Just facists destroying faith in everything that’s not them. Normal modus operandi. These people need sheep who are so confused what to believe that they don’t trust anyone anymore and instead substitute trust for blind faith.

It’s already covered under those laws. So what are you doing that’s different from ChatGPT hallucinating here ?

Those laws don’t spell out the tools (photoshop); they hinge on reproducing likeness.

you are answering a question with a different question. LLMs don’t make pictures of your mom. And this particular question?. One that has roughly existed since Photoshop existed.

It just gets easier every year. It was already easy. You could already pay someone 15 bucks on Fiver to do all of that, for years now.

Nothing really new here.

The technology is also easy. Matrix math. About as easy to ban as mp3 downloads. Never stopped anyone. It’s progress. You are a medieval knight asking to put gunpowder back into the box, but it’s clear it cannot be put back - it is already illegal to make non consensual imagery just as it is illegal to copy books. And yet printers exist and photocopiers exist.

Let me be very clear - accepting the reality that the technology is out there, it’s basic, easy to replicate and on a million computers now is not disrespectful to victims of no consensual imagery.

You may not want to hear it, but just like with encryption, the only other choice society has is full surveillance of every computer to prevent people from doing “bad things”. everything you complain about is already illegal and has already been possible - it just gets cheaper every year. What you want to have protection from is technological progress because society sucks at dealing with the consequences of it.

To be perfectly blunt, you don’t need to train any generative AI model for powerful deepfakes. You can use technology like Roop and Controlnet to synthesize any face on any image from a singe photograph. Training not necessary.

When you look at it that way, what point is there to try to legislate training with these arguments? None.

I just retained an LLM on your comment you put on the public internet. You feel violated enough to equate it to physical violation?

Lol:

Content industry: It can reproduce our stuff OpenAI: Content industry: They are hiding that it can reproduce us

Go ahead, knock yourself out: https://copyright.psu.edu/copyright-basics/fair-use/

Removed by mod

LLMs do no such thing. They abstract information which is a non copyrightable process. Copyright is specific to specific presentation, explicitly non converting style, concepts or facts.

It’s wishful thinking on your part. Every AI model in existence, from computer vision to the photo adjustments in your phone camera was trained this way.

The only reason there’s a stink now is that certain lobbies suddenly lose their job as opposed to blue collar workers.

But there’s more than a decade of precedent now to fall back on and not one legal case to show that it’s not fair use.

So would you kindly cite the case decisions that back up your assertion? Or are you just hallucinating like an LLM because you want a certain outcome to be true? Geez, I wonder where the technology learned that.

I definitely suggest people buying business class if you have having your legs broken in economy.

Given chinchilla law, nobody in their right mind trains models via shotgun ingesting all data anymore. Gains are made with quality of data at this point, less than volume.

Those studies are flawed. by definition when you can no longer tell the difference the difference on training is nil.

You cannot detect AI generated content. Not with any real world accuracy and it will only get worse.

Also, because google relies on growth for everything from compensation structure to business model, they are in a bind - ads is not growing anymore, it’s done.

And while they managed to create an illusion of growth this earnings round by juicing subscription fees 20% and increasing ad load everywhere, it’s not a sustainable tactic. We are already seeing a tech sell off as people are getting less and less secure.

So they rely on AI narrative to keep investors invested Google needs AI to work or the investors will move it to a place that may offer higher returns than a squeezed out ads model.

Worse even they are being attacked by AI - on the quality front (junk content) and in the marketplace (openAI), they don’t have a choice but to take a pro AI stance.

Oh it’s worse. They paid Rupert Murdoch who was the one who forced the government to do the law. He owns all their balls down under. So the bad guys won however you look at it.

Imagine being forced to make a better product.

That said, after the Threads position the actual story here is that Meta no longer thinks that the benefit of news outweighs the hassle. If it didn’t, they’d pay.

And they are likely right - AI + US election cycle news isn’t gonna be a net positive for them

The entropy in text is not good enough to provide enough space for watermarking. No it does not get better in longer text because you have control over i lot/chunking. You have control over top-k and temperature and prompt which creates infinite output space. Open text-generation-webui, go to the parameter page and count the number of parameters you can adjust to guide outcome. In the future you can add wasm encoded grammar to that list too.

Server side hashing / watermarking can be trivially defeated via transformations / emoji injection Latent space positional watermarking breaks easily with post processing. It would also kill any company trying to sell it (Apple be like … you want all your chats at openAI or in the privacy of your phone?) and ultimately be massively dystopian.

Unlike plagiarism checks you can’t compare to a ground truth.

Prompt guidance can box in the output space to a point you could not possibly tell it’s not human. The technology has moved from central servers to the edge, even id you could build something for one LLM, another one not in your control, like a local LLAMA which is open source (see how quickly Stable Diffusion 2 Vae watermarking was removed after release)

In a year your iphone will have a built in LLM. Everything will have LLMs, some highly purpose bound with only a few M parameters. Finetuning like LoRa is accessible to a large number of people with consumer GPUs today and will be commoditized in a year. Since it can shape the output, it again increases the possibility space of outputs and will scramble patterns.

Finally, the bar is not “better than a flip of a coin. If you are going to accuse people or ruin their academic career, you need triple nine accuracy or you’ll wrongfully accuse hundreds of essays a semester.

The most likely detection would be if someone finds a remarkable stable signature that magically works for all the models out there (100s by now), doesn’t break with updates (lol - see chatgpt presumably getting worse), survives quantisation and somehow can be kept secret from everyone including AI which can trivially spot patterns in massive data sets. Not Going To Happen.

Even if it was possible to detect, it would be model or technology specific and lagging technology - we are moving at 2000miles and hour and in a year it may mot be transformers. They’ll be GAN or RNN elements fused into it or something completely new.

The entire point of the technology is to approximate humanity - plus we are moving at it from the other direction - more and more conventional tools embed AI (from your camera not being able to take non AI touched pictures anymore to Photoshop infill to word autocomplete to new spellchecking and grammar models).

People latch onto the idea that you can detect it because it provides an escapism fantasy and copium so they don’t have to face the change that is happening. If you can detect it you can keep it out. You can’t. Not against anyone who has even the slightest idea of how to use this stuff.

It’s like gunpowder was invented and Samurai would throw themselves into the machine guns because it rendered decades of training and perfection, of knowledge about fortification, war and survival moot.

On video detection will remain viable for a long time due to the available entropy. Text. It’s always been snakeoil and everyone peddling it should be shot.

Clearly not :)

Just like your comment you say? Indistinguishable from human - garbage in, garbage out .

If you actually used the technology rather than being a stochastic parrot, you’d understand:)

There is not enough entropy in text to even detect current model output. it’s game over.

Nope. You’d just ask chatgpt to generate the conversation with emojis instead of spaces and replace the emojis after.

A million variations of this approach AND it would push people towards Apple who will launch an on the phone LLM in the next 12 month.

In a year the technology will run locally on any computer - it’s time to give up on the fantasy that this can be detected or controlled. Today you can run a GPT 3.5 alike with 30B parameters on a consumer GPU at home that, with the right finetuning - will reach chatgpt performance.

Just let the idea go, it doesn’t work.