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

Stable Attribution

stableattribution.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 365 posts

Re: Stable Attribution

#261

Post by HDevo »

rcme wrote: post #211
heliumcraft wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

relevant: https://rom1504.github.io/clip-retrieval/ https://github.com/rom1504/clip-retrieval Ironically, the stableattribution.com authors didn't give any attribution or credit to clip-retrieval and its developer

They don’t need to, as clip-retrieval is licensed under the MIT license.

The MIT license disagrees:

  The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
Besides, even if you don't interpret this as "attribution", it's still ironic coming from this particular project.

Re: Stable Attribution

#262

Post by dns_snek »

nextlevelwizard wrote: post #247
fastball wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe Stability AI is playing 4D chess and made this website themselves as a sorta "false flag" to help demonstrate that what SD is doing is no different than what humans do, to help them win any legal battles.

How is what any of these image generators are doing any different from myself when I (try to) make art? I draw on my experiences and senses and try to reproduce a picture and those experiences include natural things I've seen as well as art others have made. More so how are these image generators any different from text generators like ChatGTP? I feel like if first tool out from these AI gates was a bot that wrote go…

> More so how are these image generators any different from text generators like ChatGTP?

I've spotted this pattern a couple of times and this sort of circular reasoning seems concerning. Whenever one of (Stable diffusion, Copilot, ChatGPT) comes up in a discussion, their legitimacy seems to be swiftly justified by existence of the other two, even though they're all uniquely problematic in how they wash away attribution and licensing.

Re: Stable Attribution

#263

Post by zarzavat »

romwell wrote: post #182
chii wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This isn't weavers or telegraph operators, this is coming for all human art forms. so somehow the arts is above the telegraph operators or weavers? > but people will happily pay 2 cents to hear GPTx's paraphrase of it. except if you can tell that the novel GPTx "paraphrased" is a derivative work from yours, rather than transformative, you can either sue for loyalties, or take action. If you cannot tell if GPTx is s…

>except if you can tell that the novel GPTx "paraphrased" is a derivative work from yours, rather than transformative, you can either sue for loyalties, or take action. Respectfully, no. The top comment in this thread is saurik asking Stable Diffisuion to generate "an avatar of saurik" and getting a veritable likeness of themselves back. It would be laughable to think that this is feasible without the model having la…

A paraphrased novel is clearly a copyright violation under existing laws. If you use GPT to produce one, then you will be sued.

This does not imply that the underlying model is a copyright violation. There is no case law on the copyright status of models but it is generally believed that training a model is fair use.

In the human analogy: it is legal to read Harry Potter and to learn Harry Potter from memory such that a copy of it is stored within your head. But if you reproduce and publish or perform substantial parts of Harry Potter from memory you are violating copyright (subject to the various exceptions to copyright: quotation, parody, etc).

Re: Stable Attribution

#264

Post by consumer451 »

astrange wrote: post #122
simonw wrote: post #51

Upload a photo you took to prove to yourself that this tool is misleading (if not straight up fraudulent), then downvote and move on. You can already run exactly this kind of image similarity search against the Stable Diffusion training set using existing tools - https://rom1504.github.io/clip-retrieval/?back=https%3A%2F%2... for example

But you can't downvote stories.

You can flag though, and this fraud (or near fraud) deserves it.

Re: Stable Attribution

#265

Post by ilyt »

azeemba wrote: post #31
version_five wrote: post #2

This appears to be just looking for the nearest neighbors of the image in embedding space and calling those the source data. This by definition would find similar looking images, but it's not strictly correct to call it attribution. To some extent all of the training data is responsible for the result - as an example, the model is also learning from negative examples. The result here may feel satisfying, but it's ove…

Yea it feels misleading. I think finding attribution is genuinely a hard problem and a solution in this space would be valuable. I don't think such a solution can work just based on the resulting image though. It probably needs to input prompt to have any chance of working.

I'd like to say AI trained on say patent database would prevent many patents that shoudn't be granted in the first place but my guess is that lawyers would quickly adapt to writing them in a way that doesn't trigger AI

Re: Stable Attribution

#267

Post by ilyt »

bioemerl wrote: post #131
mrtksn wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The capital of the artists is their intellectual property, that's the point.

Under capitalism artist would be unable to make a profit off of their art. Under communism artists would be barred from making art entirely, ordered by the state to work in a place where it is deemed to be productive.

> Under capitalism artist would be unable to make a profit off of their art.

Sure they would, it would just be "I got paid to do this art/music piece that then someone will use in their product they sell"

Re: Stable Attribution

#268

Post by pksebben »

romwell wrote: post #183
chii wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You do not* have the right to start a podcast where you recite the entire book from memory. which is fine - this is public broadcasting of the works, which is part of the exclusive rights of the owner. However, this is not what the AI is doing.

>However, this is not what the AI is doing. Yes, this is what the people who use the AI are doing. As well as people who release the AI model or a product that uses it.

but they're not. Works derived stylistically are not copies.

Were they publishing copies, your harry potter analogy would hold, but that is categorically not the thing happening.

Diffusion is not compression, or copying. It's stylistic synthesis, which is more like someone reading all the Harry Potter books, then doing a podcast about Harry Potter fan fiction.

Which, incidentally, exists (1)

1 https://www.fanaticalfics.com/

Re: Stable Attribution

#269

Post by bemmu »

louison11 wrote: post #226
saurik wrote: post #35

I gave it a photo I had Stable Diffusion 1.4 generate from the prompt "avatar for saurik". If you dig through the CLIP database, you will find that the model was trained on a ridiculously large number of copies of my Twitter profile photo due to it being included when people screenshot popular tweets I've posted (which, notably, also means that it is rather low resolution). https://www.stableattribution.com/?image=e8…

This. They probably simply used an “image similarity” algorithm, of which many are readily available and do not require much computing power. The credit at the bottom of the website for “Chroma”, a startup with no live product and hiring, suggests this could be a growth hack. Like “let’s ride the buzz of the moment with a barely useful tool quick to develop, hit front page of HN, and get some visibility.” Good for th…

This will spread further than HN, as this is a current hot topic, and journalists are dying for more things to write about it.

Whether or not this tool works, expect it to make the rounds on any tech publications that have previously written “stable diffusion bad” -type stories.

Re: Stable Attribution

#270

Post by codetrotter »

mrtksn wrote: post #103
codetrotter wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> free food and housing for the artistic types Food and housing should be a human right, and it is only because of greed and fear that society allows someone to become homeless. Not only should we provide housing and food for the artists. We should do it for everyone. And then they can spend time doing what they want, and earn more money that way but never have to worry about housing or basic food for survival.

I guess you first should do your revolution, establish your new order where food and housing is a given right and later go after the work of the artist.

> do your revolution, establish your new order [...] and later go after the work of the artist

I don't think that's what's going to happen.

But if things get as bad as you guys are saying, maybe after enough people lose their jobs to AI society will change somehow to take care of the less fortunate among us in better ways, providing housing, food and healthcare to the people.

Post reply on HN