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

Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

nightshade.cs.uchicago.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 710 posts

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#441

Post by HKH2 »

isodev wrote: post #87
alentred wrote: post #77

With this "solution" it looks like the world of art enters the cat-and-mouse game the ad blockers were playing for the last decade or two.

I just tested it with Azure AI image classification and it worked - so this cat is yet to adapt to the mouse’s latest idea. I still feel it is absolutely wrong to roam around the internet and scrape images (without consent) in order to power one’s cash cow AI. I hope more methods to protect artworks (including audio and other formats) become more accessible.

Artists copy from each other all the time. Arguably, culture exists because of copying (folk stories by necessity); copyright makes culture top-down and stagnant, and you can't avoid it because they have the money to shove it right in your face. Who wants trickle-down culture?

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#442

Post by [deleted] »

Art9681 wrote: post #440
AJ007 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The level of claims accompanied by enthusiastic reception from a technically illiterate audience make it sound, smell, and sound like snake oil without much deep investigation. There is another alternative to the law. Provide your art for private viewing only, and ensure your in person audience does not bring recording devices with them. That may sound absurd, but it's a common practice during activities like having…

This would just create a new market for art paparazzis who would find any and all means to inflitrate such private viewings with futuristic miniature cameras and other sensors and selling it for a premium. Less than 24 hours later the files end up on hundreds or thousands of centralized and decentralized servers. I'm not defending it. Just acknowledging the reality. The next TMZ for private art gatherings is percolat…

[deleted]

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#443

Post by r3trohack3r »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #307
23B1 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'll be about as wickedly tool as the ability to get on the internet, e.g. commoditized, transactional, and boring.

I know this is an unpopular thing to say these days, but I still think the internet is amazing. I have more access to information now than the most powerful people in the world did 40 years ago. I can learn about quantum field theory, about which pop star is allegedly fucking which other pop star, etc. If I don't care about the law I can read any of 25 million books or 100 million scientific papers all available on A…

As Jeff Bezos recently said on the Lex podcast: one of the greatest compliments you can give an inventor is that they’re invention will be taken for granted by future generations.

“It won’t be any more wickedly cool than the internet” - saying something won’t be any more wickedly cool than the most profound and impactful pieces of infrastructure human civilization has erected is a pretty high compliment.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#444

Post by Dylan16807 »

chris-orgmenta wrote: post #243

I want progressive fees on copyright/IP/patent usage, and worldwide gov cooperation/legislation (and perhaps even worldwide ability to use works without obtaining initial permission, although let's not go into that outlandish stuff) I want a scaling license fee to apply (e.g. % pegged to revenue. This still has an indirect problem with different industries having different profit margins, but still seems the fairest)…

> And I want the world (or EU, then others to follow suit) to slowly reduce copyright to 0 years* after artists death if owned by a person, and 20-30 years max if owned by a corporation.

Why death at all?

It's icky to trigger soon after death, it's bad to have copyright vary so much based on author age, and it's bad for many works to still have huge copyright lengths.

It's perfectly fine to let copyright expire during the author's life. 20-30 years for everything.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#445

Post by petesergeant »

kredd wrote: post #308
r3trohack3r wrote: post #166

The number of people who are going to be able to produce high fidelity art with off the shelf tools in the near future is unbelievable. It’s pretty exciting. Being able to find a mix of styles you like and apply them to new subjects to make your own unique, personalized, artwork sounds like a wickedly cool power to give to billions of people.

In terms of art, population tends to put value not on the result, but origin and process. People will just look down on any art that’s AI generated in a couple of years when it becomes ubiquitous.

> population tends to put value not on the result, but origin and process

I think population tends to value "looks pretty", and it's other artists, connoisseurs, and art critics who value origin and process. Exit Through the Gift Shop sums this up nicely

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#446

Post by skydhash »

itronitron wrote: post #127
KingOfCoders wrote: post #4

[flagged]

Art schools don't teach people how to paint in different artistic styles. They teach materials and technique.

Very true. I was watching a video yesterday learning how to make brush work digitally. While there were examples, they were just examples but the rest was specific techniques and demonstrations.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#447

Post by HKH2 »

dist-epoch wrote: post #49
ozten wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The memetic weapons humans unleashed on other humans at art school to deter copying are brutal. Just wait until critique.

"Sorry, this is not art, is AI generated trash."

Who cares? With AI, you don't need art school. AI is making humanities redundant, and people are too proud to admit it.

I can't believe how many people are not in awe of the possibilities of AI art, so it's great to see AI disturbing the cynics until they learn. Not everything is political, but I'll let them have this one.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#448

Post by lern_too_spel »

eddd-ddde wrote: post #18

Isn't this just teaching the models how to better understand pictures as humans do? As long as you feed them content that looks good to a human, wouldn't they improve in creating such content?

You would think the economists at UChicago would have told these researchers that their tool would achieve the opposite effect of what they intended, but here we are.

In this case, the mechanism for how it would work is effectively useless. It doesn't affect OpenAI or other companies building foundation models. It only works on people fine-tuning these foundation models, and only if the image is glazed to affect the same foundation model.

Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators

#450

Post by sircastor »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #412
sircastor wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is simple law. Why do people have such a hard time with this? Because this isn’t simple law. It feels like simple infringement, but there’s no actual copying going on. You can’t open up the database and find a given duplicate of a work. Instead you have some abstraction of what it takes to get to a given work. Also it’s important to point out that nothing in the law is sure. A good lawyer, a sympathetic judge,…

Have you seen the examples of midjourney reproducing exact frames of Dune, Star Wars etc? With vague prompting not asking for the media property specifically. It's pretty close to querying a database, except if you're asking for something that's not there it's able to render an interpolated result on the fly. Ask it for something that is there however and the model will dutifully pull it up.

Looking for it, I found this [1] which describes almost what you're saying. The key difference here is that these images aren't exact frames. They're close, of course, but close is not identical.Is there another instance you can point to that shows what you've described?

[1] https://spectrum.ieee.org/midjourney-copyright

Post reply on HN