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

Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

imagen.research.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 500 posts

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#451

Post by johannboehme »

needle0 wrote: post #352
zarzavat wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given OpenAI’s extreme restrictions on Dalle 2, can anybody point to any harm that has been done with Stable Diffusion in particular since it launched? Even a single instance. Because I have only seen strictly positive coverage of people having fun with it.

Personally I am strongly on the opinion of favoring openness, but since you asked, there was this: https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/xofxo3/a_j... The hoax was pretty quickly debunked, as the attempt was pretty crude. The images were full of artifacts and the image sizes were all 512x512 squares (the default image size for Stable Diffusion) with no attempt made to crop it to more common aspect ratios.…

so, don't trust photos you see online? That was i learned as a student 15 years ago when Photoshop was adapted by the masses. Nothing changed, just the tools got even easier to use.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#452

Post by johannboehme »

derefr wrote: post #304
carlosdp wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a difference in ease of use. I could never use photoshop to fake something like that even if I wanted to. You couldn't, but basically any VFX shop easily could. Point is, it doesn't make anything possible that wasn't already possible, it just makes it more accessible. That's an inevitability with technology, as time goes on. The counter is not to try and suppress it, that has never worked and never will.

What motivation would a VFX shop have to do such a thing, though? (Money, sure, but what's a motive strong enough to be worth commissioning them?) It's always individuals who want to harm others in this particular way; and individuals don't throw around big-VFX-project amounts of money on petty revenge. But they'd certainly spend $20. DDoS attacks got a lot (1000x) more commonplace once there were DDoS services that…

we are talking pictures atm. not videos. I bet you could get as good as SD with two weeks of free time, lots of youtube tutorials and with a photoshop license.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#453

Post by johannboehme »

rgmerk wrote: post #315
scarmig wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to take an unpopular position: there's no harm being done. It's not putting people in positions they would rather not be in, but putting their likeness into those situations. It's a key difference: if someone makes a paper mache of a naked Trump to use in a protest, is harm being done to him? The idea that it's "doing harm" is simply inventing a new form of lèse-majesté. Verbally, we regularly do the same:…

Be serious for a moment. If I circulated a convincing-looking video of Rick fucking goats to his parents, partner and his boss at the school where he works, that could easily do considerable harm to Rick.

so, we just need better digital competence?

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#454

Post by matheusmoreira »

TuringTest wrote: post #420
matheusmoreira wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can imagine a person killing other people. I can draw a person killing other people. I can make a computer draw a person killing other people. In all three cases, zero people were harmed.

But if you if you spread the image in a forum of haters, you may incite someone to kill that person. That's why there are laws against harassment. The danger is not the existence of an image, it is the act of communication that has consequences.

They say music can alter moods and talk to you. Well, can it load a gun up for you and cock it too? Well, if it can, then the next time you assault a dude, just tell the judge it was my fault and I'll get sued!

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#455

Post by raxxorraxor »

i_like_apis wrote: post #261

The concern trolling and gatekeeping about social justice issues coming from the so-called "ethicists" in the AI peanut gallery has been utterly ridiculous. Google claims they don't want to release Imagen because it lacks what can only be called "latent space affirmative action". Stability or someone like it will valiantly release this technology, again and there will be absolutely no harm to anyone. Stop being so to…

This was never about ethics, this was only about control. Of language, behavior and they need these stories for plausible deniability. They are advertisers and know what they are doing.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#456

Post by raxxorraxor »

TuringTest wrote: post #424
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a clear risk from these sorts of models as they get better - I mean recreating specific individuals’ likenesses in compromising images Been possible on home computers for 31 years for anyone who actually wants to do it. It literally doesn't matter and I think Stability has proven that the "AI Ethics" part of these models was essentially meaningless busy work at best, and at worse stealing compute credits f…

Nobody should trust faked quotes attributed to celebrities or ethnic groups in Twitter or Whatsapp, yet these fakes have ruined political campaigns and led to mass killings. Society doesn't adapt in the way you suggest by people disregarding what you think is irrelevant.

Don't try to use open internet platforms for your political campaigns. I think "feedback" in that case is justified. People defended themselves against propaganda. The campaigns have ruined themselves.

I am not sure about mass killings. Some say that Facebook enabled a genocide in Myanmar, but I think that is a false hypothesis. It was used as a platform by conflicting parties, sure, but it wasn't the reason for the conflict.

Google has strong governmental ties right now, so opposing any of their messages regardless of content seems sensible. Without backlash it would just fortify the situation right now so it has to be costly for both Google and political parties. Google lost a lot of trust in recent years, sadly that is not true for their market influence. Perhaps they put out these message because government contracts require it, the user wouldn't know because that is not transparent.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#457

Post by raxxorraxor »

capitalsigma wrote: post #295
Gigachad wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is a recommendation engine. The problem isn't so much the content, its that facebook chooses to show it to people who did not actively seek it out. You never see people complain at Chrome for showing the content or nginx for hosting it. Recommendation engines are more responsible than basic infrastructure.

So you would say that if FB fails to censor a video titled "vaccines cause autism" that drives engagement, they are more morally culpable for the content than if Google spends TPU cycles rendering the Imagen prompt input: "detailed video about why vaccines cause autism, scientific, realistic, in the style of a public health announcement" ?

They did ban such videos and now people take videos like this seriously. Don't be so naive. This is a PR message, nothing else.

The whole banning spree did more damage to vaccine acceptance than flat earther and lizard people together. It isn't even comparable. Because of course they ended up censoring legitimate criticism and scientific data. That was inevitable, no matter how well intended.

Now they made themselves unreliable because someone on the internet was crazy.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#458

Post by mclightning »

dagmx wrote: post #185
Etheryte wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, but I wouldn't take it so personally. There have been people claiming machines will make one industry or another obsolete for as long as we've had machines. In a way, sometimes they're right! But this doesn't mean the people are obsolete. Excel never made accountants obsolete, it just made their jobs easier and less tedious. I feel like content generation tools might offer something similar. How nic…

Oh I don’t take it personally so much as I find it sad how quickly people in the tech sphere are so quick to extol the virtues of things they have no familiarity with. Every AI art thread is full of people who have clearly never attempted to make professional art commenting as if they’re experts in the domain

I have been a programmer since I was 13, and now it has been 17 years. I am totally with you on this. I think techies tend to overestimate their experience outside of their immediate area to a degree that I would describe as arrogant. As a person who adopted the tech sphere, as his community, it is extremely sad to start to notice this.

Techies tend to be good at tangible, measurable, immediate facts. Not so much when it comes to any social situations, let alone bigger concepts like social evolution of trends and their impacts. Hence you get sorry attempts at apologies from big name tech bros for terrible influences on society.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#459

Post by kranke155 »

jstummbillig wrote: post #419
visarga wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. We have a blindspot, we can't imagine second and higher order effects of a new technology. So we're left with first order effects which seem pessimistic for jobs.

I don't think what happened around WP to designers is a strong indicator of what's necessarily gonna happen here. It certainly could play out similarly but, at some point, if all the work in a field from now on only requires 1/100 of manual labor, people will probably go out of work.

This pretty much seems like the self driving car for my industry. I just don’t see how I can remain a truck driver when the AI is going to come for free with the Car.

But yeah I’ll figure something out.

Re: Imagen Video: high definition video generation with diffusion models

#460

Post by kranke155 »

echelon wrote: post #66
kranke155 wrote: post #15

I’m going to post an Ask HN about what am I supposed to do when I’m “disrupted”. I work in film / video / CG where the bread and butter is short form advertising for Youtube, Instagram and TV. It’s painfully obvious that in 1 year the job might be exceedingly more difficult than it is now.

Start making content and charging for it. You no longer need institutional capital to make a Disney- or Pixar-like experience. Small creators will win under this new regime of tools. It's a democratizing force.

This is true and a good point.
Post reply on HN