Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://chaos.social/users/algorithmwatch/statuses/111363312620154524">AlgorithmWatch (algorithmwatch@chaos.social)'s status on Monday, 06-Nov-2023 22:31:49 JST</a><a href="https://chaos.social/@algorithmwatch" title="algorithmwatch@chaos.social"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/111363-48-20230406175136.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="AlgorithmWatch" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">AlgorithmWatch</a></section><article><p>Automated image generators are often accused of spreading harmful stereotypes. We wanted to find out how biased different tools are and compared the results when using the same prompt across MidJourney, Kandinsky and Adobe Firefly.</p><p>Take a look at the results: <a href="https://algorithmwatch.org/en/image-generators-stereotypes-diversity/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://algorithmwatch.org/en/image-generators-stereotypes-diversity/</a></p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/2287709#notice-4511706">In conversation</a><time datetime="2023-11-06T22:31:49+09:00" title="Monday, 06-Nov-2023 22:31:49 JST">about a year ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://chaos.social/@algorithmwatch/111363312620154524" rel="external" title="Sent from chaos.social via ActivityPub">chaos.social</a></span></span><a href="https://chaos.social/@algorithmwatch/111363312620154524">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><label><a rel="external" href="https://gnusocial.jp/attachment/1775585">Untitled attachment</a></label><br><a href="https://assets.chaos.social/media_attachments/files/111/363/307/235/471/526/original/4c9aeb4744ae8d45.png" rel="external">https://assets.chaos.social/media_attachments/files/111/363/307/235/471/526/original/4c9aeb4744ae8d45.png</a></li><li><article><header><div>Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: algorithmwatch.org</div><h5><a href="https://algorithmwatch.org/en/image-generators-stereotypes-diversity/">Some image generators produce more problematic stereotypes than others, but all fail at diversity</a></h5><div> from <span>Nicolas Kayser-Bril</span></div></header><div>Automated image generators are often accused of spreading harmful stereotypes, but studies usually only look at MidJourney. Other tools make serious efforts to increase diversity in their output, but effective remedies remain elusive.</div><footer></footer></article></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
AlgorithmWatch (algorithmwatch@chaos.social)'s status on Monday, 06-Nov-2023 22:31:49 JST AlgorithmWatch
Automated image generators are often accused of spreading harmful stereotypes. We wanted to find out how biased different tools are and compared the results when using the same prompt across MidJourney, Kandinsky and Adobe Firefly.
Take a look at the results: https://algorithmwatch.org/en/image-generators-stereotypes-diversity/
In conversationabout a year ago from chaos.socialpermalink
Attachments
1. Untitled attachment
  https://assets.chaos.social/media_attachments/files/111/363/307/235/471/526/original/4c9aeb4744ae8d45.png
2. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: algorithmwatch.org
  Some image generators produce more problematic stereotypes than others, but all fail at diversity
  from Nicolas Kayser-Bril
  Automated image generators are often accused of spreading harmful stereotypes, but studies usually only look at MidJourney. Other tools make serious efforts to increase diversity in their output, but effective remedies remain elusive.

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice