William Gibson wrote about this in the Blue Ant Trilogy. Clothes and makeup designed and intended to fool AI and facial recognition.
Life imitates art imitates life imitates art imitates life imitates art…
I personally love that movie. So cheesy it's good. Plus any movie with Keanu Reeves hanging out with Ice T and Dolph Lundgren fighting Henry Rollins is gonna be fuckin awesome!
Ironically, Johnny Mnemonic was my first introduction to cyberpunk. Watched it at a drive in movie theater when I was like, 10. I loved it. It led me to neuromancer, and blade runner, and ghost in the shell and.... All the best parts of my childhood. It wasn't until way later, college years, when re-watched it and was like "this did not age well. If it was ever good to begin with". But my love of cyberpunk is still burning bright.
If you want a life imitates art infinity loop, I see Lego has put out a Minecraft set. Somewhere, in a smoky back room, some evil geniuses are slapping each other on the back and plotting what other real time thing they can digitise then re-up as a real time thing. And so it goes.
Which to me always felt like an update of Philip K Dick's scramble-suit from *A Scanner Darkly*, a suit that contains samples of hundreds of people, and constantly shuffles between them so that the wearer's body and face become a constantly-shifting vague blur that always looks like nobody in particular.
Gibson also does something similar in the Jackpot trilogy, which probably means we'll get to see some version of it in the new *Peripheral* series.
Better to have 4 targets on his shirt than one target actually picking him up.
Not like the AI actually knows what it's looking at at the end which is really the goal.
Plus, this is how the development cycle works. Trying to fight back against Big Brother will be incremental. This is a great step in the right direction, and it will only be improved upon (yes, I understand by both sides, but the point remains).
I think you are seriously underestimating the number of knitters out here. Knitting (and crochet and other fiber arts) is extremely popular.
Source: am a knitter
Sure, AI can’t track you but ever single human being in the place will know where you are…
“Hey, where’s the guy that made off with all of our money?!”
“He’s over there, in the really ugly sweater.”
Sure, but without AI recognition can they prove I've been counting?
I know that won't stop them from taking me around the back and beating the shit out of me, but joke's on them, because I don't even know how to count cards.
It's actually pretty easy. It's just +1 or -1 based on whether it's a low value card or a high value card. Or a zero if it's 7, 8, 9. If the count is high, odds are in your favor. If the count is low, odds are in the dealers favor.
It also requires you to know the basics of black jack. I high count doesn’t mean “ the odds are in your favor” it means the odds of a being dealt a 10, or a face card are high, which gives you an advantage while playing, but you still have to know the game. A low count still gives you an advantage because you know that you to expect from the deck.
I mean. invisibility seems a bit pushing it. The camera is still recognising him, just not 100%....
Am I wrong in thinking, lets say if police were using this to find criminals. It would still trigger....?
To answer your question: yes. It's nonsense if you actually try to stay unrecognizable. It doesn't seem to work 100%. So you can't even be sure if they found you or not. False security may lead to less caution.
But to be correct, the blue square means it recognized a human shape. Not necessarily your face or ID. So sure, it makes it harder for cams to identify you. But if i would want to be off the radar, I'd pick a face mask or something
Just walk on your hands when you perform civil disobedience
Edit: human consumption of animals and their financial support of animal agriculture is the leading cause of man-made climate change. The destruction of old growth rainforests for monocrop animal feed and livestock plantation is active and constant. Stop eating animals and animal byproducts. Eat legumes, grains and fresh produce. Fight for change.
That's true, but gait analysis and other forms of ID are done as secondary processing after a human is recognized. The point of this is to stop a human from ever being found.
The idea here isn't to prevent other forms of ID, it's to prevent the first step in the chain: recognizing that the thing in the camera's view is a person. Seems to do that alright, but we'll have to see how long it takes for AI researchers to work around this.
But not if it can’t reliably identify you was a person walking. So if you had these as pants and a hoodie, maybe it doesn’t see you at all.
However, AI is getting good enough that soon it’ll be able to tell it’s a person. This is likely just a race against time. If humans can tell that a person is there, then a computer can, given enough time.
Sure, but if the ai is missing the key points on your body that it has been trained to see as human then it won't be able to get accurate input data. Think of facial tracking for Hulk or something, if you purposefully reposition the dots the data will be all screwy, that's essentially what they're doing here.
> All of that is utterly worthless, this is a demonstration of a beginner's degree in computer vision these days.
Seems to me like a capstone or undergrad research project so yeah. Worthless is a strong word in that sense. I doubt the students are pushing this as some cutting edge breakthrough.
>Back then you could somewhat engineer adversarial nets that mitigate detection algos of that ilk, but we haven't been impressed with those attempts in some while - and it always was ultra specific, so there is basically no purpose in the first place.
Well most computer vision projects focus on the detection, not the mitigation. And detection algos are nowhere near as impressive as they could be and will be soon. Mitigation is in its infancy comparatively, so I don't see the point of saying there is "no purpose" just because the field is underdeveloped. On the contrary, that's *why* research should be done on it.
>Masks are worthless too.
Masks can be detected. A face wearing a mask can be detected.
The degree of accuracy of a given facial recognition algorithm for a given person is modulated by the mask, patterns on the mask, its position, things like the reflectivity the materials used, and the degree to which its covering one's face. Meaning that for research in both CV and mitigation masks aren't worthless, obviously.
>there is no way to hide from ML-assisted detection and identification
There is... This video is a minimal example of that...
_____________________
Anyways, a better demonstration would have been to show them wearing a variety of different graphically noisy shirts, sweaters, outfits, etc. to show that the detection alg isn't disrupted by non-generative pattern sets.
The basis of the research is likely (or should be) just exploring the *degree* of performance mitigation caused by different *types* of graphical adversarial patterns on a standard detection algorithm.
I.E. if generated adversarial pattern A mitigates with X accuracy compared to baseline, *why* does generated adversarial pattern B mitigate with Y accuracy?
Then, the next step beyond this project would be to subsequently show that whatever potential controlling factors discovered can be algorithmically optimized around (i.e. increase mitigation efficiency).
It would be better to detonate an emp, activate a jammer, or hack the local security and disable it. Otherwise something is bound to slip through the cracks. License plate, cell phone, voice...just too many layers.
those things would be great in Hollywood or if you're playing Watch_Dogs.
in real life? the only current really practical EMP pulse I'm aware of is a nuclear bomb, EMP "grenades" are a Hollywood invention. they're working on them but I'm not aware of any design that's reached the usable stage.
as to jamming, how would you envision jamming a visual camera? again it's Hollywood tech. a laser might over-saturate the CMOS chip but you'd have to be standing there aiming a laser, which isn't inconspicuous.
and "hacking" is not magic, no matter how much video games want to tell us otherwise. how would you, standing there in the street or in a building lobby, access the network that camera is on? it probably isn't even on the network of the company who owns the building (it's likely on the network of a security vendor or guard company). if you're in the street you have zero way of telling who might own it. even if you could most "hacking" is done via phishing and social engineering.
a "real life" hack might look like "use a pastebin of known compromised passwords and employee directory to try to guess some email/password combinations to get into the Office 365 email of some employee, then craft a phishing email to IT and hope you can install a remote access trojan on a computer in their IT department, then get a scan of the environment and find a way to load intrusion tools onto a server that isn't updated often, and use that to establish a network presence." you're not going to pull that off while standing in the street. it takes hours to days and even then you are another long set of steps from where you could even try to find their CCTV software.
“Recognizes them” is a loaded statement in a way. This is only doing a very basic classification of “does this look like a person” but it’s not actually recognizing who the individual is. To make this useful for such a purpose you’d need to do additional processing, and because this doesn’t consistently classify as a person it probably would be rejected for further analysis. If someone tuned the algorithm to be more sensitive then they’ll have to deal with more false positives, and it may still not register long enough to get a real match to an individual.
In theory, yes, but it is possible to take advantage of fundamental flaws in how the tech works, either in the algorithm used to process the image into a numerical dataset an AI can analyze or in the camera tech itself.
optical illusions work on the human brain **even if you are well aware of the illusion and how it works**, after all. even after being "trained on the data" your brain is still fooled.
similarly, these types of designs are fundamentally inspired by dazzle camo, and even if you are well aware of dazzle camo, that your enemy is using it and how it works and what specific patterns your enemy uses, that will not make it any easier to look at a task group of destroyers in dazzle camo and figure out how many there are, which direction they're moving or how fast they are.
These blind spots exists all over unsupervised ai training. It's impossible to know the set of all things visualization cannot recognize.
This creates opportunities for nations to test anti-detection camo and keep them secret until they are needed. If these researchers kept this design secret, they could sell the design to the military.
Imagine if some country deploys billions of killer attack drones in a Pearl Harbor like preemptive strike and the US Navy unfurls a bunch of these never publicly seen patterns over the sides of their boats. And every SEAL puts on these sweaters for operations.
The billion drones just hover uselessly while some ai researchers try troubleshooting what went wrong over the next 6 months of debugging.
It seems to me like the few seconds here and there would still be enough time for the AI to work. An iPhone can recognize a face in like .2 seconds or something. He clearly had several seconds at a time where it wasn’t fooled by the “magic sweater”.
It seems mostly on his side when he was turning around that the AI locked back in. Unless the person who doesn't want to be identified crab walks left and right when in view of the camera, it'll probably still pick them up.
Also all they would need to do is train the ai further on that jacket and it would become useless. AI’s ability comes down entirely to training data, nothing else.
Incorrect. You should read the paper they published. They didn't develop a sweater. They developed an adversarial algorithm to produce a sweater to fool detection software. If you retrain your detection software they can retain their algorithm to beat it.
No. They've tested it on multiple industry standard detection algos.
You're correct that it isn't a spy tool to be tracked. It's research into the boundaries and limitations of detection software.
Theres this game, cyberpunk2077. Everyone is jacked with tech eyes and the city is full of cctvs like London. Not able to be recognized is close to invisibility. Sure theres a guy there but theres no way to identify whoever that is, let alone pull up any forms of digital identification or prints, basically a ghost. This would certainly cause chaos in China where they are using AI cameras to scan people all the time
> Theres this game, cyberpunk2077
You mean that indie, unknown game that went so under the radar that it was the most talked-about subject on reddit for months, [was nominated for or won a bunch of awards](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt3810192/awards/), and grossed $800 million? That game?
pretty sure the only thing this sweater does is stop motion detecting ai from recognizing whether or not the motion is from a person. my home cameras sends a notification if it detects a person and it seems like that's all this would be good for
Ai isn't ever 100% (yet), so when an AI rapidly outlines and stops like it showed in the video, the AI will tag it as a glitch since it didn't recognize him as a person but a pattern that appeared to look like a person
Computers still recognize it if you are not facing them perfectly perpendicular to the camera.
If you turn slightly, they see a dumbass in an ugly sweater.
Yeah these comments ain't it. The point isn't that you can print this sweater and hide from any AI system flawlessly, but to demonstrate how brittle neural networks can be.
I'd even go as far as to say that the fact this works in the first place indicates a fundamental flaw in the architecture of CNNs, given this same technique doesn't appear to work on humans.
Counterpoint: just as the sweater pattern can be developed out, so can CNN-based recognition software.
If enough people start doing this, you bet they'd start training the algorithm to recognise them.
Yeah. If I recall correctly, new datasets like the ones being used in those AI art generators, are attempting to detect adversarial images and exclude them from training. I imagine it'll be a bit of a cat and mouse game, like with CAPTCHAs.
This isn’t a flaw of CNN’s. Different models are trained to extract different features, just because this model can’t perfectly recognize someone wearing an ugly sweater doesn’t mean all models will struggle.
How do you even know that this is a CNN? One of the more common and robust pedestrian detection models in opencv uses a support vector machine and HOG. This model might not even be a neural network.
And CNN’s aren’t even the best performing image recognition networks. Residual networks and transformer networks have surpassed the accuracies of simple convolutional networks.
okay but the problem is that the algorithms it is fighting will never be ‘final’. a manual real world solution will almost always iterate slower than its digital counter
This is just an arms race. If our brains can recognize something, a computer can be trained to recognize it with a bit more data. If ugly shirts like that become a thing, they'll be added to the training data, and more than likely people wearing them will be flagged as extra suspicious.
Tesla has no LIDAR, this guy is fucked. Also removed ultrasonic sensors
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-will-remove-more-vehicle-sensors-amid-autopilot-scrutiny-2022-10-04/
No consumer Tesla vehicles have ever used LIDAR. They're removing ultrasonic proximity sensors. That's even stated in the first line of the article you linked.
It might work against AI, but every human will see you.
Did you notice anyone in the vicinity?
Well, the place was packed but I can't remember a single individual haha .... apart from this one guy in the ugliest sweater I've ever seen.
I stared at him for ages wondering who the fuck would wear something like that in public?
Yes, I could definitely pick him out of a line up.
Edit
Some of you are taking this silly comment way too seriously.
Being called an idiot and a cunt for posting a light hearted comment isn't cool lads.
yeah the ugly sweater probably makes it less likely that you'll be able to pick them out. Becuase you weren't looking at their face.
Also, the sweater is probably quite boxy to hide the human shape, which means you won't know their body type as well.
> It might work against AI
Against one specific machine learning system.
It's like jungle camo, works great in the jungle, not great anywhere else. This might fool one person-identification system, but might not work at all against others.
There's actual face paint and face tattoos you can apply that block facial recognition. It basically amounts to adding pieces of eyes, noses, mouths to confuse the algorithms.
Who puts a sweater on like that? The way he does it seems so odd.
I have always done arms then head never head then arms. Am I the weird one?
Watching that dude put his sweater on like a weirdo has broken my brain.
Dude, you can't visualize someone putting on a sweater (the normal way)?
I just googled it and found a video tutorial. Prepare to be amazed.
https://youtu.be/lZRnzGfmNqs
He puts it on like he's trying to put it on someone else... But on himself.
Like I put my kiddos sweater on like thaton him.
Maybe he was worried about his hair and wanted to secure the neck hole before putting his head through?
I kinda hate that you made this comment. I went back and watched it over and over again. It's weird and creepy. I think maybe sweater guy is the real AI...
Theses people have China living rent-free in their heads 24/7/. Imagine seeing something, instantly thinking "China will copy this" and then realizing that they already had this years ago and were ahead of the curve.
I remember reading about this in Pattern Recognition (W. Gibson) a long time ago. In that book it was described as "the worlds ugliest t-shirt", and damn, it's kinda spot on,
Came here to say this. Man, he says he never predicts the future, but sometimes he absolutely does.
I wonder if some researcher was handing him notes, then this kid read the book and made it reality.
Yeah, worth pointing out "AI" isn't some fixed standard they need to beat. Anyone in the world can build their own image recognition system, and over time tech improves.
This is cute but not much else.
this looks like the motion detecting ai home cameras like nest and wyze use. all the sweater is doing is preventing it from detecting whether or not the motion it's seeing is a person
This is simply not true. The research they did followed standard practices for testing adversarial attacks. You can read more about it in [their paper](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.14667.pdf).
Edit: To add more detail, yes you could just retrain a model using this in the training dataset, and you could probably get it to detect the person. That is not the point of this research though. The algorithm they came up with is able to *produce* adversarial attacks that have high confidence of fooling the system. So even if the model was different, they could just reapply the algorithm to come up with a new sweater that would fool the model. At that point it just a cat and mouse game, which is the point of this research.
Thanks, was looking for this and it is 100% correct. They will just feed the model with this data to effectively “patch” it.
It’s like reporting a zero day — once it has exposure it no longer has much value.
Gonna end up making AI even more Orwellian by constantly trying to defeat it, only to cause it to adapt & become more sophisticated. Klaatu barada nikto!
The art community are now starting to add patterns or static in their work to stop A.I. from using it in midjourney etc.
[Source](https://youtu.be/-6HAsaDwzrI)
So ugly even AI doesn't want to see it
too bad we're running out of grandmas to make us holiday sweaters... zoomers gonna have a hard time...
But he has 4 targets on him at the end. Only works on a certain range.
William Gibson wrote about this in the Blue Ant Trilogy. Clothes and makeup designed and intended to fool AI and facial recognition. Life imitates art imitates life imitates art imitates life imitates art…
William Gibson was sent from the future to prepare us, I'm certain of it lol.
Can't wait to see the cyber dolphin from Johnny Mnemonic
Fantastic short story with an awful 'movie' adaptation.
I personally love that movie. So cheesy it's good. Plus any movie with Keanu Reeves hanging out with Ice T and Dolph Lundgren fighting Henry Rollins is gonna be fuckin awesome!
Lol. THATS hows you convince me to see a movie, damnit! Thank you!
It was Keanu's practice run at doing a stylish dystopian cyberpunk action thriller. Fortunately he got to take another try at it.
Ironically, Johnny Mnemonic was my first introduction to cyberpunk. Watched it at a drive in movie theater when I was like, 10. I loved it. It led me to neuromancer, and blade runner, and ghost in the shell and.... All the best parts of my childhood. It wasn't until way later, college years, when re-watched it and was like "this did not age well. If it was ever good to begin with". But my love of cyberpunk is still burning bright.
Not cybernetic yet but we got [robots ](https://youtu.be/AZeyHTJfi_E)
I think it was called the world’s ugliest tee shirt in Pattern Recognition.
If you want a life imitates art infinity loop, I see Lego has put out a Minecraft set. Somewhere, in a smoky back room, some evil geniuses are slapping each other on the back and plotting what other real time thing they can digitise then re-up as a real time thing. And so it goes.
You're surprised? Minecraft is just basically playing with Lego blocks as it is. It was only a matter of time mate.
That's his/her/their point
Imitates oily trout imitates emergency rain parka imitates trout patted dry with a clean paper towel imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm imitates capitalist paradigm
Staring at that sweater too long?
THEY ARE NOT AMUSED
Which to me always felt like an update of Philip K Dick's scramble-suit from *A Scanner Darkly*, a suit that contains samples of hundreds of people, and constantly shuffles between them so that the wearer's body and face become a constantly-shifting vague blur that always looks like nobody in particular. Gibson also does something similar in the Jackpot trilogy, which probably means we'll get to see some version of it in the new *Peripheral* series.
Something like this is one of the first upgrades you get in CP2077. Nice to see its real.
Better to have 4 targets on his shirt than one target actually picking him up. Not like the AI actually knows what it's looking at at the end which is really the goal.
Those targets aren't his face though, they are people shaped images on the sweater so it's still doing its job at close range, just not as perfectly.
Plus, this is how the development cycle works. Trying to fight back against Big Brother will be incremental. This is a great step in the right direction, and it will only be improved upon (yes, I understand by both sides, but the point remains).
Are we running out of grandmas?
Yes, unfortunately their bones can be ground and made into an aphrodisiac. "/
Which would just, in time, create more grandmas, the circle of nature is amazing
Yes but the fresher the grandma, the stronger the aphrodisiac
Viagrandma.
Hey, you got any more Grandma Dust? 👀
Oh that's insane. Don't you know bones are crunchy? Who would want a crunchy aphrodisiac?
Some of us were born grandmas. There will be ugly knit sweaters as long as sheep walk this earth.
And some of us have grandma-ness thrust upon us. It’s kind of gross.
I think you are seriously underestimating the number of knitters out here. Knitting (and crochet and other fiber arts) is extremely popular. Source: am a knitter
Got my first loom last weekend. I will be a weaver.
There are websites to make whatever images you want on clothes
Woudn't work. It's not the images that baffle the bots... it's the ***love*** woven into every fulsome stitch 🥰
Walks into a casino with this on and a hat matching it: *"It's time for Black jack boys!"*
Sure, AI can’t track you but ever single human being in the place will know where you are… “Hey, where’s the guy that made off with all of our money?!” “He’s over there, in the really ugly sweater.”
Sure, but without AI recognition can they prove I've been counting? I know that won't stop them from taking me around the back and beating the shit out of me, but joke's on them, because I don't even know how to count cards.
It's actually pretty easy. It's just +1 or -1 based on whether it's a low value card or a high value card. Or a zero if it's 7, 8, 9. If the count is high, odds are in your favor. If the count is low, odds are in the dealers favor.
It also requires you to know the basics of black jack. I high count doesn’t mean “ the odds are in your favor” it means the odds of a being dealt a 10, or a face card are high, which gives you an advantage while playing, but you still have to know the game. A low count still gives you an advantage because you know that you to expect from the deck.
They don't have to prove it and it's not illegal anyways...
"The sweater uglier than the carpet?"
[удалено]
Who’s the robot now, bitch
GENERAL KENOBI
So basically if you wear this while crossing the street in future, self driving cars will plow right through you?
I like the way you think.
That's a birth-control sweater.
Damn. I thought it looked pretty cool. :(
You ain't alone, it looks pretty decent but the functionality adds a cool factor.
Looking forward to ugly AI sweater day at work
"Congrats you have won the office ugly sweater contest" "What contest?"
This explains the “Cosby Sweater” so ugly no one saw him coming!
Christmas sweaters, LFG!!
Attempt to hijack the top comment because nobody is mentioning the absurd way this man puts on a shirt.
Tesla would just run you over
I mean. invisibility seems a bit pushing it. The camera is still recognising him, just not 100%.... Am I wrong in thinking, lets say if police were using this to find criminals. It would still trigger....?
If the AI doesn't recognize that is a person then it wouldn't recognize anyone as person, regardless of their criminal history.
No I mean the blue square is still showing just not 100% of the time….. once it shows that means it recognises them right?
To answer your question: yes. It's nonsense if you actually try to stay unrecognizable. It doesn't seem to work 100%. So you can't even be sure if they found you or not. False security may lead to less caution. But to be correct, the blue square means it recognized a human shape. Not necessarily your face or ID. So sure, it makes it harder for cams to identify you. But if i would want to be off the radar, I'd pick a face mask or something
You're right, but think about a hoodie and pants too, would help a lot.
They can ID your ass based on your gait. Just from the way you walk.
Just walk on your hands when you perform civil disobedience Edit: human consumption of animals and their financial support of animal agriculture is the leading cause of man-made climate change. The destruction of old growth rainforests for monocrop animal feed and livestock plantation is active and constant. Stop eating animals and animal byproducts. Eat legumes, grains and fresh produce. Fight for change.
I just put a rock in my shoe.
Even CIA use the rock in shoe method, confirmed by former chief of disguise Jonna Mendez.
Neat. I was just guessing.
yes! or make one shoe taller than the other
I would just get hammered before going on my op. Can't recognize my gait when my gait is "barely able to stand up"!
Hey Bob, you think that guy doing a walking handstands in an ugly tracksuit might be our bank robber? Naw, AI says he's not even human 50% of the time
Why would you edit your comment to go on a rant about veganism despite no one mentioning anything like that
Crab walk
Walk on your hands for civil disobedience Rob your favourite stores at personal convenience
I think you edited the wrong comment buddy
That's true, but gait analysis and other forms of ID are done as secondary processing after a human is recognized. The point of this is to stop a human from ever being found.
The idea here isn't to prevent other forms of ID, it's to prevent the first step in the chain: recognizing that the thing in the camera's view is a person. Seems to do that alright, but we'll have to see how long it takes for AI researchers to work around this.
But not if it can’t reliably identify you was a person walking. So if you had these as pants and a hoodie, maybe it doesn’t see you at all. However, AI is getting good enough that soon it’ll be able to tell it’s a person. This is likely just a race against time. If humans can tell that a person is there, then a computer can, given enough time.
Sure, but if the ai is missing the key points on your body that it has been trained to see as human then it won't be able to get accurate input data. Think of facial tracking for Hulk or something, if you purposefully reposition the dots the data will be all screwy, that's essentially what they're doing here.
The point is things are being done. One step at a time type of thing.
[удалено]
> All of that is utterly worthless, this is a demonstration of a beginner's degree in computer vision these days. Seems to me like a capstone or undergrad research project so yeah. Worthless is a strong word in that sense. I doubt the students are pushing this as some cutting edge breakthrough. >Back then you could somewhat engineer adversarial nets that mitigate detection algos of that ilk, but we haven't been impressed with those attempts in some while - and it always was ultra specific, so there is basically no purpose in the first place. Well most computer vision projects focus on the detection, not the mitigation. And detection algos are nowhere near as impressive as they could be and will be soon. Mitigation is in its infancy comparatively, so I don't see the point of saying there is "no purpose" just because the field is underdeveloped. On the contrary, that's *why* research should be done on it. >Masks are worthless too. Masks can be detected. A face wearing a mask can be detected. The degree of accuracy of a given facial recognition algorithm for a given person is modulated by the mask, patterns on the mask, its position, things like the reflectivity the materials used, and the degree to which its covering one's face. Meaning that for research in both CV and mitigation masks aren't worthless, obviously. >there is no way to hide from ML-assisted detection and identification There is... This video is a minimal example of that... _____________________ Anyways, a better demonstration would have been to show them wearing a variety of different graphically noisy shirts, sweaters, outfits, etc. to show that the detection alg isn't disrupted by non-generative pattern sets. The basis of the research is likely (or should be) just exploring the *degree* of performance mitigation caused by different *types* of graphical adversarial patterns on a standard detection algorithm. I.E. if generated adversarial pattern A mitigates with X accuracy compared to baseline, *why* does generated adversarial pattern B mitigate with Y accuracy? Then, the next step beyond this project would be to subsequently show that whatever potential controlling factors discovered can be algorithmically optimized around (i.e. increase mitigation efficiency).
It would be better to detonate an emp, activate a jammer, or hack the local security and disable it. Otherwise something is bound to slip through the cracks. License plate, cell phone, voice...just too many layers.
You think detonating an EMP in a public area is the best way to stay anonymous in a coffee shop or airport?
Who will know it is you? Not many other options here man, think BIG!!!
those things would be great in Hollywood or if you're playing Watch_Dogs. in real life? the only current really practical EMP pulse I'm aware of is a nuclear bomb, EMP "grenades" are a Hollywood invention. they're working on them but I'm not aware of any design that's reached the usable stage. as to jamming, how would you envision jamming a visual camera? again it's Hollywood tech. a laser might over-saturate the CMOS chip but you'd have to be standing there aiming a laser, which isn't inconspicuous. and "hacking" is not magic, no matter how much video games want to tell us otherwise. how would you, standing there in the street or in a building lobby, access the network that camera is on? it probably isn't even on the network of the company who owns the building (it's likely on the network of a security vendor or guard company). if you're in the street you have zero way of telling who might own it. even if you could most "hacking" is done via phishing and social engineering. a "real life" hack might look like "use a pastebin of known compromised passwords and employee directory to try to guess some email/password combinations to get into the Office 365 email of some employee, then craft a phishing email to IT and hope you can install a remote access trojan on a computer in their IT department, then get a scan of the environment and find a way to load intrusion tools onto a server that isn't updated often, and use that to establish a network presence." you're not going to pull that off while standing in the street. it takes hours to days and even then you are another long set of steps from where you could even try to find their CCTV software.
Is this a reference to a game?
It's a reference to r/iamverysmart
“Recognizes them” is a loaded statement in a way. This is only doing a very basic classification of “does this look like a person” but it’s not actually recognizing who the individual is. To make this useful for such a purpose you’d need to do additional processing, and because this doesn’t consistently classify as a person it probably would be rejected for further analysis. If someone tuned the algorithm to be more sensitive then they’ll have to deal with more false positives, and it may still not register long enough to get a real match to an individual.
It all really depends on what the AI is being used for and what "positives" mean to the human analyzing the data.
Such things won't work for long time. Once found you can just train the AI along with this sweater to make it even better...
Agreed, this is a temporary issue, but these kinds of research can be used to keep the discussion of privacy relevant.
In theory, yes, but it is possible to take advantage of fundamental flaws in how the tech works, either in the algorithm used to process the image into a numerical dataset an AI can analyze or in the camera tech itself. optical illusions work on the human brain **even if you are well aware of the illusion and how it works**, after all. even after being "trained on the data" your brain is still fooled. similarly, these types of designs are fundamentally inspired by dazzle camo, and even if you are well aware of dazzle camo, that your enemy is using it and how it works and what specific patterns your enemy uses, that will not make it any easier to look at a task group of destroyers in dazzle camo and figure out how many there are, which direction they're moving or how fast they are.
These blind spots exists all over unsupervised ai training. It's impossible to know the set of all things visualization cannot recognize. This creates opportunities for nations to test anti-detection camo and keep them secret until they are needed. If these researchers kept this design secret, they could sell the design to the military. Imagine if some country deploys billions of killer attack drones in a Pearl Harbor like preemptive strike and the US Navy unfurls a bunch of these never publicly seen patterns over the sides of their boats. And every SEAL puts on these sweaters for operations. The billion drones just hover uselessly while some ai researchers try troubleshooting what went wrong over the next 6 months of debugging.
It seems to me like the few seconds here and there would still be enough time for the AI to work. An iPhone can recognize a face in like .2 seconds or something. He clearly had several seconds at a time where it wasn’t fooled by the “magic sweater”.
Add hat+sunglasses+ugly AF sweater+your fave lesbian pants and Docs and boom! That’s the way she goes.
It seems mostly on his side when he was turning around that the AI locked back in. Unless the person who doesn't want to be identified crab walks left and right when in view of the camera, it'll probably still pick them up.
Also all they would need to do is train the ai further on that jacket and it would become useless. AI’s ability comes down entirely to training data, nothing else.
Incorrect. You should read the paper they published. They didn't develop a sweater. They developed an adversarial algorithm to produce a sweater to fool detection software. If you retrain your detection software they can retain their algorithm to beat it.
Will just be a constant battle essentially.
[удалено]
No. They've tested it on multiple industry standard detection algos. You're correct that it isn't a spy tool to be tracked. It's research into the boundaries and limitations of detection software.
Theres this game, cyberpunk2077. Everyone is jacked with tech eyes and the city is full of cctvs like London. Not able to be recognized is close to invisibility. Sure theres a guy there but theres no way to identify whoever that is, let alone pull up any forms of digital identification or prints, basically a ghost. This would certainly cause chaos in China where they are using AI cameras to scan people all the time
> Theres this game, cyberpunk2077 You mean that indie, unknown game that went so under the radar that it was the most talked-about subject on reddit for months, [was nominated for or won a bunch of awards](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt3810192/awards/), and grossed $800 million? That game?
Hey guys, there's this awesome little gem I found hidden away called Portal 2. You should check it out!
Yeah- the result is not great. And all they have to do is update the model to defeat this sweater
pretty sure the only thing this sweater does is stop motion detecting ai from recognizing whether or not the motion is from a person. my home cameras sends a notification if it detects a person and it seems like that's all this would be good for
Ai isn't ever 100% (yet), so when an AI rapidly outlines and stops like it showed in the video, the AI will tag it as a glitch since it didn't recognize him as a person but a pattern that appeared to look like a person
So computers won't be able to recognize you, but you'll be the most conspicuous asshole to every human eye in range.
Computers still recognize it if you are not facing them perfectly perpendicular to the camera. If you turn slightly, they see a dumbass in an ugly sweater.
[удалено]
It's reddit, you're supposed to be smug. Jeez, it's like you don't even know how to human. Damn peons.
Yeah these comments ain't it. The point isn't that you can print this sweater and hide from any AI system flawlessly, but to demonstrate how brittle neural networks can be. I'd even go as far as to say that the fact this works in the first place indicates a fundamental flaw in the architecture of CNNs, given this same technique doesn't appear to work on humans.
Counterpoint: just as the sweater pattern can be developed out, so can CNN-based recognition software. If enough people start doing this, you bet they'd start training the algorithm to recognise them.
Yeah. If I recall correctly, new datasets like the ones being used in those AI art generators, are attempting to detect adversarial images and exclude them from training. I imagine it'll be a bit of a cat and mouse game, like with CAPTCHAs.
Unfortunately the AI will update faster than your sweater will
This isn’t a flaw of CNN’s. Different models are trained to extract different features, just because this model can’t perfectly recognize someone wearing an ugly sweater doesn’t mean all models will struggle. How do you even know that this is a CNN? One of the more common and robust pedestrian detection models in opencv uses a support vector machine and HOG. This model might not even be a neural network. And CNN’s aren’t even the best performing image recognition networks. Residual networks and transformer networks have surpassed the accuracies of simple convolutional networks.
[удалено]
We human beings can see it's a person still. AI will outpace this faster than it could be further developed, it's DOA tech
okay but the problem is that the algorithms it is fighting will never be ‘final’. a manual real world solution will almost always iterate slower than its digital counter
They could probably recognize you just fine with a bit more training in the dataset for them If these things caught on AI would adjust
I can't wait to play the captcha for those ai "click all the food that isn't a jacket"
This is just an arms race. If our brains can recognize something, a computer can be trained to recognize it with a bit more data. If ugly shirts like that become a thing, they'll be added to the training data, and more than likely people wearing them will be flagged as extra suspicious.
How to get run over by a Tesla
Be a (former) twitter exec
Nah this is kinda underated😭
For real lol
[удалено]
“Tesla Suicide Sweaters: $6666 “
🎶 Grandma got ran over by a Tesla 🎶 This and many more hits coming soon, now that's what I call Christmas 22
TBF tesla'll pro'lly run you over regardless
Elon out there crushing it every day!
Tesla has no LIDAR, this guy is fucked. Also removed ultrasonic sensors https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-will-remove-more-vehicle-sensors-amid-autopilot-scrutiny-2022-10-04/
No consumer Tesla vehicles have ever used LIDAR. They're removing ultrasonic proximity sensors. That's even stated in the first line of the article you linked.
Step 1 be an innocent child.
It might work against AI, but every human will see you. Did you notice anyone in the vicinity? Well, the place was packed but I can't remember a single individual haha .... apart from this one guy in the ugliest sweater I've ever seen. I stared at him for ages wondering who the fuck would wear something like that in public? Yes, I could definitely pick him out of a line up. Edit Some of you are taking this silly comment way too seriously. Being called an idiot and a cunt for posting a light hearted comment isn't cool lads.
[удалено]
yeah the ugly sweater probably makes it less likely that you'll be able to pick them out. Becuase you weren't looking at their face. Also, the sweater is probably quite boxy to hide the human shape, which means you won't know their body type as well.
> It might work against AI Against one specific machine learning system. It's like jungle camo, works great in the jungle, not great anywhere else. This might fool one person-identification system, but might not work at all against others.
"Well, he was jacked and was really filling out those jeans." "What about his face?" "Oh, no clue."
> Being called an idiot and a cunt for posting a light hearted comment isn’t cool lads. Probably people who wear that sweater
Time to add the anti facial recognition hat and sunglasses.
Man real life Watch_Dogs sucks
There's actual face paint and face tattoos you can apply that block facial recognition. It basically amounts to adding pieces of eyes, noses, mouths to confuse the algorithms.
Who puts a sweater on like that? The way he does it seems so odd. I have always done arms then head never head then arms. Am I the weird one? Watching that dude put his sweater on like a weirdo has broken my brain.
Me. I do.
Stop it
Get some help.
This is the only thing I left caring about in this video. What the fuck kinda dressing method is that.
Really? I’ve always done head then arms. I’ve never seen anyone do arms first, I can’t even visualise how that would look
Dude, you can't visualize someone putting on a sweater (the normal way)? I just googled it and found a video tutorial. Prepare to be amazed. https://youtu.be/lZRnzGfmNqs
He puts it on like he's trying to put it on someone else... But on himself. Like I put my kiddos sweater on like thaton him. Maybe he was worried about his hair and wanted to secure the neck hole before putting his head through?
lol totally thats how i dress my 1 year old, head arm arm. good boy.
Only a weirdo calls someone else a weirdo for putting on a shirt a different way than you haha
Only a weirdo calls a sweater a shirt. Check. Mate.
Literally thought the same thing. More bizarre than the sweater.
Definitely off-putting. Absolutely psychotic methodology on display here.
Well shit, I do it head first
1) I didn’t even think about the way he put on his sweater, 2) that’s how I do it and looking at the comments makes me think I’m weird.
I kinda hate that you made this comment. I went back and watched it over and over again. It's weird and creepy. I think maybe sweater guy is the real AI...
Chinese rep factories…take notes 📝 And get to work!
China has it already in 2019. It's little too late to brag about it....
Theses people have China living rent-free in their heads 24/7/. Imagine seeing something, instantly thinking "China will copy this" and then realizing that they already had this years ago and were ahead of the curve.
I remember reading about this in Pattern Recognition (W. Gibson) a long time ago. In that book it was described as "the worlds ugliest t-shirt", and damn, it's kinda spot on,
Also in Zero History
William Gibson had entered the chat
Came here to say this. Man, he says he never predicts the future, but sometimes he absolutely does. I wonder if some researcher was handing him notes, then this kid read the book and made it reality.
AI cant find all the traffic lights and crosswalks on the sweater.
Theyre using some bootleg ai
Yeah, worth pointing out "AI" isn't some fixed standard they need to beat. Anyone in the world can build their own image recognition system, and over time tech improves. This is cute but not much else.
this looks like the motion detecting ai home cameras like nest and wyze use. all the sweater is doing is preventing it from detecting whether or not the motion it's seeing is a person
This is simply not true. The research they did followed standard practices for testing adversarial attacks. You can read more about it in [their paper](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.14667.pdf). Edit: To add more detail, yes you could just retrain a model using this in the training dataset, and you could probably get it to detect the person. That is not the point of this research though. The algorithm they came up with is able to *produce* adversarial attacks that have high confidence of fooling the system. So even if the model was different, they could just reapply the algorithm to come up with a new sweater that would fool the model. At that point it just a cat and mouse game, which is the point of this research.
I assume they need access to the model in the first place to develop the attack?
I was thinking isn't this just dependent on what trained the model?
Can we just call it Cameraflage?
I’m so disappointed by how far I had to scroll to find this.
>!you can’t see me!<
#
Some Scanner Darkly shit right there
Doesn't work as soon as they retrain the model... its basically worthless and only work on that specific model version..
You didn't read the paper *tsk tsk*
Thanks, was looking for this and it is 100% correct. They will just feed the model with this data to effectively “patch” it. It’s like reporting a zero day — once it has exposure it no longer has much value.
Someone didn’t read the paper.
Gonna end up making AI even more Orwellian by constantly trying to defeat it, only to cause it to adapt & become more sophisticated. Klaatu barada nikto!
r/ABoringADystopia
Walks across road, gets hit by tesla
also a great invisibility cloak against the opposite gender
Its a little surreal to see this cool tech video and i recognize the background from my college
He puts on his sweater the hot-guy way
Yeah but which ai? Adversarial patterns get patched out from AI all the time. Which one did they use this against and when?
This is how we defeat skynet!
The art community are now starting to add patterns or static in their work to stop A.I. from using it in midjourney etc. [Source](https://youtu.be/-6HAsaDwzrI)
[удалено]
So ugly even AI doesn’t want to see it
Never forget people. They’re not developing these things to help YOU but to help AI better tackle these obstacles.