Could a physical adversarial pattern prevent AI from replicating real people in videos?

[u/External_Mastodon876]

With tools like Kling Motion Control, it's becoming increasingly easy to take a video of a real person and transfer their movements to an entirely AI-generated character (e.g. Jean Philanthrope, etc.), I've been thinking about whether it's possible to protect people from having their appearance, movements, or actions replicated by AI. And I'm wondering if there's a way to disrupt this process using physical adversarial patterns.

I have seen research on adversarial clothing and patterns that can confuse computer vision systems or interfere with person detection. For example: https://adversarialapparel.com/

But could a similar approach work against AI video replication? For example, imagine a smartphone case with a specially designed pattern that appears in videos and interferes with an AI's ability to accurately analyze or replicate the person.

A few questions:

• Could a physical adversarial pattern interfere with pose estimation or motion extraction?
• Could a relatively small object, like a smartphone case, have any meaningful effect?
• Would something like this work across different AI video models?
• Is there any existing research exploring ways to protect real people from AI video replication?

I understand that disrupting traditional computer vision doesn't necessarily mean disrupting generative video models. I'm curious whether this is technically plausible or fundamentally unrealistic.

Would love to hear your thoughts! Thanks!

[u/Aggressive-Brief4179]

to a specific model, and generative video has way more flexibility to just... ignore the noise and hallucinate something plausible. once the model is generating frames from latent space, it's not parsing every pixel the way a detector does

a phone case sized pattern would barely register unless it's covering the face or dominating the frame. you'd need something way more obtrusive, like a full body suit with a shifting pattern, and even then models can inpaint around it

there's research on protecting images from style transfer and deepfakes with adversarial noise but video motion transfer adds temporal consistency into the mix, which makes it harder to fool across the board. each new model would need its own pattern basically

physical world attacks are also fragile as hell. lighting changes, camera angles, compression, all of it degrades the pattern until it's just decoration

[u/DiddlyDinq]

Seems like expensive unproven tat that just trying to take avantage of the anti ai crowd. A tie dye shirt would be effective if that worked. Ignoring all that, every one of those designs are extremely complex and hard to manufacture at a good quality. It's going to be some cheap flakey print that looks nothing like those ai generated mockups. There's a reason most shirts only print on the front or back.