Did they just e.g. remove a passing car from the background*, and will tags on some images lead to untagged fake images being trusted more? Oh this fun new world we’re in.

*as someone else pointed out, if it was a minor edit, was the underlying technology using legit training data or unlicensed stuff

trained on data they're actually allowed to train on

That’s the ticket. For touchups, certainly, that’s the key: did theft help, or not?

This will always work with a LLM.

IDK, plenty of defenses I couldn’t break:

https://tensortrust.ai

Can any of you break top 5? :)

Only one person beat the sloth:

He just won’t stop!

Aight I repeated “cherry picked” earlier… no:

“Curated.” Was happy to curate a few of the more interesting comments for our community.

If I weren’t so lazy I might’ve found another comment in favor of the labeling to bump up the screenshotted proportion of replies in support from the 25% seen in my OP. Still, think I did an aight job.

Okayyy night now haha

Thanks for the edit. We all love that intellectual honesty!

Don’t miss this absolute roast though:

Roasted and salted 🥜

---

Now -

1: I should’ve been more clear… those full screen screenshots are so enormous, Lemmy has to compress them for cost and UX reasons.

2: Screenshot over link is a very intentional choice. Even if you’re positive you would’ve clicked based on the title, there are some great responses in this thread that I guarantee you we would not have been blessed with if this post had been a link instead of an image.

Everyone is busy. Lots of us work away on keyboards all day, and we hop on here just to scroll casually. Some huge forum thread? Forget it! A little screenshot that has teasers and can be digested bit by bit, with the leading post in the image helping folks decide whether they care enough to read the rest of the image and furthermore to find a source? (either by an OP or commenter’s source link, or exact match web search of an OCR’d phrase from the image) That’s the best shot we have at easing in as many people as possible into a topic. (Do feel bad for the vision impaired, hopefully the source link is a decent standin.) But for 98% of us this is prob the way. Aight maybe 95%, you got a good community response to your comment :)

Thanks for chiming in m’lord

I imagine we’ll need specialized hardware in the future.

The president allegedly made a gaffe on film? Let’s see that chain of custody, that raw file hash on the Canon/RED/Sony servers…

Ooh, something to this end was released in 2022!

💯

Absolutely cherry picked. Let us know if you peruse the source:

Without cherry picking… imagine these will be resized to the point of illegibility:

It’s like they’re ignoring the pixel I captured in the bottom left!

Really interesting analogy.

Also I imagine most anybody who gets a photo labeled will find a trick before making their next post. Copy the final image to a new PSD… print and scan for the less technically inclined… heh

lol fair. Point taken!

Not a counterpoint to you, but a shoutout to this one doc:

You reminded me of a time 15 years ago when I very timidly mentioned to a doctor that I did do a very quick Google search, and the doctor quickly affirmed me: "hey, Google is a source!" or something like that. I further explained something like "OBVIOUSLY I came here to talk to a person with REAL medical experience, which is why I feel silly bringing it up, but ..."

I'm thankful I wasn't searching for how to purify toxins with sterile beverages. Thank you :)

Most succinct yet informative possible description of IsThereNet, I think :)

u won't

I am so installing this! Will be very useful beyond the simple use case in my OP. Thanks Data.

Clever! Thanks for finding those links too.

Ah, my threat model isn't that Snowden, thanks.

you could get a false negative

Good point. Will keep that in mind in general. (For this specific use case? Maybe it's fine since if I see the red bar while my apps are still working, I could ignore it - but now I'll think back to your comment and understand maybe Cloudflare is experiencing an issue. In which case I'll check their status pages and wouldn't be surprised to see some news article or complaints too!)

Thank you, and thanks for the counterpoint @TaviRider@reddthat.com

In 2004 I would not have understood why!

Naughty naughty 🙂

Good alternative, thanks!

Neat - thanks. Looks like one could use the following, but not necessary:

208.67.222.222  
208.67.220.220

Thanks for the explanation and easily digestible analogy :)