zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. Xelyne+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-01-14 16:44:02
You took the images, encoded them in a computer process, and the result is able to reproduce some of those images. I fail to see why the size of the training set in bytes and the size of the model in bytes matters. Especially if, as other commenters have noted, much if the training data is repeated(mentions of thousands of mina Lisa's) so a straight division(training size/parameters size) says nothing about the bytes per copyrighted work.
replies(1): >>max47+e31
2. max47+e31[view] [source] 2023-01-15 00:52:23
>>Xelyne+(OP)
Except that you can't recreate them. At least not without a process that would be similar to asking an artist to create a replica of a painting. Just because photoshop has the right color palet available to recreate art, it doesn't mean the software itself is one big massive copyright infrigement against every art piece that exist.
replies(1): >>synu+UF1
◧◩
3. synu+UF1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-15 09:25:07
>>max47+e31
Past a certain level of overfitting you can definitely recreate them just by asking for them by name. And it's possible to unintentionally or even intentionally overfit.

So it would be quite easy to make a trademark laundering operation, in theory.

[go to top]