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

AI real-time human full-body photo generator

generated.photos

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 421 posts

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#201

Post by declan_roberts »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #98

I get that most of these are hilarious (this is my favorite comment on HN in some time, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37239909 ). But still, I find this incredibly frightening. These are only going to get better. Does anyone doubt that in a couple years time (if that) we'll be able to put the image of any known public person into whatever generated photo we want, which would be indistinguishable from reality?…

The good news is that legal courts have already lost faith in all things digital imagery, and has for a good long while. They're actually way ahead of the curve.

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#204

Post by klyrs »

dragonwriter wrote: post #134
klyrs wrote: post #69

Amusing. My first two "random human" samples had completely ordinary uncanny valley issues (eye was smushed and blurry, weirdly shark-like teeth in child's mouth). But the third looks pretty good! ...for a 90s era povray Barbie doll model. https://generated.photos/human-generator/64d552c85263da00077...

The text prompt for that image (one is generated for the “random” images) is “barbie doll”, so in this specific case its not so much an imagegen problem as other parts of the app design not matching the advertised behavior.

Ah, funny. Their interface hid that box from me on my phone. Weird choices all around.

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#205

Post by paint »

function_seven wrote: post #33
dvngnt_ wrote: post #22

> Thanks to our advanced AI algorithms, you won’t tell generated humans from real people If the images posted are the best they can do, then i have some bad news from them

I can count on one hand the number of ways these photos fail. That's right, 6 ways.

If you encode a binary digit for each biological digit on your hand you can count up to 32 on one hand.

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#206

Post by izzydata »

sandgiant wrote: post #94

The 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…

I got the same thing and am very confused. They are the ones generating the image. Why did they generate porn if they don't allow it? Also apparently clothed teenagers are now pornographic? I think their image analysis needs some work.

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#207

Post by trehalose »

wizofaus wrote: post #188
blitz_skull wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably moral depravity if I had to guess. Not sure why we even need “an argument” against it. It’s pretty self-evidently wrong.

What if it turned out it were the only effective way to prevent people engaging in real paedophilia?

That's a very big "what if". What data could demonstrate that to be true or false?

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#208

Post by stavros »

tempestn wrote: post #180
stavros wrote: post #156

Earlier 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…

That's a good summary, thanks. I think AI-generated will lead to actual child porn not making financial sense (hopefully, anyway). I also don't think that the "whetting the appetite" argument is true, from other areas I've seen (eg playing violent games doesn't lead you to becoming a murderer), but I have no data on that.

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#209

Post by dragonwriter »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #32
Philpax wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There haven't been any solid rulings on the copyright validity of human-driven AI generation yet. There have been a few cases, but they've been muddied by complicating factors (not a human doing the generation - that is, autonomous generation - or the generation being used as a base work for something else). Additionally, even if there's no copyright, the terms of service may still apply separately (see OpenAI disall…

> Additionally, even if there's no copyright, the terms of service may still apply separately (see OpenAI disallowing training a competitor model on output from OpenAI models) Aren't contract clauses that relate to the distribution of material preempted by the copyright act?

> Aren't contract clauses that relate to the distribution of material preempted by the copyright act?

Generally, no. It's possible for there to be interactions in some cases, but the Copyright Act wouldn't generally preempt contract terms. (Its closer to the other way around, in that—to the extent copyright rights exist that could otherwise be enforced—a relevant contract will generally limit enforcement and recover to breach of contract rather than bare copyright action.)

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#210

Post by dragonwriter »

jeroenhd wrote: post #175
jrflowers wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was after several Barbie dolls. Great website.

The prompt for the image you linked says "in sims world". It's in the bottom left field.

The thing is if you are advertising generating infinite photorealistic humans, your automatically generated prompts should probably not be things that do not serve that end.
Post reply on HN