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

Stable Diffusion Public Release

stability.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 437 posts

Re: Stable Diffusion Public Release

#281

Post by simondotau »

kortex wrote: post #238
Swizec wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well what’s a “real” photo? If I take your photo and photoshop (very well) different surroundings. Is it a real photo if you? If I photoshop your face (very well) onto a different body. Is that real? If I feed your photos into a model that can create realistic versions of those photos in different poses or with different facial expressions. Is that real? They all start with something that is very definitely a real ph…

Simple: a "real" photo is one in which a light field from the real world impinges on a photosensitive media (CCD, film), and directly encodes that information, with some allowance for global light levels, gain, ISO, and speed. Anything else is a modification therein. HDR, multi-exposure compositing, etc, aren't truly "real". They may be 99% real, but aren't 100% real. If you crop it, it's 99.9% real (we have models w…

So if I take a photo of a photoshopped photo, it is a real photo.

Re: Stable Diffusion Public Release

#282

Post by miohtama »

alcover wrote: post #88

Moral question: Such tool will be used to generate lewd imagery involving virtual minors. No way to prevent it upstream by outlawing feeding it real content (whose possession already is illegal). Suffice to add 'childrenize' layer onto adult NN or something. How will the legal system react ? Bundle it into illegal imagery, period ? Maybe it's already the case - I think drawing made public is, not sure. If not, on wha…

Thoughtcrime is not a thing in the US, do not know about other countries

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

Though Think of the children folk have often tried to make it illegal.

Re: Stable Diffusion Public Release

#283

Post by UncleOxidant »

Kiro wrote: post #133
UncleOxidant wrote: post #106

> You can join our dedicated community for Stable Diffusion here: [ https://discord.gg/stablediffusion ] Oh, discord... I've had so many problems trying to log into discord in the last couple of years that I've given up on it.

That's peculiar. I run a couple of big Discord servers and never heard anyone saying they have problems logging in.

First about 18 months ago they said I had an IP phone and could no longer log in (my carrier is Republic Wireless). When I contacted support and told them that I had been able to login with that number in the past they basically said "we're tightening up security, too bad so sad. get another phone number" Then recently I found that I was able to log in when I wanted to try midjourney (Republic changed something back in April, apparently so they it no longer looks like an IP phone#). Then I wanted to login to discord on the my desktop and it gave me some weird errors which basically amounted to "this number is already claimed" (it was, by me) so now I'm back to ignoring discord again.

Re: Stable Diffusion Public Release

#285

Post by roguas »

realce wrote: post #134
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh... if I was making conspiracy theories, it's not like Photoshop hasn't existed for decades already, with far more predictable results.

Photoshop requires experience and some talent, this doesn't. If I was some small rebel group in Africa or the Middle East with basically no money or training, I'd use this tool every single day until I was in power, or I'd frame my opposition as using it against the People. Everyone just got their own KGB art department.

Try and do that. Likely those people won't care too much about you, they lean towards authority figures in their community. It is way easier to find those guys and corrupt them. Rather than running some underground news agency changing minds of millions of people.

In fact quite often the former is the case + cheaper + less time to execute. "Western" societies will be more resilient to this scenario. So, mostly its gonna be a lot of "political" art we gonna see.

Re: Stable Diffusion Public Release

#286

Post by kazinator »

coolspot wrote: post #284
faizshah wrote: post #100

What’s the license on the images produced by this model?

CC0 - no one owns the copyright, so everyone is free to use

That is not so; the CC0 explicitly states that patent and trademark rights are not waived.

Contrast that with, say, the Two-Clause BSD which says "[r]edistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met [...]".

Since trademark and patent rights are not mentioned, then these words mean that even if the purveyor of the software holds patents and/or trademarks, your redistribution and use are permitted. I.e. it appears that a patent and trademark grant is implied if a patent holder puts something under the two-clause BSD. Or at least you have a ghost of a chance to argue it in court.

Not so with the CC0, which spells out that you don't have permission to use any patents and trademarks in the work.

Re: Stable Diffusion Public Release

#287

Post by Swizec »

seydor wrote: post #235
Swizec wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well what’s a “real” photo? If I take your photo and photoshop (very well) different surroundings. Is it a real photo if you? If I photoshop your face (very well) onto a different body. Is that real? If I feed your photos into a model that can create realistic versions of those photos in different poses or with different facial expressions. Is that real? They all start with something that is very definitely a real ph…

A real photo is one created by photons outside the camera

You’ll be surprised to learn that doesn’t work without some amazing tech to process the photons. Different settings will produce a different photo.

Hell, just changing focal length makes a bigg difference to what your face looks like: https://imgur.io/gallery/ZKTWi no digital manipulation required.

Which of those faces is “real”? They’re all just recording photons hitting the camera, but look very different.

It gets even worse when we start talking about colors. For example: it took cameras decades before they could accurately capture black faces. Where accurately means “an average person would say it looks right”

https://www.vox.com/2015/9/18/9348821/photography-race-bias

Edit: here's a fun example of how journalists use perspective and focal distance tricks to support their desired story angle. No digital manipulation https://twitter.com/baekdal/status/1254460167812415489

Re: Stable Diffusion Public Release

#288

Post by Swizec »

kortex wrote: post #238
Swizec wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well what’s a “real” photo? If I take your photo and photoshop (very well) different surroundings. Is it a real photo if you? If I photoshop your face (very well) onto a different body. Is that real? If I feed your photos into a model that can create realistic versions of those photos in different poses or with different facial expressions. Is that real? They all start with something that is very definitely a real ph…

Simple: a "real" photo is one in which a light field from the real world impinges on a photosensitive media (CCD, film), and directly encodes that information, with some allowance for global light levels, gain, ISO, and speed. Anything else is a modification therein. HDR, multi-exposure compositing, etc, aren't truly "real". They may be 99% real, but aren't 100% real. If you crop it, it's 99.9% real (we have models w…

> Yes, by that definition, most photographs already aren't real.

What if I use no digital manipulation at all, but play around with focal lengths or perspective to produce the desired effect. Is that a real photo?

For example from covid reporting: https://twitter.com/baekdal/status/1254460167812415489

Re: Stable Diffusion Public Release

#289

Post by derac »

Kiro wrote: post #275
derac wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll need to know how to program. Try Python with Flask or Bottle.

Very funny. Anyway, this pretty much answered my question: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32556277

Sorry I misinterpreted what you meant, I wasn't meaning to be glib.

Re: Stable Diffusion Public Release

#290

Post by hahajk »

mabbo wrote: post #33

The most interesting part, to me, of a release like this is the amount of "please don't abuse this technology" pleading. No licence will ever stop people from doing things that the licence says they can't. There will always be someone who digs into the internals and makes a version that does not respect your hopes and dreams. It's going to be bad. As I see it, within a couple years this tech will be so widespread and…

Like you mentioned near the end, all this has been possible with photoshop, with amateur level skill. Hollywood can CGI the entire Captain Marvel movie, so as far as state-level efforts go, AI can really only be an incremental improvement at best.

I think this is all just trendy popular sentiment moralizing AI.

Post reply on HN