What's up with that? Does e6 just support AI grifters? Tags like this are known to be like honey to bees to AI bros, because they can train their machines to be better at learning and decoding them. If an artist uses a glaze, why does that need to be announced? Does E6 not want to help protect the artists that keep their site running? /gen

So it can be blacklisted. Adversarial noise makes me physically nauseous to look at, and I know I'm not alone there.

Personally, I don't even think images with adversarial noise should be allowed under the quality standards. They're like JPEG artifacts on steroids, and they aren't even effective at their intended purpose of warding off bots, they do nothing but make the image worse and give real people (myself included) literal headaches. But that's just my own subjective opinion.

lendrimujina said:
So it can be blacklisted. Adversarial noise makes me physically nauseous to look at, and I know I'm not alone there.

Personally, I don't even think images with adversarial noise should be allowed under the quality standards. They're JPEG artifacts on steroids. But that's just my own subjective opinion.

Yeah, quality 👀

birbobuzzle said:
Yeah, quality 👀

I'm not a user with power, authority, or even respect. What I say has no bearing on site policy. I'm just a guy who doesn't like feeling like I have to throw up. So I have to settle for blacklisting the tag that actually makes me physically ill.

birbobuzzle said:
Tags like this are known to be like honey to bees to AI bros, because they can train their machines to be better at learning and decoding them.

If the possibility of AI bros training anti-glaze agents based on adversarial noise is a concern, why wouldn't they just run glaze locally?
They would instantly have a "clean" copy to compare each image to, and they could generate a couple millions of examples instead of just relying on the current 248 posts.

Additionally, if we "support AI grifters", then how do you explain the 3,301 posts currently deleted for being generative imagery? delreason:*generat* date:>2022-08-22

lendrimujina said:
I'm not a user with power, authority, or even respect. What I say has no bearing on site policy. I'm just a guy who doesn't like feeling like I have to throw up. So I have to settle for blacklisting the tag that actually makes me physically ill.

IDK much about tech stuff, so I only understood like, half of what you said is all :'D

lafcadio said:
If the possibility of AI bros training anti-glaze agents based on adversarial noise is a concern, why wouldn't they just run glaze locally?
They would instantly have a "clean" copy to compare each image to, and they could generate a couple millions of examples instead of just relying on the current 248 posts.

Additionally, if we "support AI grifters", then how do you explain the 3,301 posts currently deleted for being generative imagery? delreason:*generat* date:>2022-08-22

I assumed it was because there is an E621AI server ran, genuine question is all

birbobuzzle said:
I assumed it was because there is an E621AI server ran, genuine question is all

They were basically forced into making it. It was either make a place for ai "artists" to post their "art" or deal with all of them trying to sneak their art onto here. Some of them do still try to sneak in here, but diverting their traffic to a place made for them means the flow of ai junk posted here is smaller and easier to delete.

lendrimujina said:
So it can be blacklisted. Adversarial noise makes me physically nauseous to look at, and I know I'm not alone there.

Personally, I don't even think images with adversarial noise should be allowed under the quality standards. They're like JPEG artifacts on steroids, and they aren't even effective at their intended purpose of warding off bots, they do nothing but make the image worse and give real people (myself included) literal headaches. But that's just my own subjective opinion.

While I don't have headaches or whatnot, I still agree with this viewpoint. I just feel like glaze doesn't do anything meaningful against AI users and only hurts the viewers. And I'm really, really tired with the self-righteous viewpoint some artists have that being against glaze and other harmful countermeasures makes us "pro-AI". It's such a weak and deflective argument that shows they don't really care about alternative viewpoints on this sort of thing, they just hate AI with a passion (and I can understand that) and anybody that doesn't hate AI as hard as they do (that's where they lose me).

qwazzy said:
While I don't have headaches or whatnot, I still agree with this viewpoint. I just feel like glaze doesn't do anything meaningful against AI users and only hurts the viewers. And I'm really, really tired with the self-righteous viewpoint some artists have that being against glaze and other harmful countermeasures makes us "pro-AI". It's such a weak and deflective argument that shows they don't really care about alternative viewpoints on this sort of thing, they just hate AI with a passion (and I can understand that) and anybody that doesn't hate AI as hard as they do (that's where they lose me).

I mean, i do post non glazed art. But only in my communities, not on display boards. The glazed art, or very heavily watermarked art, is the only art that will touch boards like this. If people want to see higher quality they have to pay or enter my communities.

birbobuzzle said:
I mean, i do post non glazed art. But only in my communities, not on display boards. The glazed art, or very heavily watermarked art, is the only art that will touch boards like this. If people want to see higher quality they have to pay or enter my communities.

Cool?

It's a visible image trait, often to the point of it being the main thing noticable about the image. We tag what can be seen.