this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
240 points (87.5% liked)

Technology

59739 readers
3865 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s
[email protected]
[email protected]
L4s
enu
240
‘Dream’ AI Girlfriend Randomly Turns Into Nude Jennifer Lopez, Has Four Legs (www.404media.co)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/technology
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A nightmare scenario previously only imagined by AI researchers, where AI image generators accidentally spit out non-consensual pornography of real people, is now reality.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the idea is that if the model doesn't know what Jennifer Lopez is, it couldn't make imitations of her naked.

Realistically that ship has sailed and AI is capable enough now that even if the data wasn't there it could be pretty easily added.

It will need to become a simple fact of life. If we can imagine something now, we can have pictures of it. There is no putting this back in the bottle.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"Knowing what Jennifer Lopez looks like" is a very distinct thing from "reproducing an exact replica" of training data. OP appears to be arguing that the former is not true because he thinks the latter is true, but it's actually the opposite. That's the crux of what I'm arguing here, OP is simply factually wrong about his position.

Edit: OP has pointed out that he doesn't actually think there are exact replicas being produced, which just makes this even more confusing.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

OP has pointed out that he doesn't actually think there are exact replicas being produced, which just makes this even more confusing.

Your misread their first comment, I think.

They were saying that DESPITE the common arguments that AI only learns and doesn't copy exactly it might still be good to require consent for people's content to be in training data.