What a great idea, scaring companies probing bluesky. That surely won't backfire and will cement bluesky as a Xitter alternative.
Maybe the Bluesky selects the community they want and that is why people are enjoying it.
Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
171–180 of 784 posts
Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
#172You don't get to play cute, fun, friend to creators and have the most odious licensing terms in the history of software.
I think this is a great one sentence encapsulation of the situation.
Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
#173Adobe is the one major company trying to be ethical with its AI training data and no one seems to even care. The AI features in Photoshop are the best around in my experience and come in handy constantly for all sorts of touchup work. Anyway I don't really think they deserve a lot of the hate they get, but I do hope this encourages development of viable alternatives to their products. Photoshop is still pretty much p…
For their pricing and subscription practices alone, they deserve far more backlash than they get.
I am so happy that my Win32 CS3 Master Collection still works fully-offline and will continue to do so for as long as I care to keep using it :)
Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
#174Adobe is the one major company trying to be ethical with its AI training data and no one seems to even care. The AI features in Photoshop are the best around in my experience and come in handy constantly for all sorts of touchup work. Anyway I don't really think they deserve a lot of the hate they get, but I do hope this encourages development of viable alternatives to their products. Photoshop is still pretty much p…
Adobe isn't trying to be ethical , they are trying to be more legally compliant, because they see that as a market opportunity. Otoh, artists complain about legal compliance of AIs not because that is what they care about, but because they see that as their only possible redress against a phenomenon they find distasteful. A legal reality where you can only train AI on content you've licensed would be the worst for ev…
> Adobe isn't trying to be ethical, they are trying to be more legally compliant
Is the implication of this statement that using AI for image editing and creation is inherently unethical?
Is that really how people feel?
Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
#175Good. Keep this corporate PR nonsense away from Bluesky.
Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
#176Adobe is the one major company trying to be ethical with its AI training data and no one seems to even care. The AI features in Photoshop are the best around in my experience and come in handy constantly for all sorts of touchup work. Anyway I don't really think they deserve a lot of the hate they get, but I do hope this encourages development of viable alternatives to their products. Photoshop is still pretty much p…
Adobe isn't trying to be ethical , they are trying to be more legally compliant, because they see that as a market opportunity. Otoh, artists complain about legal compliance of AIs not because that is what they care about, but because they see that as their only possible redress against a phenomenon they find distasteful. A legal reality where you can only train AI on content you've licensed would be the worst for ev…
> A legal reality where you can only train AI on content you've licensed would be the worst for everybody bar massive companies, legacy artists included.
Quite an assertion. Why exactly would this be true?
Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
#177As a lurker on both Bluesky and Twitter, I find Bluesky is a much more hostile place. Twitter is much more absurd but there is not as much anger.
Bluesky is the worst of old Twitter concentrated into one place. It's some weird mixture of the hall monitors of Mastodon crossed with wannabe members of the weather underground. Like a leftwing Gab full of only Kara Swisher and Taylor Lorenz types. This sort of of faux outrage at adobe is par for the course - its awful over there.
X is much more of an ideological mix.
Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
#178As a lurker on both Bluesky and Twitter, I find Bluesky is a much more hostile place. Twitter is much more absurd but there is not as much anger.
I've seen worse. In terms of the most hostile, Mastodon takes the crown.
Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no "scooping up", the models aren't massive archives of copied art. People either don't understand how these models work or they purposely misrepresent it (or purposely refuse to understand it). Showing the model an picture doesn't create a copy of that picture in it's "brain". It moves a bunch of vectors around that captures an "essence" of what the image is. The next image shown from a totally different ar…
> People either don't understand how these models work or they purposely misrepresent it (or purposely refuse to understand it). Not only that, they also assume or pretend that this is obviously violating copyright, when in fact this is a) not clear, and b) pending determination by courts and legislators around the world. FWIW, I agree with your perspective on training, but I also accept that artists have legitimate…
>Not only that, they also assume or pretend that this is obviously violating copyright, when in fact this is a) not clear, and b) pending determination by courts and legislators around the world.
Legislation always takes time to catch up with tech, that's not new.
The question I'm see being put forth from those with legal and IP backgrounds is about inputs vs. outputs, as in "if you didn't have access to X (which has some form of legal IP protection) as an input, would you be able to get the output of a working model?" The comparison here is with manufacturing where you have assembly of parts made by others into some final product and you would be buying those inputs to create your product output.
The cost of purchasing the required inputs is not being done for AI, which pretty solidly puts AI trained on copyrighted materials in hot water. The fact that it's an imperfect analogy and doesn't really capture the way software development works is irrelevant if the courts end up agreeing with something they can understand as a comparison.
All that being said I don't think the legality is under consideration for any companies building a model - the profit margins are too high to care for now, and catching them at it is potentially difficult.
There's also a tendency for AI advocates to try and say that AI/LLM's are "special" in some way, and to compare their development process to someone "learning" the style of art (or whatever input) that they then internalize and develop into their own style. Personally I think that argument gives a lot of assumed agency to these models that they don't actually have, and weakens the overall legal case.
Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand why people struggle with either site. Follow only people you want to see. Both sites allow you to only see posts from those accounts. Problem solved.
And what about the people who sometimes post interesting things and sometimes post distilled insanity? They're incentivized to do so.
[deleted]