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

291–300 of 421 posts

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

#291

Post by lemper »

katabasis wrote: post #199
stavros wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

1. You are potentially giving a shield of deniability to people who create or distribute real CSAM because now they could claim that the images are just AI generated and therefore "harmless" 2. Efforts to stamp out real child abuse may be undermined by a flood of AI-generated false positive imagery 3. When people see something over and over again they start to think that it's normal. AI generation of this kind of mat…

ok, you've convinced me about it. before, I didn't have any opinions regarding llm and cp. I didn't even think people could generate cp with llm. thanks mate.

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

#292

Post by mkoryak »

jprete wrote: post #283
jacurtis wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it feels optimized for porn So I was relatively unimpressed with the first few images, they looked incredibly unrealistic. But then after reading this message i decided to add "topless" to the notes just to see how crazy the result was. I was actually impressed, it returned an image that actually looks lifelike once I gave it an adult request. Which reinforces the idea that this was optimized for porn. For those cu…

That image is really off-putting. It looks wrong in several ways I can identify and some that I can’t.

I can count a number of things wrong with that image on her right hand. 7 or 8.

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

#293

Post by wizofaus »

blitz_skull wrote: post #237
wizofaus wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

You’re suggesting that perhaps allowing people to explore an urge that should be fought and suppressed might dissuade them from pushing that urge further resulting in real-world action? Fascinating, do tell me more. Blatant disregard for children aside, the larger issue here is the presupposition that we should someone permit all urges. Not every thought that passes through your brain should be “explored”; some thing…

Not suggesting either, just putting forward a hypothetical possibility. The idea of using AI to generate kiddy porn is off-putting to me in the extreme, and I can think of plenty of reasons why it's almost certainly a bad idea to permit it, but I'd be wary of relying primarily on my instinctual aversion to it to be so certain it should be banned outright.

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

#294

Post by wizofaus »

trehalose wrote: post #207
wizofaus wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I did have exactly that thought when I posted it. It was more of a thought experiment than anything.

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

#295

Post by wizofaus »

dragonwriter wrote: post #216
wizofaus wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

> What if it turned out it were the only effective way to prevent people engaging in real paedophilia? Paedophilia is not synonym for child sex abuse, and to the extent that conjecture hasn't been ruled out by study already, that's at most an argument that its an appropriate function for tightly-controlled research-supporting tools, not a general public business.

No real disagreement there. Ultimately my biggest concern is that real children are not exploited and damaged by experiences they're clearly not ready for - if using AI-generated pornography turned out to be a particularly effective way to achieve that (with no obvious negative side-effects, and to be clear I doubt that's particularly likely to be the case), then I would think we shouldn't dismiss it out of hand as something that must be banned just because it intuitively seems so awful.

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

#296

Post by [deleted] »

ShamelessC wrote: post #193
gwern wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is very widespread. You will see people in this very thread dismissing GANs as fundamentally failed, and hotly objecting to any kind of parity, even if they have to fall back to 'well ok GANs do scale, but they're more complicated'. I also have some representative quotes in my linked draft essay from various papers & DL Twitter discussions. (Another way to put it would be: when was the last time you saw someone be…

Sounds very important to you that you don’t have to change the premise of your essay or ever admit you’re wrong. No one is dismissive of GAN’s here without justification. They’re fine. They don’t beat diffusion, but they’re fine. You come across as severely, _severely_ biased and reactionary.

[deleted]

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

#297

Post by drusepth »

anigbrowl wrote: post #152
ormax3 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

private/incognito window?

That forgets the whole session when you close it. I meant a way to isolate websites for tracking purposes but also continue to use it over time rather than throwing away all cookies.

It sounds like Chrome accounts might accomplish this for you. I have 7-8 profiles for different personas that seem to sandbox cookies and other identity-adjacent features quite well.

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

#298

Post by cortesoft »

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 only difference between that world and our current world for the last 10 years is that before you needed to have some photoshop skills and now anyone can do it.

In some ways, I think that actually makes it safer now… the more trivial it is the more people will stop trusting photos as automatically being real.

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

#300

Post by acosmism »

wrs wrote: post #11
bdowling wrote: post #7

> “If you want to use images produced by Human Generator in commercial projects, contact us.” If there is no copyright in AI-generated images, then how can they possibly enforce this?

They could do it with a click-through license agreement, but they don’t have one of those either. So it seems to have the legal force of a polite request. (IANAL)

I am thinking out loud so here it goes - How will they have the bandwidth to identify and pursue every person using a generated image in commercial use. i respect and understand legalese around terms of service copyright etc but - seriously. how would any company just starting in this space enforce “terms and services”? serious question. Until there is a concrete and - let me emphasize, “cheap and generally available” solution to legally moderating AI generated content - feels to me like it’s the wild west. be real
Post reply on HN