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

Stable Diffusion 2.0

stability.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 519 posts

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#251

Post by FeepingCreature »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #236
ftufek wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To put things in perspective, the dataset it's trained on is ~240TB and Stability has over ~4000 Nvidia A100 (which is much faster than a 1080ti). Without those ingredients, you're highly unlikely to get a model that's worth using (it'll produce mostly useless outputs). That argument also makes little sense when you consider that the model is a couple gigabytes itself, it can't memorize 240TB of data, so it "learned"…

> when you consider that the model is a couple gigabytes itself, it can't memorize 240TB of data, so it "learned". This is just lossy compression with a large and well-tuned (to the expected problem domain) dictionary. Video compression codecs can achieve a 500x compression ratio, and they are general-purpose.

The dataset, LAION-5B, is 240TB of already compressed data. (5 billion pairs of text to 512x512 image.)

Uncompressed, LAION-5B would be 4PB, for a compression ratio into SD of ~780kx, or one byte per picture.

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#253

Post by alignItems »

datalopers wrote: post #40
satvikpendem wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They reportedly did so to stop people from generating CSAM [0]. [0] https://old.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/y9ga5s/sta...

They’ve ensured the only way to create CSAM is through old-fashioned child exploitation, meanwhile all perfectly humane art and photography is at risk of AI replacement. This is a huge missed opportunity to actually help society.

CSAM is a canary for general AI safety. If we can’t prevent SD from creating CP, will we be able to stop robots from killing people?

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#254

Post by barrkel »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #238
datalopers wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without the changes they made to Stable Diffusion, it was already able to generate CP. That's why they restricted it from doing so. It did not have child pornography in the training set, but it did have plenty of normal adult nudity, adult pornography, and plenty of fully clothed children, and was able to extrapolate. Anyway, one obvious application: FBI could run a darknet honeypot site selling AI-generated child po…

> FBI could run a darknet honeypot site selling AI-generated child porn. Eliminate the actual problem without endangering children. It's very unlikely AI generated child porn would even be illegal. Drawn or photoshopped photos aren't so I don't think AI generated would be.

This isn't the case in law in many countries. Whether an image is illegal or not does not solely depend on the means of production; if the images are realistic, then they are often illegal.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_po...

Don't forget that pornographic images and videos featuring children may be used for grooming purposes, socializing children into the idea of sexual abuse. There's a legitimate social purpose in limiting their production.

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#255

Post by causi »

mberning wrote: post #43
LASR wrote: post #27

I am a solo dev working on a creative content creation app to leverage the latest developments in AI. Demoing even the v1 of stable diffusion to the non-technical general users blows them away completely. Now that v2 is here, it’s clear we’re not able to keep pace in developing products to take advantage of it. The general public still is blown away by autosuggest in mobile OS keyboards. Very few really know how far…

I don’t know anybody that is blown away by keyboard auto suggest. It’s wrong as often as it is right. Not saying it isn’t useful, but let’s not oversell it.

It’s wrong as often as it is right.

And for some damn reason they refuse to stop changing "ok" to "OK" like we're all octogenarians on Facebook.

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#256

Post by jeroenhd »

syockit wrote: post #109
throwup wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do pixels have human rights now?

They don't. The training dataset though, may have been obtained through human rights violation. The problem is when the novelty starts to wear out. Then they will start to look for fresh training data which may again incur more human rights violation. If you can ensure that no new training data are obtained that way, then I guess it's okay? (Personally, I don't condone it)

Once again this does pose an interesting problem, though. The AI people claim no copyright issues with the generated issues because AI is different and the training data is not simply recreated. This would also imply that a model released by a paedophile generated out of illegal material would itself not be illegal, as the illegal data is not represented within the model.

I very much doubt the police will look at AI this way when such models do eventually hit the web (assuming they haven't already) but at some point someone will get caught through this stuff and the arrest itself may have damning consequences throughout the AI space.

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#258

Post by TeMPOraL »

kmeisthax wrote: post #58

Is there a good explanation of how to train this from scratch with a custom dataset[0]? I've been looking around the documentation on Huggingface, but all I could find was either how to train unconditional U-Nets[1], or how to use the pretrained Stable Diffusion model to process image prompts (which I already know how to do). Writing a training loop for CLIP manually wound up with me banging against all sorts of stra…

> Specifically, Wikimedia Commons images in the PD-Art-100 category, because the images will be public domain in the US and the labels CC-BY-SA.

Doesn't the "BY" part of the license mean you have to provide attribution along with your models' output[0]? I feel you'll have the equivalent of Github Copilot problem: it might be prohibitive to correctly attribute each output, and listing the entire dataset in attribution section won't fly either. And if you don't attribute, your model is no different than Stable Diffusion, Copilot and other hot models/tools: it's still a massive copyright violation and copyright laundering tool.

----

[0] - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#259

Post by beanjuice »

kanonieer wrote: post #252
88stacks wrote: post #60

Awesome, I’ve put stable diffusion on an api to train a model for anyone to use for free. I’m adding 2.0 to it as we speak! https://88stacks.com

Interesting project but terrible naming.

To be clear to the original poster, the naming is terrible because of the nazi associations of the number 88, correct?

Re: Stable Diffusion 2.0

#260

Post by LouisSayers »

mberning wrote: post #43
LASR wrote: post #27

I am a solo dev working on a creative content creation app to leverage the latest developments in AI. Demoing even the v1 of stable diffusion to the non-technical general users blows them away completely. Now that v2 is here, it’s clear we’re not able to keep pace in developing products to take advantage of it. The general public still is blown away by autosuggest in mobile OS keyboards. Very few really know how far…

I don’t know anybody that is blown away by keyboard auto suggest. It’s wrong as often as it is right. Not saying it isn’t useful, but let’s not oversell it.

Maybe blown away at how terrible it is... like how many times do we need to correct it for it to show us the same shitty suggestions. I'm not sure I'd even notice if it were turned off.
Post reply on HN