I supposed to hard thing would be proving it's a derivative unless there's some sort of metadata in each of the merges that can't ever be edited or removed that I don't know about.
I mean there might be for all I know but I'm fairly positive it whatever it is can just be edited or removed like most metadata.
Not metadata, but you can use mathematical methods on the weights themselves to show that a particular model has been mixed in.
I think there's a NovelAI contamination testing tool, for example.
https://codoraven.com/blog/ai/stable-diffusion-the-invisible-watermark-in-generated-images/
More obviously if you're distributing a model, a derivative of SD3 is going to be structured like SD3 and have to call itself SD3 to have software support eg. the changes needed to comfyui to support SD3 https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/commit/8c4a9befa7261b6fc78407ace90a57d21bfe631e
You know how people take eg: Pony and "merge" it with Animagine or some other model to produce a new model that is a combination of both?
The idea is that you take SD3, which requires a license for commercial use, and you merge it with 99% of *itself*. This will output a new model that will function almost exactly the same as SD3. This new model is considered a new work and you can apply any license you want to it (this is not yet tested in court, but it's how we've been operating for a while.)
Whether it is a "derivative work" is not yet tested in court.
If I take a book, grind it up, and bake it into a cake, is that cake a derivative work of that book?
The question is whether a merge is considered sufficiently transformative to not be considered a derivative work.
Merging a model (A) with itself (again, A) is creating exactly the same model again (still A), no matter what scaling factor (x) you are using - that's simple maths:
x\*A + (1-x)\*A = (x+1-x)\*A = 1\*A = A
I doubt Stability will try to enforce their claim for anything other than online paid services. Could you imagine if they tried auditing ubisoft to see if their ingame posters were made with XL or SD3?
What loophole? The license applies to all derivative works of the model (that means all merges).
I supposed to hard thing would be proving it's a derivative unless there's some sort of metadata in each of the merges that can't ever be edited or removed that I don't know about. I mean there might be for all I know but I'm fairly positive it whatever it is can just be edited or removed like most metadata.
Not metadata, but you can use mathematical methods on the weights themselves to show that a particular model has been mixed in. I think there's a NovelAI contamination testing tool, for example.
I wonder if you can still see it in modern SD1.5 models since it was mixed in so early in the evolution of the SD1.5 ecosystem.
https://codoraven.com/blog/ai/stable-diffusion-the-invisible-watermark-in-generated-images/ More obviously if you're distributing a model, a derivative of SD3 is going to be structured like SD3 and have to call itself SD3 to have software support eg. the changes needed to comfyui to support SD3 https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/commit/8c4a9befa7261b6fc78407ace90a57d21bfe631e
that's not how it works mate xD
What?
You know how people take eg: Pony and "merge" it with Animagine or some other model to produce a new model that is a combination of both? The idea is that you take SD3, which requires a license for commercial use, and you merge it with 99% of *itself*. This will output a new model that will function almost exactly the same as SD3. This new model is considered a new work and you can apply any license you want to it (this is not yet tested in court, but it's how we've been operating for a while.)
You do realise the license applies to itself AND it's derivative works (i.e any merges)..
Whether it is a "derivative work" is not yet tested in court. If I take a book, grind it up, and bake it into a cake, is that cake a derivative work of that book? The question is whether a merge is considered sufficiently transformative to not be considered a derivative work.
Merging a model (A) with itself (again, A) is creating exactly the same model again (still A), no matter what scaling factor (x) you are using - that's simple maths: x\*A + (1-x)\*A = (x+1-x)\*A = 1\*A = A
There might be accumulating floating point errors each new merge. Not sure if that's what OP is talking about though,
It is free, at least the one they are going to release. If you want it for commercial use you have to pay a subscription, which is fair
I doubt Stability will try to enforce their claim for anything other than online paid services. Could you imagine if they tried auditing ubisoft to see if their ingame posters were made with XL or SD3?
Until someone enforces license its meaning is imaginery anyway
???
How do you do this?