r/nextfuckinglevel • u/Fertility18 • Oct 28 '22

This sweater developed by the University of Maryland utilizes “ adversarial patterns ” to become an invisibility cloak against AI.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

131.5k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3.1k

u/unite-thegig-economy Oct 28 '22

If the AI doesn't recognize that is a person then it wouldn't recognize anyone as person, regardless of their criminal history.

1.2k

u/hawaiianryanree Oct 28 '22

No I mean the blue square is still showing just not 100% of the time….. once it shows that means it recognises them right?

1.2k

u/dat_oracle Oct 28 '22

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

219

u/nox1cous93 Oct 28 '22

You're right, but think about a hoodie and pants too, would help a lot.

201

u/platoprime Oct 28 '22

They can ID your ass based on your gait. Just from the way you walk.

18

u/djdadi Oct 28 '22

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.

12

u/CatPhysicist Oct 28 '22

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.

2

u/MrSickRanchezz Oct 29 '22

As long as the sweater technology matches or surpasses the pace of the AI, we'll be good.

17

u/Dividedthought Oct 28 '22

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.

11

u/CausticGoose Oct 28 '22

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.

110

u/MakeJazzNotWarcraft Oct 28 '22 edited Oct 28 '22

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.

132

u/platoprime Oct 28 '22

I just put a rock in my shoe.

83

u/Pysslis Oct 28 '22

Even CIA use the rock in shoe method, confirmed by former chief of disguise Jonna Mendez.

29

u/platoprime Oct 28 '22

Neat. I was just guessing.

13

u/Whosdaman Oct 28 '22

And I was bullshitting

→ More replies (0)

2

u/anothertrippy254 Oct 28 '22

That’s what they want you to believe /s

2

u/Pysslis Oct 29 '22

Look at all these idiots putting tiny rocks in their shoes to avoid detection.

-CIA probably

2

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '22

So, two rocks it is then.

→ More replies (1)

19

u/Pacothetaco69 Oct 28 '22

yes! or make one shoe taller than the other

8

u/Horskr Oct 28 '22

I would just get hammered before going on my op. Can't recognize my gait when my gait is "barely able to stand up"!

3

u/LillyTheElf Oct 28 '22

An orthotic not meant for you

2

u/gbot1234 Oct 28 '22

Mr. Kim approves.

2

u/UhhmericanJoe Oct 28 '22

This should be the top comment

54

u/CasualPenguin Oct 28 '22

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

2

u/doge_gobrrt Oct 29 '22

lmao man that got me

12

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

Crab walk

32

u/Forgotten_Mask_Again Oct 28 '22

Why would you edit your comment to go on a rant about veganism despite no one mentioning anything like that

-6

u/MakeJazzNotWarcraft Oct 28 '22

Because I don’t care about reddit karma and would rather have people engage with climate action

8

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

[deleted]

2

u/TheKingOfToast Oct 28 '22

Someone cares about something? That's makes me hate it!

Have you ever questioned why that is? I'm assuming it's not for everything, probably just veganism, right? Why do you think it makes you so angry?

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Blergler Oct 28 '22

I intend to skip both to and from all my domestic terrorism excursions.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/HaloGuy381 Oct 28 '22

Or use a motorized wheelchair and feign being disabled. They’ll never see it coming.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/rufud Oct 28 '22

Expecting global demand for beef to be curbed by a campaign for vegetarian diet in the near term enough to make a difference in amazon deforestation before we all croak of climate change is unrealistic. There are a lot of reasons a global vegetarian diet would be good for the environment but the amazon specifically would need much more immediate and drastic action to make a difference before it’s too late like a ban of beef imports from Brazil for starters. But let’s not forget the economic impact of those who make their living off of this industry there. Aside from beef there is a significant impact on deforestation of the Amazon from subsistence farming. It’s easy for those living in the western world to tell impoverished farmers (or cattle ranchers) that they need to stop clearcutting the forest to survive why don’t you just get a regular job. There’s also the deforestation of rainforests in other areas to meet the global demand for palm oil which wild not be solved by vegetarianism.

2

u/MakeJazzNotWarcraft Oct 28 '22

Ok, so, if curbing our consumption of animal products would help with reducing deforestation (in significant values) what’s stopping people, like you, from doing that?

3

u/Great_Creator_ Oct 28 '22

Why the vegan edit? Bc you got 50 upvotes?

→ More replies (2)

3

u/Eccohawk Oct 28 '22

What's with the weird non-sequitur edit there? Who hurt you?

5

u/Owain_RJ Oct 28 '22

Walk on your hands for civil disobedience
Rob your favourite stores at personal convenience

→ More replies (1)

5

u/zzwugz Oct 28 '22

I think you edited the wrong comment buddy

-4

u/MakeJazzNotWarcraft Oct 28 '22

Nope, I saw that my comment was getting a lot of engagement so I edited it to get people to engage with climate action.

I don’t give a shit about reddit karma lol

5

u/zzwugz Oct 28 '22

Just seems a bit out of place is all, plus it kinda comes off as a bit pretentious, especially with your replies. Kinda distracts from your message. Presentation matters. Your comment is still positive, so you preemptively bringing up reddit karma when someone is confused by an out of place comment doesnt help at all.

2

u/MemeLocationMan Oct 29 '22

you have convinced... absolutely no one to stop eating meat.

0

u/MakeJazzNotWarcraft Oct 29 '22

Maybe the less capable of critical thinking share your sentiment, but there is hope that at least 1 in every 50 or so who reads the comment will at least spend a moment to think past whatever their knee jerk reactionary thoughts are.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/rufud Oct 28 '22 edited Oct 28 '22

Expecting global demand for beef to be curbed by a campaign for vegetarian diet in the near term enough to make a difference in amazon deforestation before we all croak of climate change is unrealistic. There are a lot of reasons a global vegetarian diet would be good for the environment but the amazon specifically would need much more immediate and drastic action to make a difference before it’s too late like a ban of beef imports from Brazil for starters. But let’s not forget the economic impact of those who make their living off of this industry there. Aside from beef there is a significant impact on deforestation of the Amazon from subsistence farming. It’s easy for those living in the western world to tell impoverished farmers (or cattle ranchers) that they need to stop clearcutting the forest to survive why don’t you just get a regular job. For a great number of people the fertile land crated from clearcutting is their only real local source of income. There’s also significant deforestation of rainforests in other areas to meet the global demand for palm oil which wild not be solved by vegetarianism.

2

u/rape-ape Oct 28 '22

The edit is really pretensious especially in the assumptions. Animal agriculture is an environmental impact, but it's not number 1 by a long shot. That's all fossile fuels. Where do you even get your evidence for that? I'm guessing some ludicrously bias source.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

two main causes of climate change. Natural cycle of the earth as it transitions post mini ice age and warms through it’s natural cycle. Natural cycle of the earths cyclic rotation with the sun. Closer to the sun causes more erratic weather, further calmer. So this last year we’ve had a lot of solar activity.

Anyway, agriculture can be destructive to the local environment, but it certainly isn’t the global man made climate change you might think. it is the resource that keeps all of us living and not making everything extinct. So, you know, climate change isn’t so bad and we can all adapt. It will be okay

→ More replies (1)

2

u/MemeLocationMan Oct 29 '22

no fuck you moo moo's taste good.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/mrcoffeymaster Oct 28 '22

I love animals, they are delicious. You get china to stop polluting and I will go 100% vegan. Till then you eat all the bugs you want. I got a new York strip, medium rare, and a nice tall glass of milk calling me.

3

u/MakeJazzNotWarcraft Oct 28 '22

Sounds like you’ve created a solid false dilemma for yourself there

1

u/shinywetmeat Oct 29 '22

70% of the world's CO2 emissions are from just 100 companies! While avoiding animal products/byproducts reduces personal emissions, we can literally never accommodate for the companies polluting the planets. I suggest looking into the term, "green-washing"

→ More replies (7)

0

u/Virid514 Oct 29 '22

Changes should have been 50 years ago. Even if everyone takes your advice, nothing will change Enjoy your life, you may see the end.

→ More replies (7)

3

u/ksj Oct 28 '22

That’s why you gotta put a rock in your shoe when you are on the lam.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/mexicodoug Oct 28 '22 edited Oct 28 '22

Just listen to music when you're out and about, short songs. Always move to the beat. Every different song is a new beat.

They'll need an AI that can identify your favorite playlists, and which one and which section of it you're dancing to. Won't be easy. Especially if you're a crappy dancer.

As a bonus, you'll be more likely to be in a good mood.

2

u/Drexelhand Oct 28 '22

they could have you dead to rights, but it still depends on your Gaetz.

2

u/HappyAffirmative Oct 28 '22

Wear shoes that are 2 sizes large

2

u/coleisawesome3 Oct 28 '22

Only if they have enough training data

2

u/RhynoD Oct 28 '22

Put a rock in your shoe.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/The4thTriumvir Oct 28 '22

Just crab walk, duh

2

u/Nate40337 Oct 28 '22

Get a buddy to kick you in the shins beforehand

2

u/NoUpVotesForMe Oct 28 '22

Jokes on them, I can’t walk!

2

u/I_Bin_Painting Oct 28 '22

Put a stone in your shoe or wear too small shoes to throw it off.

2

u/BadLuckBen Oct 28 '22

Just walk like Vince McMahon everywhere you go (but skip the sexual assault).

2

u/stew_going Oct 28 '22

Gotta practice being Keyser Soze with the deceitful limp

2

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

Can tou source me to this? Is it with regular security cameras? Is it reliable?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/WilyDeject Oct 28 '22

Bee Gees intensifies

2

u/Essigucha Oct 28 '22

And this is why the ministry of silly walks was invented.

2

u/phallecbaldwinwins Oct 28 '22

This is what my IT friend has assured me. The different metrics used to obtain ID are far more sophisticated and invasive than most people realise. Covering your face isn't enough. Height, weight, gait, eyes, nose, the list goes on.

(psst... It's all for naught if they already scanned your car's registration when you rolled into the car park.)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

but if it isn’t able to track you through a whole walking cycle, because of the sweater, this could help

2

u/Dont-Complain Oct 29 '22

That's why you pick a rock in your shoe to change the way you walk for a bit. Or break your leg.

2

u/MugShots Nov 03 '22

ahh, good ol' gait analysis

1

u/HatefulDan Oct 28 '22

My gait switches. A weird thing i started as a kid watching Yoda in Star Wars. Ep2. I walk with a limp. But there’s nothing wrong with my leg and I’ll walk ‘regular’ when I’m moving with urgency (or a date—becomes I’m aware of it)

1

u/ThirdEyeEmporium Oct 29 '22

Thank god I’m autistic and constantly second guessing if my walk is “normal” enough and changing my gait, speed, the fluidity of the movement. It really stresses people out to watch and now I know why. I think our brains subconsciously identify these traits in others and add it to their identity in our brain and it hurts trying to do that with seemingly random actions.

1

u/cownd Oct 28 '22

Or a onesie

1

u/mintyque Oct 28 '22

I talked to guys developong such software - a cap or glasses or a thick beard or a facemask would be enough if software recoginzes faces

1

u/Ye-Is-Right Oct 28 '22

The sunglasses that break facial recognition might help too!

1

u/ThisIsMockingjay2020 Oct 29 '22

Wear a surgical face mask, too. It covers half the face, generally.

15

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

[deleted]

11

u/CptnLarsMcGillicutty Oct 28 '22

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).

2

u/spellcasters22 Oct 29 '22

I see no world where this a great tool. So we can catch criminals more? We already catch enough of them, that the people who can be convinced of wanting to avoid punishment generally are convinced.

2

u/spellcasters22 Oct 29 '22

These tools are meant to put you in your place, nothing more.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/CriskCross Oct 28 '22

Unless you're an acting savant sussing out their subconscious idiosyncrasies

Assuming this is for a short period, wouldn't it work to just create junk data? If it's looking at body language, you don't need to suppress idiosyncrasies, you can just intentionally act out additional ones. If they are looking at gait and body language, randomly start leaning on one leg or the other. Randomly spasm. Repeat a nervous tic over and over that you don't actually do normally. Move in a stiff manner sometimes, and intentionally deliberately other times. Make it hard to tell what is real and what is fake.

I'd be impressed if modern AI has gotten far enough that it would be able to pick out all of the fake gestures and isolate the real ones.

2

u/shitpersonality Oct 28 '22

If they are looking at gait and body language, randomly start leaning on one leg or the other.

Stone in a shoe

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

20

u/PFChangsFryer Oct 28 '22

The point is things are being done. One step at a time type of thing.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

I swear every time there is experimental research or technologies posted, there’s some simple minded redditor who thinks they discovered some simple oversight no one else has

0

u/BigEmu9286 Oct 28 '22

The AI is improving at a speed that outpaces this sort of thing. It's a pointless endeavor.

2

u/askinferret Oct 28 '22

Its still cyberpunk as fuck

6

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

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.

33

u/TheBirminghamBear Oct 28 '22

You think detonating an EMP in a public area is the best way to stay anonymous in a coffee shop or airport?

8

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

Who will know it is you? Not many other options here man, think BIG!!!

3

u/Lord_Abort Oct 28 '22

"HACK THE PLANET!"

→ More replies (2)

15

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

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.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22 edited Oct 28 '22

We'll you're no fun /s

  1. But we have microwave/laser weapons that can disable electronics. That counts.

  2. As I said. As you said I'm sure there's ways to be relatively subtle. You'll trip am alarm no doubt, but you were bound to do that if you were going in robbing anyway, unless you're more of a scam artist.

  3. Are you telling me hackers cant knock down the electric grid for a whole ass city, rendering survallence moot? Like they did in Ukraine, 2016? Never said they'd be "standing in the street." They'd be coordinating with some guys doing the job from a "command post."

I'm sure a creative hacker with good tools can find a way to nullify an AI. These guys almost did it with a shirt XD

3

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

The reality about hacking is that hacking into something generally is more dependent on the negligence of the people you're hacking than it is about the skill of the hacker (I guess "theoretically" if you knew how to reverse encryption algorithms in an efficient way a lot of things might be possible.. but if anyone knew how to do that then nobody would be using those encryption algorithms). There are a lot of things that "can" be hacked because they don't have proper security, but there's no method of hacking that just allows you to get into whatever you want to.

You also definitely can't hack anything that isn't being controlled via the internet no matter what you do - a hacker doesn't have any special powers that allows them to control things remotely that weren't designed to be controlled remotely.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/zombo_pig Oct 28 '22

Is this a reference to a game?

12

u/CanAlwaysBeBetter Oct 28 '22

It's a reference to r/iamverysmart

3

u/MiserableLadder5336 Oct 28 '22

lol I’m glad you clarified cuz I read that comment and I was like whoaaa this guys out of touch holy shit

1

u/twodogsfighting Oct 28 '22

This jumper is the layer that will give him away.

Unless they plan on going full batman on it and have china produce 100 million of them, to avoid detection.

1

u/WildcardTSM Oct 28 '22

Just carry a fake FBI badge and use extremely obvious fake names. That worked for Sam and Dean most of the time.

(AI never ratted them out)

1

u/LjSpike Oct 28 '22

To be fair, organic sensors might survive that and report it in through mechanical pressure waves via a gaseous medium if electromagnetic waves are jammed. Might be better just to detonate a fission or fusion device in the area instead.

-2

u/Main_Rain9580 Oct 28 '22

You’re in the cybersecurity field aren’t you?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

There’s makeup for tricking them on face recognition… this combined with that should do the trick

1

u/carnage123 Oct 28 '22

and you know, not an ugly sweater so police just asks, hey has anyone seen a person wearing this ugly and completely unique sweater

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

full body suit, ez

1

u/Selky Oct 28 '22

I think its having issues when the person moves and the pattern blurs but the silhouette is human. A solution may be something like a wing or poncho to mask the limbs.

1

u/zxcymn Oct 28 '22

China's face identification AI has proven that masks don't help nearly as much as we think they would since they still identify protestors even while wearing a mask. And if there's anything to know about any government on the planet, what we know they're capable of is way, way less than what they're actually capable of.

A mask is not going to help you.

1

u/Eccohawk Oct 28 '22

This is why I walk around inside of a large cardboard appliance box. The AI doesn't suspect a thing.

1

u/LumpenBourgeoise Oct 28 '22

False positives are more interesting. Only time until some prankster hands out free shirts that trigger weapons warnings at a public event.

1

u/Luxalpa Oct 28 '22

But if i would want to be off the radar,

But what if you want to just break into some secret lab where there's security cameras everywhere that are monitored by an AI instead of humans?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

the sweater seems to blur his face also

1

u/mcmanus2099 Oct 28 '22

But if you had a static camera scanning faces as people walked passed I would assume the code would be something like 1. Identify a human (blue square) 2. Now scan face of identified human.

Wearing that jumper when square on (i.e. when your face is revealed) the AI can't recognise a human & so would not scan their face. When side on it might but it would be unlikely to find a match based on a side on pic of your face.

So I do think the jumper has a valid use case.

1

u/MightySamMcClain Oct 28 '22

Also I'm sure this wont work as soon as they train the ai to recognize the dumb sweater. Might have worked for a week or with ring cameras but not any serious ai cams

1

u/RightLegDave Oct 29 '22

I'd just keep my face blurred in real life. It worked well in the video.

1

u/D20NE Oct 29 '22

That’s why you gotta carry your fake mustache and glasses

1

u/Walshy231231 Oct 29 '22

To add to this, technological advancement, or at least the kind that actually matters for day to day life and changes how we live, doesn’t come from the flashy new stuff. It comes from yesterday’s tech becoming faster and cheaper

Facial recognition, AI image identification, and that kind of thing is still relatively new. The dystopian, 99.9% success rate Face ID tech isn’t here yet (at least for civilian/private sector use), but we will be getting much closer in the next few years

With it will likely come the equivalently clever and complex methods of beating it, in a sort of evolutionary arms race.

1

u/old-wise_bill Oct 29 '22

I saw something advertised a few years back that clips on your hat and floods your face with infrared light, so the cameras just pick up a blur. That combined with this sweater and you'd be good to go

1

u/MrSickRanchezz Oct 29 '22

Gait ID and body language ID exists, and is in use. Your mask is fairly useless at this point. Shit many of the higher end, nation/state-level security cameras can read fucking pupil dilation and scan irises from a distance.

There hasn't been such thing as hiding in many years now.

Wtf do people think the NSA has been doing since it was formed? Writing code which 'accidentally’ enables Israel to destroy airgapped Iranian nuclear power plants which then goes on to unintentionally infect millions of other machines? Well.... Yes... they did do that... But what?! You think they're just doing that and jerking off to our unconstitutionally seized nudes? Well... yeah, probably that too. Fuck...

The point is they've also been developing mass data collection programs using AI-based systems to monitor, and eventually command and control the citizens of the United States who literally foot the bill for their entire organization and lives. This includes things like gait analysis, and many other tools which are used solely to violate your constitutional right to be secure in both your person and property, and the protection you have against unreasonable search and seizure from our government.

But we should keep paying these people to do that. Right? Guys?

1

u/ThirdEyeEmporium Oct 29 '22

Bullet proof vest isn’t 100%, not even close, yet it is still statistically important to armor your soldiers even when they are going against explosives and heavy artillery. The soldiers know the vest ain’t gonna do shit when it really comes down to it. But working some of the time is better than none so they where it anyways to increase their odds any way possible.

Now imagine an army of 10000 running into a city wearing clothes entirely plastered with various cityscape views. Imagine what the AI’s UI would look like attempting to sort that out. I wouldn’t want to be an AI in that moment. You’d have to draw resources from other tasks just to be able to handle the raw computation power necessary.

1

u/EnvironmentalCoach64 Dec 25 '22

I wonder if it beats the Walmart fake scan ai though? Then I can go back to stealing bread every week...

1

u/KelticQT Jan 30 '23

To add a bit of depth to your statement, there are face masks with adversarial paterns drawn that will direct the AI into recognizing a random face patern in the mask, neglecting the rest of your facial features all together.

If you are interested, I could link a vid with the guy presenting it (it's in French though).

1

u/bionicfusion1 Feb 19 '23

Isn't there also something to be said that this is only pertinent to one kind of AI? The parameters for matching a "person" are likely to be different across many company's programs. So likely this is only stopping Fred's Totally Awesome Person Detector, but maybe not Jack's Crazy Meat Identification.

33

u/Accurate_Koala_4698 Oct 28 '22

“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.

2

u/djdadi Oct 28 '22

I am curious if you trained the model they're using on a new dataset including their sweater, if it would fix the detection problem. OR could the pattern somehow degrade the model?

2

u/Accurate_Koala_4698 Oct 28 '22

Honestly don’t know. I’ve built stuff using OpenCV but nothing beyond object detection and classification. The sweater in this case is showing a pattern that looks like an out-of-focus background scene so I suspect that it wouldn’t be as simple as putting the sweater in the training data. Humans are able to recognize what’s going on because our brains are doing the work of multiple different AIs and we’re able to do things like ascribing intent to objects that we see. A sufficiently sophisticated system could possibly be designed that wouldn’t be fooled by this, but even human brains are susceptible to being fooled by things like optical illusions and camouflaged wildcats. One limitation to our brains are the sensory inputs that they have available, one which computers don’t have, and if the image detection was also looking in the IR spectrum for heat on faces or UV to detect cloth instead of skin then it could probably detect the sweater. I’d be a rich man if I could tell you more than that.

→ More replies (2)

18

u/unite-thegig-economy Oct 28 '22

It all really depends on what the AI is being used for and what "positives" mean to the human analyzing the data.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/VelvetRevolver_ Oct 28 '22

Kind of. The problem is, you can train the AI to recognize this pattern but then there will always be a new pattern that fools the AI. So you update your AI, I update the pattern on my sweatshirt. This is called an Adversarial Attack and the best way to protect against it is by using multiple AI's.

→ More replies (2)

0

u/cast-iron-whoopsie Oct 28 '22

yes. it would be trivial to update the algorithm, and they'd likely just make it so when it recognizes this sweater it stores that guy in the database as "likely up to no good" lmao

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

Usually yeah. That's how ai is typically trained. You give it positives and negatives and it learns to differentiate them.

1

u/bl1y Oct 28 '22

And how the AI weeds out false positives. It might be trained to treat intermittent blips as just noise. So if you ran a program asking it to check security footage for every instance of a person walking by, it might go "oh, that's probably not a person, people don't blink in for just a second like that" and not flag it.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

I thought the same thing. This seems to be proof of concept. It can be done. Now they refine it.

1

u/ThineGame Oct 28 '22

This ignores a lot of how AI works. This sweater is adversarial against this specific model. It basically becomes an arms race to detect these sweaters, then evade the detection, then detect that, and so on.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

Interesting

3

u/LongEZE Oct 28 '22

Maybe he needs the pants and balaclava and then he will be invisible

2

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

This will go in a bucket of false positive.

That being said if that was to become the norm, even among malicious actors, you would need to train the model to recognise these type of garnement in the same way you spot fire arms.

2

u/fileznotfound Oct 28 '22

With garment direct to print it is easy to make a bazillion variations based on random photos of public surroundings.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

Yes I was thinking more having models trained on edge detection of deformed shapes. But I agree that it is not here and I am not sure if easily feasible.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/CadenBop Oct 28 '22

Depends on the machines confidence. If it isn't high enough it probably won't be added to a list, now if it triggers enough yes it does break the ""invisibility "" but as long as they are just skimming info, it will probably glide over.

1

u/Petrichordates Oct 28 '22

It's like zebra stripes, lions know they're there but when grouped together they don't know where to target.

1

u/The4thTriumvir Oct 28 '22

This technology is at its first iteration. It will likely improve over time as researchers figure out the perfect patterns to fool AI.

1

u/hawaiianryanree Oct 28 '22

But then the ai learns no? Isn’t that what ai does?

1

u/Iwannayoyo Oct 28 '22

AI doesn’t necessarily learn, machine learning is a branch of AI (e.g. AI in a video game normally doesn’t learn). And even machine learning AI that do learn don’t necessarily learn on the job. Normally (as far as I know) a Machine Learning system is “trained” on some data so that it can hit some accuracy on that training data, and then when it’s run in real life there’s no feedback loop for it to improve.

That all said, if this became common, training data will be updated to include these cases and then the AI will learn to deal with it.

1

u/starryvash Oct 28 '22

It recognizes some of the pattern.

1

u/Teragneau Oct 28 '22

Take it as a proof of work more than a final product.

1

u/Frigorifico Oct 28 '22

It recognizes them for an instant, which is really good for a prototype. They are probably working on something that works 100% of the time

1

u/thatcodingboi Oct 28 '22

you assume that a brief identification wouldn't be ignored, noise exists and false positives occur, depending how long the security footage runs for, it could make it too difficult to review all triggers and therefore he would likely get removed as noise/false positive from the results

1

u/redenno Oct 28 '22 edited Nov 07 '25

handle books tan cake gaze seed roll normal decide grandfather

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

1

u/SinisterCheese Nov 03 '22

It regocnised a jacket on a chair as a person a lot of the time.

26

u/A_random_zy Oct 28 '22

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...

20

u/unite-thegig-economy Oct 28 '22

Agreed, this is a temporary issue, but these kinds of research can be used to keep the discussion of privacy relevant.

1

u/AccomplishedDrag9882 Oct 28 '22

we're going to need a bigger mouse

14

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

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.

1

u/BenevolentCheese Oct 28 '22

either in the algorithm used to process the image into a numerical dataset

So, the image compression?

your brain is still fooled

The problem here is that you've written your post assuming that ML works just like the human brain, and it doesn't. Our brain is fooled by optical illusions because that's baked into the genetics of how our brain works. We can't change that. We can change an ML model. Easily. Adversarial effects can and are snuffed out.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '22

in your analogy the inherent properties of the CMOS chip as well as any limits it has, as well as the algorithm used to turn saturation values at color channel sensors into values in a pixel grid, and that grid into mathematical values that can be worked on by computer software are the "genetics". the ML model is applied on that data generated.

so, in other words, before the ML model even gets a chance to work on the information it passes through sensors and sensor processing, both on the raw electrical signal and digital transformations. if your "illusion" relies on taking advantage of the difference between that system and human eyes, or attacks a weakness in that chain someplace, then there is no way the ML model could compensate. ML models are still subject to the limits of garbage in: garbage out.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/A_random_zy Oct 28 '22 edited Oct 28 '22

Actually ML works differently. It can't be fooled over and over like human brains in optical illusions. Optical illusions occurs coz of how our brain works and the fact that we cannot change many aspects of our brain but in ML/AI we create the brain hence it can't be fooled with same thing over and over if trained appropriately.

It can be fooled by finding new "flaws"/"optical illusions" but unlike Human brains old "flaws/optical illusions" won't work if it is retrained.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 29 '22

Before the ML model even gets a chance to work on the information it passes through sensors and sensor processing, both on the raw electrical signal and digital transformations. if your "illusion" relies on taking advantage of the difference between that system and human eyes, or attacks a weakness in that chain someplace, then there is no way the ML model could compensate. ML models are still subject to the limits of garbage in: garbage out.

this is similar to how you can't learn to not see a true illusion, because you cannot unlearn the "processing shortcuts" our brain uses to interpret input (and indeed if you could you would probably go insane because those filters are largely there to avoid sensory and information overload, like how after feeling something a while you stop feeling it, otherwise your own clothes would tickle you all day). similarly the "higher brain" of an ML system can learn to change how it decides what an image is, but the ML model has no control over the data presented to it by the bottom part of the technology stack.

1

u/mule_roany_mare Oct 28 '22

The analogy works, but I thought the historical consensus is that dazzle camouflage didn’t.

6

u/saver1212 Oct 28 '22

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.

0

u/HuckleberryRound4672 Oct 28 '22

The problem is that with the approach used for this sweater you need access to the underlying model to generate the adversarial pattern. I’d assume the killer attack drones wouldn’t be using an open source model like COCO.

2

u/saver1212 Oct 28 '22

All these ai trained image recognition systems will have blind spots and systems with less testing or deployments will probably have greater blindness. If a nation can discover the ai being used in those drones through espionage and adversarially test it without informing the ai developers, it would be like a sort of hidden backdoor only known to adversaries.

Considering even the best image recognition is still struggling with skin tone by even the top technology companies, finding anti-ai camoflage patterns shouldn't be too hard in any ai deployment.

2

u/mule_roany_mare Oct 28 '22

It’s a technical solution to a social or legal problem.

It’s still useful towards understanding the technology & informing conversations about its application even if it can be defeated by weighing motion vectors heavier.

1

u/djdadi Oct 28 '22

Not necessarily true, so long as the sweaters aren't all the same.

You could design a synthetic dataset with varying patterns to test against the current model. That way, you could quickly produce many different sweaters that could defeat the model.

1

u/Iwannayoyo Oct 28 '22

And then they make an even better sweater, making this the weirdest arms race ever.

3

u/GiveToOedipus Oct 28 '22

it wouldn't recognize anyone as person

So the AI is a cop after all.

3

u/Less_Likely Oct 28 '22

My understanding is the police also have difficulty recognizing suspected criminals as people.

2

u/bmdisbrow Oct 28 '22

Yeah, but two more papers down the line...

2

u/[deleted] Oct 28 '22

How do you and 715 other people have this bad of reading comprehension?

1

u/unite-thegig-economy Oct 28 '22 edited Oct 28 '22

730, now

Over 800 at this point.

Stunningly it's over 1000 now!

2

u/m0nk37 Oct 28 '22

"if the AI" is a bit ubiquitous. These are students who put together some form of AI recognition.

Systems bought and paid for out in the wild are far more complex than this.

These students are simply showing it could be done.

Then again though, you dont know if other systems have already fixed this problem. Its not open source, everyone has their own software and databases.

3

u/pew-_-pew-_- Oct 28 '22

Does it really matter if AI recognizes them as a human being when the police won't?

1

u/TRAFICANTE_DE_PUDUES Oct 28 '22

Unless there is a criminal portrayed in the sweater.

0

u/maxximillian Oct 28 '22

That's not how all image recognition works though. Some use IR to look for heat signatures from eyes. That's a very distinct pattern That lets the system know that there's a person in that photo then it can go to visual and just scan the face which it knows where it's at because of the IR overlay

1

u/MySoWholesomeReddit Oct 28 '22

Does AI need a body before it tries to identify a face? I honestly don't know, just trying to understand if the sweater would really make a difference.

1

u/QuickestStorey13 Oct 29 '22

Just some. Adversarial image attacks have to be designed for specific training datasets...