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

Dall-E 2

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 511 posts

Re: Dall-E 2

#451

Post by jug »

dntrkv wrote: post #229
0F wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally everyone on this website is in denial. They all approach it by asking which fields will be safe. No field is safe. “But it’s not going to happen for a long time.” Climate deniers say the same thing and you think they should be wearing the dunce hat? The average person complains bitterly about climate deniers who say that it’s “my grandkids problem lol” but when I corner the average person into admitting AI…

I don't think anyone is in denial about this, it's just not something anyone should concern themselves with in the foreseeable future. AI that can replace a dev or designer is nowhere close to becoming a reality. Just because we have some cool demos that show some impressive capabilities in a narrow application does not mean we can extrapolate that capability to something that is many times more complex.

I agree. It bears repeating: Where modern AI shines is where it does not matter to be precise, where programming absolutely _depends_ on being precise.

So, today some good AI applications are face detection, fingerprint detection, or generating art. Where you need to catch or generate the general gist of it without pixel precision.

Of course, programming might be under greater threat than we imagine. I can also not claim that anyone holding that position is just plain _wrong_. But I do believe that would take an AI breakthrough that is yet to happen. That breakthrough would also have absolutely crazy consequences beyond programming, because now we would have "exact AI" and the thought of that boggles my mind for sure.

Re: Dall-E 2

#452

Post by djoldman »

refulgentis wrote: post #301
btdmaster wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.eleuther.ai (text, not images, but free as in freedom)

Katherine Crawson is @ Eletheur & IMHO is indisputably most responsible for the advances in text=>image generation. Dall-E 2 is Dall-E and her insight to use diffusion, the intermediate proof of concept of diffusion + Dall-E is GLIDE. https://twitter.com/RiversHaveWings & https://github.com/crowsonkb

The paper cites K. Crowson 4 times:

[5] Katherine Crowson. Ava linear probe. https://twitter.com/RiversHaveWings/status/ 1472346186728173568?s=20&t=T-HRr3Gw5HRGjQaMDtRe3A, 2021.

[6] Katherine Crowson. Clip guided diffusion hq 256x256. https://colab.research.google.com/ drive/12a_Wrfi2_gwwAuN3VvMTwVMz9TfqctNj, 2021.

[7] Katherine Crowson. Clip guided diffusion 512x512, secondary model method. https://twitter. com/RiversHaveWings/status/1462859669454536711, 2021.

[8] Katherine Crowson. v-diffusion. https://github.com/crowsonkb/v-diffusion-pytorch, 2021.

Re: Dall-E 2

#453

Post by BlueTemplar »

aliakhtar wrote: post #432
Szpadel wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we already have a lot of fabricated content like that using current photo editing technology (Photoshop) and it's not causing much legal nor moral issues

Because it’s still pretty hard to make it and it’s bad - you can easily tell it’s fake. This makes it as easy as typing a sentence - and the quality seems fairly realistic

Considering where the progress on deepfakes is at, I'm going to have to disagree on both counts of "hard to make" and "easily tell it's fake".

Re: Dall-E 2

#454

Post by BlueTemplar »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #308
chias wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would this not necessarily require training it on a large body of real CSAM? Seems like it would be a non-starter.

Surprisingly no. It knows what a child looks like, and can infer what a naked child looks like from medical imagery. A child with adult body parts is a whole other class of weirdness that might pop out too. Models want to surprise us all.

Relatedly, when checking for a related comment, I wanted to see what the current state of deep fakes progress was, so I went to the usual place where the bleeding edge for such things could be found.

First video clips were with the faces of your usual celebrities, but then suddenly I got "treated" to Greta Thunberg in the situations you might expect. I cut my exploration short.

Now, Greta Thunberg is actually 19 now (how time flies !), except that deep fake was most likely trained on her media appearances, which started when she was 15 !

(I guess at least that she wasn't a child any more, which might explain why those clips had not been almost immediately flagged and removed ?)

Re: Dall-E 2

#455

Post by Synaesthesia »

falcor84 wrote: post #246

>We’ve limited the ability for DALL·E 2 to generate ... adult images. I think that using something like this for porn could potentially offer the biggest benefit to society. So much has been said about how this industry exploits young and vulnerable models. Cheap autogenerated images (and in the future videos) would pretty much remove the demand for human models and eliminate the related suffering, no? EDIT: typo

Or maybe we don't want to encourage that behavior more.

Re: Dall-E 2

#456

Post by danbruc »

JohnBooty wrote: post #410
kromem wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's necessarily certain villainy for those who fight that fight as long as they are fighting it correctly. There's a huge case to be made that flooding the darknet with AI generated CP reduces the revictimization of those in authentic CP images, and would cut down on the motivating factors to produce authentic CP (for which original production is often a requirement to join CP distribution rings). As w…

Thought-provoking post, thanks. Especially the part about maybe generating specifically tailored material to "train" folks. Although, while obviously moral instead of immoral like "gay conversion therapy", I wonder if it would be just as ineffective. and would cut down on the motivating factors to produce authentic CP (for which original production is often a requirement to join CP distribution rings). Hmmmmm. Will m…

But when watching normal porn, I think part of the thrill for many/most people is knowing that what's happening is real.

Unless you understand real to just mean that actual humans were involved, describing porn as real seems to be a bit of a stretch more often than not.

Re: Dall-E 2

#457

Post by BlueTemplar »

harpersealtako wrote: post #133
andybak wrote: post #3

Preventing Harmful Generations We’ve limited the ability for DALL·E 2 to generate violent, hate, or adult images. By removing the most explicit content from the training data, we minimized DALL·E 2’s exposure to these concepts. We also used advanced techniques to prevent photorealistic generations of real individuals’ faces, including those of public figures. "And we've also closed off a huge range of potentially int…

It's the usual pattern of AI safety experts who justify their existence by the "risk of runaway superintelligence", but all they actually do in practice is find out how to stop their models from generating non-advertiser-friendly content. It's like the nuclear safety engineers focusing on what color to paint the bike shed rather than stopping the reactor from potentially melting down. The end result is people stop re…

Like safety engineers trying to run turbines on minimal reactor power so that the safety test has a checkmark for the 1rst May ?

(Hmm, I guess this comparison doesn't actually work...)

Re: Dall-E 2

#458

Post by zackmorris »

robertsdionne wrote: post #211
zackmorris wrote: post #161

Apologies for an open-ended question but: does anyone know if there is a term for something like Turing-completeness within AI, where a certain level of intelligence can simulate any other type of intelligence like our brains do? For example, using DeMorgan's theorem, we can build any logic circuit out of all NAND or NOR gates: https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/boolean/demorgan.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N…

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

Thank you, that's just the sort of breadcrumb I was looking for!

I'm in a bit of a rush and don't know the term for this offhand, but I remember hearing that single-layer neural networks are equivalent to multi-layer ones:

https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/451127/equivalence...

https://www.quora.com/Is-a-single-layer-feed-forward-neural-...

There are probably more insights like this out there. These equivalences allow us to think in abstractions that get us above the minutia of fine-tuning these algorithms so that we can see the big picture. I think.

Re: Dall-E 2

#459

Post by zackmorris »

dqpb wrote: post #292
zackmorris wrote: post #161

Apologies for an open-ended question but: does anyone know if there is a term for something like Turing-completeness within AI, where a certain level of intelligence can simulate any other type of intelligence like our brains do? For example, using DeMorgan's theorem, we can build any logic circuit out of all NAND or NOR gates: https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/boolean/demorgan.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N…

Juergeb Schmidhuber predicts the “Omega point” of technological development (including AGI) to be around 2040 https://youtu.be/pGftUCTqaGg The MIT Limits to Growth study predicts the collapse of global civilization around 2040 https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/z3xw3x/new-research-vind...

This is my feeling as well, that the rise of AGI conveniently coincides with the end of the world. I find it demoralizing because so many trends look just like that, where solving the ultimate problem results in the destruction of the context in which the original problem resided.

Re: Dall-E 2

#460

Post by coldpie »

0F wrote: post #318
coldpie wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to understand your point, because I think I agree with you, but it's covered in so much hyperbole and invective I'm having a hard time getting there. Can you scale it back a little and explain to me what you mean? Something like: AI is going to replace jobs at such scale that our current job-based economic system will collapse?

Most people get stuck where you are. The fastest way possible to explain it is that it will bring rapid and fundamental change. You could say jobs or terminators but focusing on the specifics is a red herring. It will change everything and the probability of a good outcome is minuscule. It’s playing Russian roulette with the whole world except rather that 1/6 for the good, it’s one in trillions for the bad. The worst…

Okay. What do you want me to do about it?
Post reply on HN