• mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    You think these billion-dollar companies keep hyper-illegal images around, just to train their hideously expensive models to do the things they do not want those models to do?

    Like combining unrelated concepts isn’t the whole fucking point?

    • mcv@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      No, I think these billion dollar companies are incredibly sloppy about curating the content they steal to train their systems on.

      • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        True enough - but fortunately, there’s approximately zero such images readily-available on public websites, for obvious reasons. There certainly is not some well-labeled training set on par with all the images of Shrek.

    • CerebralHawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yes and they’ve been proven to do so. Meta (Facebook) recently made the news for pirating a bunch of ebooks to train its AI.

      Anna’s Archive, a site associated with training AI, recently scraped some 99.9% of Spotify songs. They say at some point they will make torrents so the common people can download it, but for now they’re using it to teach AI to copy music. (Note: Spotify uses lower quality than other music currently available, so AA will offer nothing new if/when they ever do release these torrents.)

      So, yes, that is exactly what they’re doing. They are training their models on all the data, not just all the legal data.

      • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s big fucking news when those datasets contain, like, three JPEGs. Because even one such JPEG is an event where the FBI shows up and blasts the entire hard drive into shrapnel.

        Y’all insisting there’s gotta be some clearly-labeled archive with a shitload of the most illegal images imaginable, in order for the robot that combines concepts to combine the concept of “child” and the concept of “naked,” are not taking yourselves seriously. You’re just shuffling cards to bolster a kneejerk feeling.

    • stray@pawb.social
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      It literally can’t combine unrelated concepts though. Not too long ago there was the issue where one (Dall-E?) couldn’t make a picture of a full glass of wine because every glass of wine it had been trained on was half full, because that’s generally how we prefer to photograph wine. It has no concept of “full” the way actual intelligences do, so it couldn’t connect the dots. It had to be trained on actual full glasses of wine to gain the ability to produce them itself.

        • stray@pawb.social
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’m saying it can’t combine clothed children and naked adults to make naked children. It doesn’t know what “naked” means. It can’t imagine what something might look like. It can only make naked children if it has been trained on them directly.