• ricecake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    That’s not accurate. The systems are designed to generate previously unseen concepts or images by combining known concepts.

    It’s why it can give you an image of a pony using a hangglider, despite never having seen that. It knows what ponies look like, and it knows what hanggliding looks like, so it can find a way to put both into the image. Where it doesn’t know, it will make stuff up from what it does know, often requiring potentially very detailed user explanation to describe how a horse would fit in a hangglider, or that it shouldn’t have a little person sticking out of it’s back.

    • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think it would just create adults naked with children’s faces unless it actually had CSAM… Which it probably does have.

      • ricecake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Again, that’s not how it works.

        Could you hypothetically describe csam without describing an adult with a child’s head, or specifying that it’s a naked child?
        That’s what a person trying to generate csam would need to do, because it doesn’t have those concepts.
        If you just asked it directly, like I said “horse flying a hangglider” before, you would get what you describe because it’s using the only “naked” it knows.
        You would need to specifically ask it to demphasize adult characteristics and emphasize child characteristics.

        That doesn’t mean that it was trained on that content.

        For context from the article:

        The DOJ alleged that evidence from his laptop showed that Anderegg “used extremely specific and explicit prompts to create these images,” including “specific ‘negative’ prompts—that is, prompts that direct the GenAI model on what not to include in generated content—to avoid creating images that depict adults.”

          • ricecake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            ??? Knowing how stuff works is creepy now? Knowing what the law actually is is creepy?

            I think you’re just militantly attached to your own ignorant conception of how the technology works.

              • ricecake
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                You made an incorrect statement about how the technology worked and I corrected you. You doubled down and I made a more detailed explanation.
                You called me a “creep” for this, and again just now call me a “little unpaid footman”.

                If anything’s bullshit it’s your making it aggressive when it doesn’t need to be.

                I never said their system was perfect, or that they made no mistakes. I said the system does not need csam to generate csam. I explained why their actions weren’t illegal.

                You need to work on your reading comprehension if you can’t see how those are different from being a bootlicker.