Live data from Hacker News

Stable Attribution

stableattribution.com

51–60 of 365 posts

Re: Stable Attribution

#51
Upload a photo you took to prove to yourself that this tool is misleading (if not straight up fraudulent), then downvote and move on.

You can already run exactly this kind of image similarity search against the Stable Diffusion training set using existing tools - https://rom1504.github.io/clip-retrieval/?back=https%3A%2F%2... for example

Re: Stable Attribution

#52
post #44

I like this because they are trying to show how AI is a copyright laundry. I can see other commenters picking apart its method of heuristically guessing at source images from training data. That obviously won't be accurate, or a full picture, but I wonder if it would convince a judge. An interesting challenge for these heuristics would be to take the picture under test along with its prompt, retrain the model without…

Kind of a sidebar, but interesting you chose Thomas Kinkade, who has been dead 10 years, and yet new "Thomas Kinkade Studios" work with his signature (i.e. "in the style of Thomas Kinade") is still being produced by by his family, who are probably stoked to be able to use an AI to quickly create "new" works.

Re: Stable Attribution

#53
post #44

I like this because they are trying to show how AI is a copyright laundry. I can see other commenters picking apart its method of heuristically guessing at source images from training data. That obviously won't be accurate, or a full picture, but I wonder if it would convince a judge. An interesting challenge for these heuristics would be to take the picture under test along with its prompt, retrain the model without…

[deleted]

Re: Stable Attribution

#54

This is a great website, but not in the way the authors intended. Based on some of the examples they explicitly provided, it is clear to me Stable Diffusion creates novel art. Here's a random example https://www.stableattribution.com/?image=a2666aee-0a1a-411b-... I will admit this is a nice tool for verifying the creations of SD aren't pure copies, so I think it will be useful for a time. But as AI-generated images s…

Exactly. The tool is incomplete, in a sense, as while it shows the work of original art produced by the AI and the human images it was trained on, it has no way to show the imagery on which the human artists were trained to produce their images. (The model behind a human mind is vastly more complex than that of a deep learning model, but the principle is analogous.)

Re: Stable Attribution

#55
That's not how the AI works. It also ignores all the work from the Language model that goes into the art. The language model can fill massive gaps in the image generation.

All the negative examples are also instructing the AI how to make an image, not just the most similar images.

This is a bad joke that reinforces poor understanding of how image generation works.

Re: Stable Attribution

#56
post #46

This is a great website, but not in the way the authors intended. Based on some of the examples they explicitly provided, it is clear to me Stable Diffusion creates novel art. Here's a random example https://www.stableattribution.com/?image=a2666aee-0a1a-411b-... I will admit this is a nice tool for verifying the creations of SD aren't pure copies, so I think it will be useful for a time. But as AI-generated images s…

The discussion over novelty is useless, all these legal structures like copyrights patents royalties and licenses are about creating business structures to allow artist or inventors be compensated. They were already imperfect in it and now suddenly a new technology drags their work into the wilderness with no stuctures for compensation. The images created by the AI are indeed novel but they feed on the work of people…

This is no different than professional calligraphers losing their jobs because of the printing press and then later due to customizable fonts on printers.

I have a ton of respect for calligraphers and believe they are artists, but at the same time I don't think that the millions of people who create custom fonts or use custom fonts are doing a bad thing.

Re: Stable Attribution

#57

This is a great website, but not in the way the authors intended. Based on some of the examples they explicitly provided, it is clear to me Stable Diffusion creates novel art. Here's a random example https://www.stableattribution.com/?image=a2666aee-0a1a-411b-... I will admit this is a nice tool for verifying the creations of SD aren't pure copies, so I think it will be useful for a time. But as AI-generated images s…

Im sure its very random, but why is it that 99% of the time someone says this about some AI artwork its an image of a beautiful woman?

I am pretty convinced at this point that in a lot people's heads, the fight to claim pictures like this as "real" or novel art is unconsciously just an urge to claim the beautiful woman as their own! Just thousands of men every day, generating beautiful ladies, yelling at people on the internet that they are real and they need to be protected...

Maybe its all just coincidental or something, but if you just step back and look at it, its very... interesting.

Re: Stable Attribution

#58
post #44

I like this because they are trying to show how AI is a copyright laundry. I can see other commenters picking apart its method of heuristically guessing at source images from training data. That obviously won't be accurate, or a full picture, but I wonder if it would convince a judge. An interesting challenge for these heuristics would be to take the picture under test along with its prompt, retrain the model without…

Kind of a sidebar, but interesting you chose Thomas Kinkade, who has been dead 10 years, and yet new "Thomas Kinkade Studios" work with his signature (i.e. "in the style of Thomas Kinade") is still being produced by by his family, who are probably stoked to be able to use an AI to quickly create "new" works.

The point is they will want a moat around that and probably won't be so happy anyone with a GPU or 1$ can do it too

Re: Stable Attribution

#60
The story sounds like either satire or blatant misrepresentation of reality. The Internet was full of images without attribution way before Stable Diffusion appeared. Why do people feel compelled to invent nonsensical narratives to demonize AI?
Post reply on HN