nialv7
@nialv7@lemmy.world
- Comment on Does anyone actually believe this "rogue AI" nonsense? 4 days ago:
let me try to understand what you are saying. when you say it’s “state sponsored hacking”, do you mean:
a) no AI was involved. some state (presumably the US?) funded some hackers to hack Hugging Face (a US company) among others, then made up a story and blamed it all on OpenAI. or
b) some state gave OpenAI money and asked it to either 1) use its LLM or 2) use its employees to hack Hugging Face, among others. then OpenAI made up a story about rogue AI to cover it up.
or maybe something else?
- Comment on [Video] Green party: "If you believe Jewish safety can only be achieved by the slaughter and genocide of Palestinians then you are racist." 4 days ago:
great, now if only we can get the MPs and leaders to say the same…
- Comment on Ready for Halloween 1 week ago:
that’s exactly right! it’s kept secret because if someone figure out exactly how it’s done it becomes easy to remove. so it’s security through obscurity, but it’s what we have unfortunately.
- Comment on Ready for Halloween 1 week ago:
the openai one does not require signin.
it’s not AI. it’s a kind of hidden watermark or steganography. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_watermarking
- Comment on Ready for Halloween 1 week ago:
see it for yourself: synthid.com openai.com/research/verify/
- Comment on Ready for Halloween 1 week ago:
- Comment on 1 week ago:
no i don’t support stealing from everyone. it’s possible to endorse a certain type of action only in certain context. like i don’t think stealing from walmart is morally wrong, but i think stealing from a mom-and-pop corner shop definitely is.
it would be even better if stole from adobe without paying the ai companies, i.e. open weights models.
- Comment on 1 week ago:
stealing from the people is wrong, but i support stealing from the bourgeoise.
- Comment on 1 week ago:
shit, how do i get myself out of this moral dilemma
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
I mean, I have nightmares from time to time
- Comment on 2 weeks ago:
He didn’t even say he supports the motion
- Comment on Green party drops longstanding opposition to nuclear power 2 weeks ago:
True, and that means there needs not be an ideology ban of nuclear. We should just do whichever option that’s the best, and that won’t be nuclear.
- Comment on Nailed it 2 weeks ago:
I thought we were just making shit up?
- Comment on Nailed it 2 weeks ago:
[remembering girls hate capitalism] no wait. I give drugs to kids in need for free
- Comment on politic 2 weeks ago:
there are only two kinds of political positions: common sense (i.e. agrees with me), and mental illness.
- Comment on what would one win...? 2 weeks ago:
- Comment on what would one win...? 2 weeks ago:
- Comment on Screw you.. 2 weeks ago:
Slop
- Comment on There's one right choice 2 weeks ago:
So it goes
- Comment on Doof doof 3 weeks ago:
No you misheard. I didn’t say clubbing with billionaires. I said clubbing billionaires
- Comment on el tigre 3 weeks ago:
you can pet a tiger at least once
- Comment on Just FYI 🤷🏻 4 weeks ago:
Yeah it’s too late, for them
- Comment on Useful things at the mall 4 weeks ago:
i don’t know what to tell you man. i don’t even know what you are trying to say here.
as for what artifact i am looking for? i can only say the barcode’s lines look weird. if you see it you see it, otherwise i don’t know how to explain it too you. it’s chicken sexing. i’ve just seen too many AI generated images.
- Comment on Useful things at the mall 4 weeks ago:
photoshopped or generated by AI
this is exact what i was saying. i didn’t assume anyone thought it was real, but apparently a lot of people thought it was photoshop (which requires skill, practice, time, and effort), when it was really AI (which doesn’t). the proof is the fact that the entire image has SynthID, you can block out the product image (which is also AI generated) from the photo and it still has SynthID. someone took one AI image and asked AI to edit it into a photo, it’s AI all the way down.
People are fooled by a genAI image and thought it was created by a human, and when given the facts they choose to denial and continue to be confidently wrong about it. i mean i already know it’s difficult for humans to admit that they are wrong, but to see that actually play out in front of my eyes…
- Comment on Useful things at the mall 4 weeks ago:
information is information, man… does it matter where it comes from?
are you like “oh, look at me, i am very posh and sophisticated, i only get my top rate information from the Encyclopædia Britannica”, so something
- Comment on Useful things at the mall 4 weeks ago:
just because part of it is AI generated, doesn’t mean all of it cannot be:
- Comment on Useful things at the mall 4 weeks ago:
Could have been altered after being generated.
- Comment on Useful things at the mall 4 weeks ago:
Honestly sad people can be so wrong and arrogant. Educate yourself a bit: youtu.be/kVXp6UNVPTo
- Comment on Useful things at the mall 4 weeks ago:
We are done. People who can identify an AI image are now the minority and the mass will choose to be confidently wrong about it.
If you are curious, read up about ai image watermarking: youtu.be/kVXp6UNVPTo
- Comment on Useful things at the mall 4 weeks ago:
Yes, AI has been able to take reference images for quite a while now.
And OpenAI generated images have invisible watermarks embedded into them so you can check if it’s AI generated definitively. It’s not an AI detector. Here: openai.com/research/verify/
It’s sad how tech illiterate and yet still confidently wrong people can be.
