518
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TheSlad@sh.itjust.works 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Gaussian blur 1 px, Sharpen 1 px

Bye bye any pixel level encoding with minimal quality loss.

[-] kogasa@programming.dev 12 points 1 year ago

Why do you think this would do anything to affect training? The patterns learned by ML models are way too fuzzy to be picky about exact pixel values.

[-] ShustOne@lemmy.one 9 points 1 year ago

I'm not sure what your experience is with the training data but that would absolutely effect the inputs.

[-] kogasa@programming.dev 10 points 1 year ago

I'm a professional software developer with ML experience, albeit not an expert in ML specifically. It would obviously affect the literal value of the embeddings, but there's no chance it would have a qualitative effect on a reasonably performant model.

[-] ShustOne@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

It would though and their paper shows as much. The thing many forget is that it isn't trained visually like us. Little input changes like this have a big impact.

Now eventually if everyone uses the same glazing method the training won't care but at the moment this is bespoke enough that it can't be trained well on it. It will always be an arms race though.

[-] kogasa@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

No, it wouldn't, and the paper shows no such thing. Nightshade isn't "Gaussian blur + sharpen." It's based on the use of a different diffusion model to perturb an image (with bounded difference in perceptual similarity) to minimize the distance of the embedding from that of an unrelated concept. It is mathematically optimized and highly specific to the prompt. The clever thing is that you don't need access to the actual original text-to-image feature extractor because of the transferability between models, and the surprising thing is how few poisoned samples are required to break a model.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Blur+Sharpen isn't what Nightshade is doing, it's an example of a passive defense technique that may mess up fine-tuned "invisible" attacks because they rely on making minimal changes to jump category, and that can often come in the form of pretty precise pixel changes. You may have seen past papers about making pandas classify as gibbons. They rely on introducing a noise mask that just makes the image look a little worse quality, but in total is enough to flip the category. They don't really define their perturbation method in this paper, but there's some tension between being "invisible" and being resilient to "invisible" corrections like suggested above.

[-] kogasa@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Oh, blur+sharpen to mitigate Nightshade makes sense, yeah.

[-] vox@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

not to be that guy, but it's affect*

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

affect - action

effect - uh, noun

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Easy mnemonic device is to remember them in alphabetical order in a simple sentence

"you affect an effect"

[-] Cyberflunk@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] kogasa@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

What is this article supposed to show?

this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
518 points (93.6% liked)

News

23305 readers
3619 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS