Site Tells You If Photos of You Were Used To Train AI

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Deepfakes, AI generated porn, and a thousand more innocent uses -- there's been a lot of news about neural network-generated images. It makes sense that people started getting curious; were my photos used to train the robots? Are photos of me in the image-generating training sets? A brand new site tries to give you an answer.

Spawning AI creates image generation tools for artists, and the company just launched Have I Been Trained? which you can use to search a set of 5.8 billion images that have been used to train popular AI art models. When you search the site, you can search through the images that are the closest match, based on the LAION-5B training data, which is widely used for training AI search terms. It's a fun tool to play with, and may help give a glimpse into the data that the AI is using as the basis for its own.

"...If You Were Used To Train AI *before*...

[cstacy]

"A set of 5.8 billion images ....", plus one, Thank You!

Re:

[gweihir]

Indeed. That was my first thought. And I would call it ingenious, only that it has been done in other forms before.

Re:

[lsllll]

That was my first thought, too, but then the image would be useless to them without metadata, and surely whatever metadata I provide them would be all lies. Haven't they heard of Larry Laffer?

Re:

[gweihir]

That was my first thought, too, but then the image would be useless to them without metadata, and surely whatever metadata I provide them would be all lies. Haven't they heard of Larry Laffer?

They probably get enough metadata from the lookups they do and possibly from tracking your browser...

Re:

[Tablizer]

They can then always answer "yes" and always be right.

Simplest algorithm in the world, even a poli.....caveman can code that.

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

The site looks dodgy. No info on the main page, just a search box. I did a bit of digging and it leads back to an AI company producing software for artists.

In other words they are hoping to offer artists a "safe" AI image generator that they certify has not been trained on stolen images... By getting you to clean their database for them.

No privacy policy in sight, no GDPR contact details. If they are legit they are doing it wrong.

Re:

[mspohr]

They do say that they do not retain any images you upload FWIW.

Re:

[gweihir]

No idea what moron modded you down, because that is pretty much it: Uploading your photo to that site is a very bad idea if you are concerned about it being used as training data.

Re:

[lsllll]

Wish I had mod point to mod this post up as funny!

Re:

[gweihir]

Wups. Well, you do troll a lot, but not everything you write is crap.

Re:

[jenningsthecat]

Wups. Well, you do troll a lot, but not everything you write is crap.

At least a substantial majority of the non-troll comments are probably from the original "rsilvergun" - IIRC he has a six-digit UID. Somebody has created a bunch of accounts with minor variations on the name - such as "rsvilergun" - presumably to give the real rsilvergun a bad rep.

Re: Submit your photos here

[NagrothAgain]

There's actually only two people who post here these days... you, and a really bored guy with a LOT of sockpuppets.

Re:

[Tablizer]

What do you have against Hunter Schafer?

Hm.

[xlsior]

I pasted a random googled picture of Zuckerberg's mug just to see what it would say, and its suggestion of "most similar images" were hundreds of Indian convenience store facades.

Reminds me of the "service"

[Tablizer]

..."just give us your bank account number and we'll check it for dubious activity."

Re:

[pacinpm]

If you can do something nefarious with bank account number only there is something wrong with banking system in your country.

I routinely give my account number to people who want to send me money. That's how bank transfers should work.

Re:

[Tablizer]

It's usually one part of a multi-angled hack.

That's fine

[locater16]

Ok. That's fine. Odds are incredibly great it's going to be used for nothing super interesting to me personally, the government already has my face because that's how passport security really works, and frankly humans could always just go draw each other including me doing something weird. This is not really that different or scary compared to how the world was 2 years ago.

Re:

[fermion]

Yes, but the popular kids are going to be devastated if their image was not used.

Do you have to use your own photo?

[Fly Swatter]

How could they know that you aren't uploading someone else's photo because you are a stalker? And won't someone think of the children!

Is this a joke? NSFW

[tommeke100]

Don't search for random male names if you don't want a screen full of penises.

No match for me?

[mspohr]

I did upload a photo of myself which I know is commonly available in multiple places on the web.
No matches... just a lot of similar looking people and a bunch that are not very similar.
I think the AI needs quite a bit of improvement.

how do you know you aren't just adding to the set?

[roc97007]

The problem I've always had with 'services' like these, "submit your personal information to see if you've ever been compromised" is the "submit your personal information" part. It just seems a cheap way to have people voluntarily add to the set.

AI feeding itself?

[schweini]

It's going to be interesting once AI generated images that were shared online start creeping into the image data sets that are being used to train the AIs. The different AIs will then, in effect, train each other and themselves.