Looks like you need to remove the image for the actual link to be the link
Looks like you need to remove the image for the actual link to be the link
Disclaimer: I have no real qualification on this. But it seems like this whole technology is pretty sensitive to the specific model being used and the specific details of the pixels; the whole thing is written like there's some silver-bullet image alteration that can fool "machine vision" in general, but what it demonstrates is nothing like that.
I asked Midjourney to identify the altered images that machines are supposed to identify as a sheep or a cat or whatever, and it said:
... which is what they are.
The last two images were actually a little more interesting -- they're distorted to the point that it's visually obvious that they've been altered, and Midjourney actually picks up that the image is distorted a little, and includes that in the style part of its description, while mostly-accurately describing what's in the image. These are its full descriptions:
"a red bridge, traffic lights, and a fencedin section of street, in the style of digital mixed media, thermal camera, american realism, found object sculpture, stipple, ricoh r1, xbox 360 graphics"
"a pole with a traffic light and a van, in the style of distorted, fragmented images, manapunk, found objects, webcam photography, suburban ennui capturer, hyper-realistic bird studies, 19th century american art"
Tor Browser is both free, and a hell of a lot more secure.
Haha yea, I've become extremely suspicious of people's voting habits based on observing that type of thing before... 🙂