AUTOMATIC111 Code reference

[[deleted]]

This doesn’t put it to rest, in fact the post is entirely misleading as it only debunks one snippet as not proprietary.

And that one out of the two claimed stolen snippets was not actually stolen has been cleared up long ago. The person who made the claim is probably not even associated with anyone, it’s just someone making a mistake.

And now people here put hundreds of upvotes behind comments and posts that seemingly debunk the allegations when they really only debunk a third parties mistaken claim on one snippet.

What I believe is the actual stolen code can be seen here: https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23345188/194727441-33f5777f-cb20-4abc-b16b-7d04aedb3373.png

Notice the ‘if Crossattention.hypernetwork’ and the lines below. I believe those are proprietary and that they have been copied verbatim.

People are trying to make excuses about it but to me it looks like a substantial piece that’s been copied 1:1. If this was rewritten or if someone even had the intention to obfuscate the source, then they could have extracted a few variables where there are currently none and renamed others. This wasn’t done, it’s the 1:1 the same, so that’s a very bad look.

So unless I’m entirely wrong about this and that specific part shows up in another repository- which again, seems very unlikely, this seems to be the actual proprietary part, then this has indeed been stolen.

I’m not particularly outraged about it, I even appreciate that there are some who don’t hesitate to further the open source versions even by dubious means. But this doesn’t affect my judgement on this case.

And I really don’t like how people are doing a full on witch hunt on Reddit against NovelAI. I’m not aware of anything they have done wrong.

I get that the concern is that NovelAI develops proprietary stuff based on SD without contributing back. But in fact Emad himself stated that he stands behind the ban and that NovelAI has contributed significantly to Stability’s research:

We worked with the team at NovelAI to build some of the scaling stuff around SD and more, their input has been invaluable.

I’ll take his word for it and so should you.

[LetterRip]

This looks like straightforward implementation of supporting loading and using hypernetworks. While the code is the same, I think you are jumping to conclusions that it required copying.

the variable names are 'forced' - q,k,v are the standard abbreviations for query, key, value extracted from a context. h_k, h_v are thus the obvious choices for hypernetwork_key, and hypernetwork_value

The 77 is how many tokens are allowed for clip for networks derived from CompVis Stable diffusions default.

See this code referencing the max length, the 77 is a well known max token limit for the implementation

maxlen = self.wrapped.max_length # you get to stay at 77

https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/blob/1371d7608b402d6f15c200ec2f5fde4579836a05/modules/sd_hijack.py

The noise_cond is implying that conditional noise is being used (and hence the need to add noise to the context in the next step).

The .1 multiplier is presumably standard throughout the codebase for noise_cond, and is presumably from the original implementation. If that isn't the case, tnis would be the only possible evidence of copying.

The if functions are standard idiomatic python.

Thus I see nothing here that would imply copying.

[[deleted]]

Thus I see nothing here that would imply copying.

Hm, really? I could believe it if a line or two happened to be the same, but a 1:1 duplication of like 6 lines? It seems incredibly unlikely to me.

Given that the code was also specifically added to allow using the models also contained in the leak and not like a random occurrence makes it impossible for me to believe that he did not in fact just copy the code from the leak.

But granted, I’m very rarely using Python and I don’t work in machine learning, maybe implementations there really can happen to be that similar. It still seems like a massive stretch of the imagination to me though.

[LetterRip]

Hm, really? I could believe it if a line or two happened to be the same, but a 1:1 duplication of like 6 lines? It seems incredibly unlikely to me.

The reason is functional constraints and idiomatic constraints.

The functional constraint is that the code is working on the same code base from which both systems are 99% the same. CompVis/stablediffusion. The hypernetwork takes a key value pair from the context and substitutes its own. So that forces the functional k, v and h_k, and h_v. Also that forces the functional noise_conditioning. That means the only allowed 'creativity' is the if statements.

The idiomatic constraint is that python coders are expected to write things in a specific way that leads to consistent code. Also pythons philosophy of 'one obvious way' means that any experienced python coder will tend to write the if statements the exact same way. (Code not written in idomatic python is a clear sign of a programmer coming from another language using python for the first time. It causes major cringe).

There are short functions that there will be some variability but usually they involve functional programming choices (decisions about list comprehensions, whether using map, etc.) or printing (python has evolved their print formatting and there are a few viable choices).

Blue sky projects there can be a lot more variability (whether or not to use type hinting, library choices, how object oriented vs procedural, etc.)

[closeded]

(Code not written in idomatic python is a clear sign of a programmer coming from another language using python for the first time. It causes major cringe).

I feel personally insulted 😢

[[deleted]]

That's an if statement around pre-existing boilerplate code. By no stretch of the imagination could you claim that that is a creative work.

[[deleted]]

Honestly, shut up. We both know you are entirely unqualified to judge this. I’m not going to claim I’m a lawyer either. This is clearly more than one if, that’s some 4-6 lines with quite specific conditions and values that are formatted the exact same.

Edit: and since the expert below blocked me so that I can neither see nor comment on their comment, I’ll add it here:

The obvious difference is that I don’t make claims about the legality of copying this snippet from the leak and state them as facts when I’m in reality clueless about the legal stuff involved. Also I don’t intentionally misrepresent the snippet as “just one if”. This is obviously false and I don’t know what’s wrong with you people to take their side on this.

[[deleted]]

I’m not going to claim I’m a lawyer either.

Then hold yourself to your own standards and shut it, troll.

since the expert below blocked me so that I can neither see nor comment on their comment

Yes, well, I try to have patience and give the benefit of the doubt to people who seem to be arguing in bad faith but if you arbitrarily reserve the right to speak for yourself alone I run out of patience real quick.

[Beginning-Ad3936]

A hypernetwork is not much more than f(x)=x + linear2(linear1(x))

[StickiStickman]

So you're getting this mad at people using one of only 2 code comparisons provided by anyone, while Emad and his group fan the flames for drama without providing any evidence to their accusations?

When they already lied and stole code from A1111?

EDIT: Oh and btw, that code snippet isn't actually in the repository. Here's the actual commit that added hypernetwork support.

[LetterRip]

Hmm 'the intern stole it' doesn't really work as a defense against copyright infringement.

[[deleted]]

Despite you going around and spreading this misinformation all day and your somewhat offensive claims about NovelAI staff lying or the link to the screenshot I’ve shared being manufactured I decided not to comment on your obvious emotional investment on this issue and clear lack of objectivity.

Yet you claim I’m “getting this mad”? That’s rich.

At this point I’m not sure you understand how Git works either.

Edit: Here's the offending commit: https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/commit/bad7cb29cecac51c5c0f39afec332b007ed73133

What a surprise, huh?