Even Google themselves previously offered a no-auth way (just very niche): if you uploaded an image to Google Image search, and went to "About this image", it would show if the image was Google AI-generated. Now it doesn't.
We need to inform everyone that this technology can encode database identifiers and enough entropy to uniquely identify you as an author (or downloader).
Yeah I've been wanting to run a ton of Wikipedia images through the detector to see if fakes snuck in. Doesn't seem to be a practical way to do this. Even Open AIs tool has a low rate limit
I've never seen it mentioned anywhere so I will just here complain that Google also removed the ability to paste images into Google Image search some years ago for no apparent reason. It worked great and I used it all the time.
I worry we’ll have to approach this the other way around: verify that photos came from a camera, using hardware support like Apple’s Reference Image, rather than try to detect every AI generated one.
In many situations, photos are evidence. AI tools make convincing fakes, such as images of defect product.
Even Google themselves previously offered a no-auth way (just very niche): if you uploaded an image to Google Image search, and went to "About this image", it would show if the image was Google AI-generated. Now it doesn't.
https://brand.io/article/spymarks/
We need to inform everyone that this technology can encode database identifiers and enough entropy to uniquely identify you as an author (or downloader).
This extends to other forms of media as well.
In many situations, photos are evidence. AI tools make convincing fakes, such as images of defect product.
More detail at https://deepmind.google/models/synthid/
For those who, like me, were hoping it was a vision model to identify synthesizer models from photos of concerts and music studios!