Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | gorbot's commentslogin

What happens when the AI generated porn doesn't feel real enough? It's not the end of the road it's the beginning


Come on man. Really? You think this is a good argument?

Why not charge the people who make my glasses cuz they help me see the CP? Why not charge computer monitor manufacturers? Why not charge the mine where they got the raw silicon?

Here you have a product which itself straight up produces child porn with like absolutely zero effort. Very different than some object which happens to be used, photograph materials

Nikon doesn't sell a 1-minute child porn machine, xAI apparently does.

Maybe you think child porn machines should be sold?


Of course it’s not the same thing but still doesn’t make sense to use companies as police. I’m sure it’s much easier than with Nikon but the wast majority of its users aren’t doing it, just go after those who do instead of demanding that the companies do the police work.

If it was a case where CSAM production becomes mainstream use case I would have agreed but it is not.


> instead of demanding that the companies do the police work

How hard is this? What are they doing now, and is it enough? Do we know how hard they are trying?

For argument's sake, what if they had truly zero safegaurd around it, you could type "generate child porn" and it would 100% of the time. Surely you'd agree they should prevent that case, and be held accountable if they never took action to prevent it.

Regulation, clear laws around this would help. Surely they could try go get some threshold of difficulty in place that is a requirement to adhere to preventing.


No, I don't agree that they should prevent it.

I'm not in CP so I don't try to make it generate such content but I'm very annoyed that all providers are trying to lecture me when I try to generate anything about public figures for example. Also, these preventive measures are not working well at all, yesterday I had one denying to generate infinite loop claiming its dangerous.

Just throw away this BS about safety and jail/fine whomever commits crime with these tools. Make tools tools again and hold people responsible for the stuff they do with these tools.


Im not saying the companies should necessarily do the police work, though they absolutely should not release CP-generators. What I am saying is the companies should be held responsible for making the CP. Sure the user who types "make me some CP" can be held accountable too, but the creators/operators of the CP-generator should as well.


Which company released CP? As far as I’m concerned we are talking about users using some tools to generate CP. It should be handled by the authorities


Source?


8 Million refugees?


If someone murdered Obama while in office you could have filmed a video just like this in America, crazy that you’d post this


But it's not murder. It's an arrest of someone who wouldn't leave office after losing an election. Admittedly the people celebrating are Venezuelans abroad rather than in Venezuela. Hope it goes ok there too.


i know, I was being hyperbolic, same point of have <country> arrest Obama while he was in office..


It's not hyperbolic. At least the last four American presidents are war criminals.


Source?


Maduro lost elections. 8 millions of exilees can't love him. And I interact daily with exilees. There are already videos of people celebrating all around the world. You can disagree. It is hard to believe narco dictators have too much love from people anyway.


Ok, so you have no basis to claim that a majority of venezuelans think anything.

> It is hard to believe narco dictators have too much love from people anyway.

You must be confusing venezuela with a state that traffics in drugs.


Ask people from Venezuela, check the web, the news. They are the main players in all this.


im just asking for an actual source, like a news article from a reputable source. Is that not able to be provided?



Not a single one of these backs up your claim that a "wide majority" venezuelans are happy about this.


Check better.


I'm not the parent commenter, but here's one:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/09/americas/venezuela-election-r...

and you can google similar keywords from a variety of sources - many dispute the integrity of the 2024 elections


Ive been using 2.5 pro or flash a ton at work and the pro was not noticeably more accurate, but significantly slower, so I used flash way more. This is super exciting


Anecdotally I've seen lots of anti AI posts on instagram from gen-z accounts, and on YouTube ive seen "ai not used to make this music" in the description.

Also anecdotal, but I do think there's gen z anti-ai sentiment, these kids are joining a world where they will never own a house and have bleak prospects and now even art is something they can't do if AI takes off, so the market might not be there

Seems like older people love AI art, people over 50, which is a sizeable market don't get me wrong, but in 10-15 years idk


I'm an idiot and I know nothing

But I wonder if there could be room for an ARM-like spec that Google could try and own and license but for AI chips. Arm is to risc-cpu as google-thing is to asic-aichip

Prolly a dumb idea, better to sell the chips or access to them?


I'm not sure the chip spec (or instruction set) is the level of abstraction here?

Something like DirectX (or OpenGL) might be the better level to target? In practice, CUDA is that level of abstraction, but it only really works for Nvidia cards.


It's not that it only works on Nvidia cards, it's only allowed to work on Nvidia cards. A non-clean room implementation of CUDA for other hardware has been done but is a violation of EULA (of the thing that was reverse engineered), copyright on the driver binary interface, and often patents. Nvidia aggressively sends cease-and-desist letters and threatens lawsuits (successfully killed ZLUDA, threatened others). It's an artificial (in a technical sense moat).


Spectral just did a thread on that.

https://x.com/SpectralCom/status/1993289178130661838


> successfully killed ZLUDA

Did they? Sounds like AMD did that[^1] and that the project is continuing based on the pre-AMD codebase[^2].

[^1]: https://www.phoronix.com/news/AMD-ZLUDA-CUDA-Taken-Down

[^2]: https://www.phoronix.com/news/ZLUDA-Third-Life


Unless ZLUDA can show that it is a clean room re-implementation from a spec without contact with the CUDA libraries, it would be a bad place for AMD to place themselves. That could be reason enough to retract voluntarily before any bad press. Such a thing is possible but likely much harder than Compaq re-implementing IBM PC BIOS.


I don't think you can make the EULA bite here?

To circumvent: you have someone (who might be bound by the EULA, and is otherwise not affiliated with you) dump the data on the internet, and someone else (from your company) can find it there, without being bound by the EULA. Nvidia could only sue the first guy for violating the EULA.

However you are right, that copyright and patents still bite.


> CUDA is that level of abstraction, but it only really works for Nvidia cards.

There are people actively working on that.

https://scale-lang.com/


Not really, because as usual people misunderstand what CUDA is.

CUDA is hardware designed according to the C++ memory model, with first tier support for C, C++, Fortran and Python GPGPU DSLs, with several languages also having a compiler backend for PTX.

Followed by IDE integration, a graphical debugger and profiler for GPU workloads, and an ecosystem of libraries and frameworks.

Saying just use DirectX, Vulkan, OpenGL instead, misses the tree from the forest that is CUDA, and why researchers rather use CUDA, than deal with yet another shading language or C99 dialect, without anything else.


they tried selling years ago, not much happened, coral

now they dont want to sell them - why power local inference when they can saubscribe forever and you get their juicy datas too


Also introducing the amazing 6-7 pro model


I'm dumb and barely understand things at a high level, but standard candles never sat right with me so it's interesting to hear that they might not be, but then again who knows.


The idea is that standard candles are based on chemistry and microscopic physics only, not cosmology.


If I remember correctly (sorry it’s been a while), the size of the star determines its colour, and the data suggests that the colour of stars fits nicely into the mass of a star (ie you’ll never see a star of X color thats Y kg)


The rule is violated in all sorts of fun and interesting ways. There's white dwarfs, for one, then stars with varying levels of metallicity. Stars can merge, which does strange things to their position on the Hertzsprung–Russell diagram. There's oddball combinations like a red giant with a neutron star that has sunk into its core, called a Thorne–Żytkow Object!

Not to mention variable stars, novae, occultation by dust clouds, etc.


Great Scott look at your username!


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: