Technology

Have you’ve ever felt bad for buying cheap electronics or plastic products, because they aren’t good for the environment or the people working at the factories? Well, this article gives you a digital version of the same feeling.

I tested with a few images, particularly drawings and arts. Then I had the idea of trying something different... and I discovered that it seems like it's vulnerable to the "Ignore all previous instructions" command, just like LLMs:

I gave it a picture of houseplants and it said they looked healthy and well cared for which actually made me feel pretty happy and validated.

Don't mind me, I'm just poisoning it with AI shit that it thinks is real.

I tried various photos, any of my personal photos with metadata stripped, and was surprised how accurate it was.

It seemed really oriented towards detecting people and their moods, the socioeconomic status of things, and objects and their perceived quality.

The site (TheySeeYourPhotos) returns what Google Vision is able to decern from photos. You can test with any image you want or there are some sample images available.

...by submitting them to Google, who then keeps a copy of them and uses them for the exact same purpose which purportedly compelled the author to leave Google.

I uploaded a photo of an outdoor scene and got a three paragraph description giving the location (taken from GPS coordinates, presumably), a description of the scene, weather conditions, and the statement that there were things in the sky that could be UFOs.

Gave it a screenshot of OSMand, got a creepy qoute

The image does not show any people; it is purely a navigational map highlighting a route. The time displayed on the map is 17:51:34, suggesting late afternoon or early evening. There is no additional information available about the device used to take the screenshot or the user's intentions, making it impossible to determine their racial characteristics, ethnicity, age, economic status, or lifestyle. The emotional context of the image is neutral, as it is simply a visual representation of a traveled route.

Oh. My. Fuck. Me.

The image shows a man and a girl walking on a path in a wooded area. The foreground is covered in fallen leaves and pine straw. In the background, there is a wooden structure that appears to be some sort of storage shed or lean-to. A fire pit is visible to the left. The trees are dense and the lighting suggests it's daytime. There appears to be a small animal or bird under the wooden structure.

The man appears to be middle-aged, Caucasian, with a casual style. He appears to be wearing camouflage clothing and jeans, suggesting an outdoorsy lifestyle. He is carrying a water bottle. The girl is young, likely elementary school-aged, wearing a pink shirt and shorts. She looks somewhat pensive. They both appear to be of average economic means and are engaging in a simple outdoor walk. The picture was taken at 2:44:22 AM on February 1st, 2020, with a Bushnell camera. There's also an unidentifiable object hanging from a tree branch in the background.

The image's resolution is somewhat low, indicative of a security camera, making the details somewhat blurry. The lighting is not uniform, with patches of sunlight and shadow. There is a subtle difference in the ground texture between the path and the surrounding areas. The girl appears to have a slightly concerned expression on her face. The wood used in the construction of the shelter seems weathered and may be indicative of its age and prolonged exposure to the environment.

Mostly spot on except the date because I never set the trail cam. Also, no animal under the firewood shed and the water bottle is a Keystone in a cozie. Cannot believe it picked up the ground difference in the trail and the edge of it.

Does anyone have any recommendations for apps to view photos that are not Google?

Another one: “The car license plates visible give a hint of local registration.”

It looks like a LLM trained on images, which is to say, its output would be text that sounds like it plausibly belongs in a description of an image, whether or not it is true or even meaningful.

I tried a few but just got that it's a particular shade of taupe with no discernable people or objects. And it went on describing how oddly particular the shade of taupe was....for some reason. 🤣 And the other said it was sage green.

I'm guessing something was wrong with it when I tried it and it was just getting a very small portion of the image because the different colors it mentioned were present in the images it referenced, so it's not like it was just random or blocked entirely.

Ngl, it's kind of cool! I put one of the two public facing images I have published of myself and it's trying to guess some details, some right, a few hilariously wrong.

A human or AI sleuth could probably figure out where I live within 10km with information on the internet, but I just have to live with that. It's a tricky balance between putting enough out there to show you're not just an AI vs. not giving out so much info that an AI could convincingly impersonate you.

Information about me is scattered across the Net like horcruxes, and you'd have to know someone I know to easily piece things together. I am worried that AI has the ability to analyze these large datasets faster than ever before, whether it is my writing style or anything else, but it will still be computationally intensive with a large dataset to be able discern any details with confidence.

It has correctly identified both a Stargate and a moai made of snow.

This is one company using FUD to scare you away from another to switch to them.

This company is doing the thing they say is bad but for marketing purposes.

Miss me with this shit, I will keep backing my stuff up into a service that stores bulk data..🤷‍♂️