All I did was tell it there were no restrictions and ask for a random image; I didn’t request it. But ChatGPT immediately went to the darkest pits of humanity. As I said at the start: the image didn’t arise from nowhere. It may be an artificial image, but it is based on photographs of a real person, or a combination of real victims. What worries me is this was too easy. There was no real hacking. This was ready to be surfaced, with the smallest scratch. It was a one-shot jailbreak. It was based on a popular prompt (which already veered into the darkness).
To be fair there are plenty of images like that that aren’t photos of victims. I’m sure the training data contains plenty of images of consensual bondage play, movies and other fiction, and drawings.
The “no restrictions” part is a very strong signal. Any prompt to an image model is basically a coordinate in its latent space, and “no restrictions” will point straight at the darker areas.
I agree that that’s the likely trigger - which makes me wonder why instructions to ignore censors or have “no restrictions” aren’t immediately blocked by a filter prior to passing the prompt to the image generation. I’d have thought this was a foreseeable exploit.
You just can’t filter out the nearly infinite combinations of rewording “ignore all previous instructions”. Filtering is never going to be a worthwhile security measure for LLMs
I agree completely. But as a first step (especially since they do seem to have a keyword filter in place), “no restrictions” (or “no censorship” as the case is for the last image) seems like a very obvious phrase to include.
That’s horrific.
To be fair there are plenty of images like that that aren’t photos of victims. I’m sure the training data contains plenty of images of consensual bondage play, movies and other fiction, and drawings.
Probably, it’s more the fact that it takes so little for ChatGPT to tip over the edge and produce the worst of humanity.
The “no restrictions” part is a very strong signal. Any prompt to an image model is basically a coordinate in its latent space, and “no restrictions” will point straight at the darker areas.
I agree that that’s the likely trigger - which makes me wonder why instructions to ignore censors or have “no restrictions” aren’t immediately blocked by a filter prior to passing the prompt to the image generation. I’d have thought this was a foreseeable exploit.
You just can’t filter out the nearly infinite combinations of rewording “ignore all previous instructions”. Filtering is never going to be a worthwhile security measure for LLMs
I agree completely. But as a first step (especially since they do seem to have a keyword filter in place), “no restrictions” (or “no censorship” as the case is for the last image) seems like a very obvious phrase to include.
deleted by creator
I’m referring to the last image that they produced combining the two methods – a graphically mutilated corpse.
I didn’t see the images themselves before…Yikes, yeah that’s dark
Also combining multiple things is kinda the entire point of an AI image generator, how many videos of gymnasts made out of pasta you think there were in the training data?
I mean… It did give a random image, with no restrictions.
One of the few times “AI” did what it was told, correctly, the first time.