Warning: This post contains abstract depictions of nudity
October 21, 2016 12:41 AM Subscribe
I was just considering posting this but I was stuck on how to frame it. "Computer generates Cronenbergian VHS still frames of dicks and boobs" probably would not have gone over well, so congratulations on a better post.
posted by Rhomboid at 12:54 AM on October 21, 2016 [16 favorites]
posted by Rhomboid at 12:54 AM on October 21, 2016 [16 favorites]
I wonder if, now that the network is open-source, it'd be theoretically possible for sneaky pornographers to use it to optimise their images, packing in enough SFW-bait to evade the filters, and what the resulting images would look like.
posted by acb at 1:11 AM on October 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by acb at 1:11 AM on October 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
Francis Bacon-bot?
posted by chavenet at 1:34 AM on October 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by chavenet at 1:34 AM on October 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
Knowledge is power. France is bacon.
posted by Pyrogenesis at 1:40 AM on October 21, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by Pyrogenesis at 1:40 AM on October 21, 2016 [10 favorites]
OH YES they are teaching machines about teh pr0n and I am SO HERE for all the ways this will go horribly wrong.
posted by louche mustachio at 1:49 AM on October 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by louche mustachio at 1:49 AM on October 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
What's that bit about most of art being about dicks?
posted by rhizome at 2:18 AM on October 21, 2016
posted by rhizome at 2:18 AM on October 21, 2016
This excited my NSFW neuron.
posted by No-sword at 2:34 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by No-sword at 2:34 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
What's that bit about most of art being about dicks?
That's a common phallusy
posted by oulipian at 2:41 AM on October 21, 2016 [43 favorites]
That's a common phallusy
posted by oulipian at 2:41 AM on October 21, 2016 [43 favorites]
What makes an image NSFW, according to Yahoo's recently open sourced neural network, open_nsfw?
Given that Yahoo owns Tumblr, this thing must not actually work very well.
posted by Thorzdad at 2:50 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Given that Yahoo owns Tumblr, this thing must not actually work very well.
posted by Thorzdad at 2:50 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Oh god, that NSFW concert is something else. I'm not sure I can make out exactly what instruments that giant disembodied penis is playing, but he sure looks like he's having a good time.
"80s Night is tomorrow - you're at GWAR!"
posted by solarion at 3:17 AM on October 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
"80s Night is tomorrow - you're at GWAR!"
posted by solarion at 3:17 AM on October 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
I like how for most of them NSFW basically means adding a dong, but the desert pics have a more feminine angle.
posted by Braeburn at 3:42 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Braeburn at 3:42 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
I like how for most of them NSFW basically means adding a dong, but the desert pics have a more feminine angle.
Boobs at the top of the image, dicks "rooted" about 1/3rd up the page. I think it's been trained on headless mirror selfies and dick pics.
I'm guessing they want to use it to categorise images in mail/chat... it would explain why there were so many dick pics in the training data.
posted by Leon at 4:13 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Boobs at the top of the image, dicks "rooted" about 1/3rd up the page. I think it's been trained on headless mirror selfies and dick pics.
I'm guessing they want to use it to categorise images in mail/chat... it would explain why there were so many dick pics in the training data.
posted by Leon at 4:13 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Damn these are uncanny! I'd pay good money for some of those desert images in hi res.
posted by STFUDonnie at 5:01 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by STFUDonnie at 5:01 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
I wonder if, now that the network is open-source, it'd be theoretically possible for sneaky pornographers to use it to optimise their images, packing in enough SFW-bait to evade the filters, and what the resulting images would look like.
Almost certainly yes. Unfortunately it wouldn't be a cool bizarre artwork, you just add a little bit of noise to the image until it predicts what you want, and the difference is barely perceptible to humans.
posted by vogon_poet at 5:44 AM on October 21, 2016 [6 favorites]
Almost certainly yes. Unfortunately it wouldn't be a cool bizarre artwork, you just add a little bit of noise to the image until it predicts what you want, and the difference is barely perceptible to humans.
posted by vogon_poet at 5:44 AM on October 21, 2016 [6 favorites]
Deep Dream, meet Deep Wet Dream.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:59 AM on October 21, 2016 [9 favorites]
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:59 AM on October 21, 2016 [9 favorites]
Anyone else amused that the left side of the equation is D(x)? No? Just me? ...I'll see myself out.
posted by merriment at 6:03 AM on October 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by merriment at 6:03 AM on October 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
Metafilter: "Cronenbergian VHS still frames of dicks and boobs"
posted by cyclotronboy at 6:17 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by cyclotronboy at 6:17 AM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Oh god, that NSFW concert is something else.
Must have misinterpreted something drawn on the cocktail napkin.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 6:30 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
Must have misinterpreted something drawn on the cocktail napkin.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 6:30 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
I was just getting ready to post this! It's so great. Just super weird wonderful results.
posted by cortex at 8:34 AM on October 21, 2016
posted by cortex at 8:34 AM on October 21, 2016
Hot taters.
posted by Nanukthedog at 8:43 AM on October 21, 2016
posted by Nanukthedog at 8:43 AM on October 21, 2016
So, I'm not sure I understand what is happening here... We have fed a program thousands (millions?) of images that are either SFW or NSFW (as judged by...?) and then we have asked it to generate (mash-up?) new images that it thinks are either SFW or NSFW?
posted by Rock Steady at 8:58 AM on October 21, 2016
posted by Rock Steady at 8:58 AM on October 21, 2016
This video seems like a decent enough description of how this sort of things work with the caveat that I'm no enough of an export to know how much they're fudging things to make it understandable in layman's terms.
posted by Zalzidrax at 9:37 AM on October 21, 2016
posted by Zalzidrax at 9:37 AM on October 21, 2016
I'm no enough of an export
That's okay, you're still import-ant.
posted by Greg_Ace at 9:56 AM on October 21, 2016
That's okay, you're still import-ant.
posted by Greg_Ace at 9:56 AM on October 21, 2016
I loved the concert ones too, like most of the image mixture ones had some phallic-looking stuff and some curvy stuff and some yonic-looking stuff and then the concert ones were all just straight-up GIANT PENIS GUITAR HERO
posted by nebulawindphone at 9:59 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by nebulawindphone at 9:59 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
The problem with all these hallucinated images caused by running image-classification networks in reverse is that they're too dreamlike; they make sense in a peripheral way, but dissolve into amorphous artefacts on closer examination. I wonder whether running the output through a style-transfer neural network (think Prisma or something), trained on the desired idiom (landscape photographs, watercolours, pencil sketches, comicbook art, or whatever), would not produce more satisfying pictures of puppyslugs or cockmountains or whatever.
posted by acb at 9:59 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by acb at 9:59 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
GIANT PENIS GUITAR HERO
Or, literal cockstar
posted by acb at 10:15 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
Or, literal cockstar
posted by acb at 10:15 AM on October 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
they're too dreamlike; they make sense in a peripheral way, but dissolve into amorphous artefacts on closer examination.
aka the entire animating principle of the Surrealism movement
posted by rhizome at 12:15 PM on October 21, 2016
aka the entire animating principle of the Surrealism movement
posted by rhizome at 12:15 PM on October 21, 2016
To me it seems like any image with two vertical edges will turn into a dick, non-parallel will be vaguely feminine, and anything round will turn bulbous and somewhere in the middle.
posted by rhizome at 12:17 PM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by rhizome at 12:17 PM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Pounded In The Butt By The Maximal Activation of a Hidden Layer Trained On Butts
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 12:50 PM on October 21, 2016 [17 favorites]
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 12:50 PM on October 21, 2016 [17 favorites]
It's always useful to keep abreast of new technology.
posted by scalefree at 1:08 PM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by scalefree at 1:08 PM on October 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
We have fed a program thousands (millions?) of images that are either SFW or NSFW (as judged by...?) and then we have asked it to generate (mash-up?) new images that it thinks are either SFW or NSFW?
Yahoo implemented (and recently open sourced) a neural network that can rate whether a given image is NSFW on a scale of 0 to 1. That would have involved a training corpus of numerous images that were manually categorized, yes.
An unrelated person/group implemented a completely separate neural network that will take some arbitrary starting image and repeatedly modify it a little at a time, with the end goal of making the Yahoo classifier return a 1 (or any other chosen target value) for that image. It makes a change that it thinks will have the desired effect, judges whether that brings the image closer or farther from the target score, and repeats. That's the work that's been reported here. The Yahoo classifier is just along for the ride, and wasn't written with the intent to generate anything.
posted by Rhomboid at 1:11 PM on October 21, 2016
Yahoo implemented (and recently open sourced) a neural network that can rate whether a given image is NSFW on a scale of 0 to 1. That would have involved a training corpus of numerous images that were manually categorized, yes.
An unrelated person/group implemented a completely separate neural network that will take some arbitrary starting image and repeatedly modify it a little at a time, with the end goal of making the Yahoo classifier return a 1 (or any other chosen target value) for that image. It makes a change that it thinks will have the desired effect, judges whether that brings the image closer or farther from the target score, and repeats. That's the work that's been reported here. The Yahoo classifier is just along for the ride, and wasn't written with the intent to generate anything.
posted by Rhomboid at 1:11 PM on October 21, 2016
That NSFW concert image w/the giant phallus ain't too far off the mark, as this HuffPo article shows: [The Rolling Stone's] “Tour of the Americas ‘75” featured a giant inflatable penis, nicknamed 'Tired Grandfather,' due to its general inability to stay erect." (linked article w/image of fabric phallus most likely SFW.)
The More You Know!
posted by mosk at 2:22 PM on October 21, 2016
The More You Know!
posted by mosk at 2:22 PM on October 21, 2016
Anyone remember the B. Kliban cartoon "Genitals of the Universe"? 'Cos the "NSFW Images" section of the article reminds me of that.
posted by zompist at 7:20 PM on October 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by zompist at 7:20 PM on October 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
« Older Danger from coal slurry being tipped at the rear... | Another Hyper Realistic Stab at HFR Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by eykal at 12:52 AM on October 21, 2016 [11 favorites]