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

521–530 of 710 posts

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

#521

Post by abrarsami »

AlfeG wrote: post #517
gfodor wrote: post #175

Huge market for snake oil here. There is no way that such tools will ever win, given the requirements the art remain viewable to human perception, so even if you made something that worked (which this sounds like it doesn’t) from first principles it will be worked around immediately. The only real way for artists or anyone really to try to hold back models from training on human outputs is through the law, ie, levera…

My guess. Is that at some poi t of time You will not be able to use any generated image or video in commercial. Because of 100% copyright claim for using parts of copyrighted image. Like YouTube those days. When some random beeps matches with someone music...

It should be like that. I agree

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

#522

Post by kredd »

Aerroon wrote: post #487
kredd wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I disagree. I definitely value modern digital art more than most historical art, because it just looks better. If AI art looks better (and in some cases it does) then I'll prefer that.

That’s totally fine, everyone’s definition of art is subjective. But general value of an art as a piece will just still be zero for AI generated ones, just like any IKEA / Amazon print piece. You just pay for the “looks pretty”, frame and paper.

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

#523

Post by wraptile »

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)…

Extremely naive to think that any of this could be enforced to any adequate level. Copyright is fundamentally broken and putting some plasters on it is not going to do much especially when these plasters are several decades too late.

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

#524

Post by GaggiX »

kmeisthax wrote: post #378
542458 wrote: post #48

This seems to introduce levels of artifacts that many artists would find unacceptable: https://twitter.com/sini4ka111/status/1748378223291912567 The rumblings I'm hearing are that this a) barely works with last-gen training processes b) does not work at all with more modern training processes (GPT-4V, LLaVA, even BLIP2 labelling [1]) and c) would not be especially challenging to mitigate against even should it become…

The screenshots you sent in [1] are inference, not training. You need to get a Nightshaded image into the training set of an image generator in order for this to have any effect. When you give an image to GPT-4V, Stable Diffusion img2img, or anything else, you're not training the AI - the model is completely frozen and does not change at all[0]. I don't know if anyone else is still scraping new images into the genera…

If it doesn't work during inference I really doubt it will have any intended effect during training, there is simply too much signal and the added adversarial noise works on the frozen and small proxy model they used (CLIP image encoder I think) but it doesn't work on a larger model and trained on a different dataset, if there is any effect during training it will probably just be the model learning that it can't take shortcuts (the artifacts working on the proxy model showcase gaps in its visual knowledge).

Generative models like text-to-image have an encoder part (it could be explicit or not) that extract the semantic from the noised image, if the auto-labelers can correctly label the samples then the encoded trained on both actual and adversarial images will learn to not take the same shortcuts that the proxy model has taken making the model more robust, I cannot see an argument where this should be a negative thing for the model.

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

#525

Post by zerocrates »

Almondsetat wrote: post #323
xigoi wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can do it in private, but you can’t distribute the resulting image, let alone sell it.

Then I don't really understand your original reply. Simply copying a publicly available image doesn't infringe anything (unless it was supposed to be private/secret). Doing stuff with that image in private still doesn't constitute infringement. Distribution does, but that wasn't the topic at hand

The most basic right protected by copyright is the right to make copies.

Merely making a copy can definitely be infringement. "Copies" made in the computing context even simply between disk and RAM have been held to be infringement in some cases.

Fair use is the big question mark here, as it acts to allow various kinds of harmless/acceptable/desirable copying. For AI, it's particularly relevant that there's a factor of the "transformative" nature of a use that weighs in favor of fair use.

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

#526

Post by trimethylpurine »

fenomas wrote: post #497
pimlottc wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t really see any difference in those images on the Twitter example when viewing it on mobile

At full size it's super obvious - I made a side-by-side: https://i.imgur.com/I6EQ05g.png

I still don't see a difference. (Mobile)

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

#528

Post by fenomas »

trimethylpurine wrote: post #526
fenomas wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At full size it's super obvious - I made a side-by-side: https://i.imgur.com/I6EQ05g.png

I still don't see a difference. (Mobile)

Here's a maybe more mobile friendly comparison:

https://i.imgur.com/zUVn8rt.png

But now that I double-check, I was comparing with the images zoomed to 200%. On desktop the artifacts are also noticeable at 100%, but not nearly as bad as in my previous comment.

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

#529

Post by spaceman_2020 »

gfodor wrote: post #175

Huge market for snake oil here. There is no way that such tools will ever win, given the requirements the art remain viewable to human perception, so even if you made something that worked (which this sounds like it doesn’t) from first principles it will be worked around immediately. The only real way for artists or anyone really to try to hold back models from training on human outputs is through the law, ie, levera…

This is the hard reality. There is no putting this genie back in the bottle.

The only way to be an artist now is to have a unique style of your own, and to never make it online.

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

#530

Post by [deleted] »

spaceman_2020 wrote: post #529
gfodor wrote: post #175

Huge market for snake oil here. There is no way that such tools will ever win, given the requirements the art remain viewable to human perception, so even if you made something that worked (which this sounds like it doesn’t) from first principles it will be worked around immediately. The only real way for artists or anyone really to try to hold back models from training on human outputs is through the law, ie, levera…

This is the hard reality. There is no putting this genie back in the bottle. The only way to be an artist now is to have a unique style of your own, and to never make it online.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN