Comment on Teens exploited by fake nudes illustrate threat of unregulated AI

• rar@discuss.online ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Do the files exactly match to their hashes? I wonder if there’s a fundamental difference generated by using different hardwares.

  source

  • echodot@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    AI always generate different outputs for the same input (AI appears to be non-deterministic) so it would be impossible to confirm that exactly.

    But I suppose what they mean is they appear to be of the same quality. Taking a longer time does not appear to decrease the quality of the output.

    I suppose you could give an AI the same input resetting it after each input and then use statistical models to identify common traits. Then do the same thing on different hardware and run the same statistical analysis and see if there is a difference between group A in group B but as far as I’m aware no one has done this.

    In theory hardware shouldn’t matter, it’s all mathematics basically and one plus one is always equal two, so there shouldn’t be any fluctuations.

    source

    • rar@discuss.online ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Yes, I suppose given equal input (model, keyword, seed, etc.) two Stable Diffusion installs should output same images; what I am curious about is whether the hardware configuration (e.g. gpu manufacturers) could result in traceable variations. As abuse of this tech gains prominence, tracing back the producer of a certain synthetic media by the specific hardware combination could become a thing.

      source

      • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        While it could work like bullet forensics, where given access to the gun you can shoot it and compare it to the original bullet, there is no way to look at a generated image and figure out exactly what made it. Well, unless the creator is dumb enough to keep the metadata enabled, by default automatic1111 stable diffusion embeds all of it in the file itself.

        source