p

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @Nerd02 @bmygsbvur @db0 @laurel

> Regardless, this is better than what we believed before - the tools not only can be built,

If it works. I mean, image classifiers aren't new. There's no way to verify whether this (or any) tool does the job for which it is intended, though, so it's not only expensive but it's unknown how useful it is.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @laurel @Nerd02 @bmygsbvur @db0

> If nothing else, the fact that this model exists and is not getting rekt by fedbois is a sign that

This is not a sign of anything. "The cops didn't seem to care yesterday" doesn't indicate anything about today.

> the next time everyone starts bitching about CP spam, I'm going to throw it on the table.

"Why don't you use a ridiculous amount of bandwidth downloading literally every image and then a ridiculous amount of computer juice processing all of it and then deal with the false positives?"

I don't even use the thumbnailer because it is too heavy. sjw regularly posts 12MB JPEGs. It's so heavyweight that you could DoS it just by posting a lot of very large images, and you could defeat it pretty easily. Even something like hashing the images is too much for most instances.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @Nerd02 @bmygsbvur @db0 @mint Ah, okay, so this one wasn't trained on that material?

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @Nerd02 @bmygsbvur @db0 @mint Yeah, but youtube-dl was on Github for years and then suddenly declared an evil piracy tool and scrubbed and banned. The odds that you get bonked are also higher than the odds that Github gets bonked; "I got it from Github" doesn't constitute much of a defense.

In either case, I don't have much investment in the legality of that model because I don't plan to acquire it. Just it was my understanding that possessing a model that was trained on some source material and that can be used to produce material resembling the source material is considered the same, legally, as possessing the source material. I'm not an expert on that and I don't think there have even been any cases yet.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @Nerd02 @bmygsbvur @db0 @mint Yeah, presumably it is better at detecting stuff that it produces itself, but my understanding is that this kind of model is legally questionable to possess because of that.

@laurel @Nerd02 @bmygsbvur @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @db0 Then it's definitely going to be unreliable.

@mint @Nerd02 @bmygsbvur @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @db0

> it's using local CLIP model,

How does this not end up getting used to produce computer-generated CP?

> isn't something people with $5 VPSes can afford.

Yeah, but when you're at the $5 VPS stage, you're usually going to be hosting a couple dozen people at most.

> malicious actors can keep scrambling the image so that it passes the filter yet is still recognizable by human brain.

Yeah. Not foolproof.

@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @Nerd02 @bmygsbvur @db0 The last time the topic came up, the only publicly available API for this was owned by the feds. I don't know if this tool downloads a model (I also don't know how such a model could be legal to possess) or if it consults an API (which would be a privacy concern). In either case, you'd have to be very careful about false positives.