite a popular subject in tech news the past couple weeks.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#24

Post by jsheard »

Drakim wrote: post #13
gmerc wrote: post #7

Doing the work to increase OpenAIs moat

Obviously AIs can just train on images that aren't poisoned.

Is it possible to reliably detect whether an image is poisoned? If not then it achieves the goal of punishing entities which indiscriminately harvest data.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#25

Post by SonicSoul »

NoraCodes wrote: post #8
KingOfCoders wrote: post #4

[flagged]

This is a tired argument; whether or not the diffusion models are "learning", they are a tool of capital to fuck over human artists, and should be resisted for that reason alone.

great comment!

imagine being a photographer that takes decades to perfect their craft. sure another student can study and mimic your style. but it's still different than some computer model "ingesting" vast amount of photos and vomiting something similar for $5.99 in aws cpu cost so that some prompt jockey can call themselves an AI artist and make money off of other peoples talent.

i get that this is cynical and does not encompass all ai art, but why not let computers develop their own style wihout ingesting human art? that's when it would actually be AI art

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#26

Post by KeplerBoy »

Kuinox wrote: post #14
Quanttek wrote: post #10

This is fantastic. If companies want to create AI models, they should license the content they use for the training data. As long as there are not sufficient legal protections and the EU/Congress do not act, tools like these can serve as a stopgap and maybe help increase pressure on policymakers

> they should license the content they use for the training data You mean like OpenAI and Adobe ? Only the free and open source models didn't licensed any content for the training data.

There is a small difference between any and all. OpenAI certainly didn't licence all of the image they use for training.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#28

Post by Kuinox »

galleywest200 wrote: post #21
Kuinox wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they should license the content they use for the training data You mean like OpenAI and Adobe ? Only the free and open source models didn't licensed any content for the training data.

Adobe is training off of images stored in their cloud systems, per their Terms of Service. OpenAI has provided no such documentation or legal guarantees, and it is still quite possible they scraped all sorts of copyright materials.

> OpenAI has provided no such documentation

OpenAI and Shutterstocks publicly announced their collaboration, Shutterstocks sells AI generated images, generated with OpenAI models.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#30

Post by popohauer »

Quanttek wrote: post #10

This is fantastic. If companies want to create AI models, they should license the content they use for the training data. As long as there are not sufficient legal protections and the EU/Congress do not act, tools like these can serve as a stopgap and maybe help increase pressure on policymakers

It's going to be interesting to see how the lawsuits against OpenAI by content creators plays out. If the courts rule that AI generated content is a derivative work of all the content it was trained on it could really flip the entire gen AI movement on its head.
Post reply on HN