Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

adobe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 496 posts

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#211

Post by adam_arthur »

dopeboy wrote: post #11

What this reinforces is that unlike with previous big innovations (cloud, iphone, etc), incumbents will not sit on their laurels with the AI wave. They are aggressively integrating it into their products which (1) provides a relatively cheap step function upgrade and (2) keeps the barrier high for startups to use AI as their wedge. I attribute the speed at which incumbents are integrating AI into their products to a…

Creating AI models has proven to simply be easier than other past innovations. Much lower barrier to entry, the knowledge seems to be spread pervasively within months of breakthroughs.

People seem to take offense at this idea, but the proof is in the pudding. Every week there's a new company with a new model coming out. What good did Google's "AI Talent" do for them when OpenAI leapfrogged them with only a few hundred people?

It's difficult to achieve high margins when barrier to entry is low. These AI companies are going to be moreso deflationary for society rather than high margin cash cows as the SaaS wave was

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#212

Post by emptybits »

airstrike wrote: post #172
open-paren wrote: post #81

Adobe employee, not in Creative Cloud. We got access to this in beta a week ago and it was an instant hit across the whole company. This is just the tip of the iceberg and there is a lot of really cool, in-house products around generative AI. The team is going to great lengths to make this ethical and fair (try and generate a photo of a copyrighted character like Hello Kitty or Darth Vader). I'm excited to see the fi…

> The team is going to great lengths to make this ethical and fair (try and generate a photo of a copyrighted character like Hello Kitty or Darth Vader) are you saying it won't work? if that's the case, that seems really silly. actually, it goes against everything I believe in (as well as my understanding of even the kindest meaning of the word "hacker"). it drives me up the wall, it makes my blood boil who is going…

> "it's not the tool's job to regulate my creativity. the law exists to regulate the use of my art, not the act of creating the art. I can draw hello kitty all I want and leave it in my drawer, if it floats my boat"

This is very well said. Thank you!

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#213

Post by s1k3s »

Wow, what a waste of time for Adobe to implement something like this. Who’s even going to use this since all the artists said AI is bad and everyone who uses it should be put in prison?

Sorry, couldn’t resist.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#214

Post by O__________O »

superbatfish wrote: post #109
O__________O wrote: post #22

Anyone able to comment on where in their opinion the measure is for current state of copyright law when generative AI is a subset of an image?

There are at least two potential issues pertaining to copyright law here, and it's not clear which one you're asking about. That's why the responses you're getting here seem to be answering different questions. 1. Are the AI systems violating the copyright protections of the images they were trained on? If so, are users of such AI systems also in violation of those copyrights when they create works derived from those…

As I am sure you’re aware, already posted response US Copyright’s ruling related to authorship here, so will not be repeating myself:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35247377

Will say that post you linked to also states, “17 U.S.C. 101 (definition of “compilation”). In the case of a compilation including AI-generated material, the computer-generated material will not be protected outside of the compilation.” — the problem is that unlike say for example a compilation of recipes, where the individual recipes are not protected, but the compilation is, there is no clear delineation within a singular work of art such delineation. As such, injecting such delineations is counterproductive and shows no understanding of the nature and spirit of the rule of law. Further, while their opinion appears to be a prompt is somehow a recipe and not a novel expression that merits copyright, clearly photographs of the output of a recipes are commonly photographed and given copyright protection.

Sure others have made far more compelling arguments against the ruling, but to me, the ruling lacks merit as is.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#216

Post by HeavyFeather »

airstrike wrote: post #172
open-paren wrote: post #81

Adobe employee, not in Creative Cloud. We got access to this in beta a week ago and it was an instant hit across the whole company. This is just the tip of the iceberg and there is a lot of really cool, in-house products around generative AI. The team is going to great lengths to make this ethical and fair (try and generate a photo of a copyrighted character like Hello Kitty or Darth Vader). I'm excited to see the fi…

> The team is going to great lengths to make this ethical and fair (try and generate a photo of a copyrighted character like Hello Kitty or Darth Vader) are you saying it won't work? if that's the case, that seems really silly. actually, it goes against everything I believe in (as well as my understanding of even the kindest meaning of the word "hacker"). it drives me up the wall, it makes my blood boil who is going…

I hate limitations as much as the next person, but these tools are viewed as generators by company xyz. You don’t want Disney to sue Adobe because the tool can circumvent IP and abuse it.

“Draw a Disney logo but for adults”

That image now lives on Adobe.com

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#217

Post by dragonwriter »

HeavyFeather wrote: post #216
airstrike wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The team is going to great lengths to make this ethical and fair (try and generate a photo of a copyrighted character like Hello Kitty or Darth Vader) are you saying it won't work? if that's the case, that seems really silly. actually, it goes against everything I believe in (as well as my understanding of even the kindest meaning of the word "hacker"). it drives me up the wall, it makes my blood boil who is going…

I hate limitations as much as the next person, but these tools are viewed as generators by company xyz. You don’t want Disney to sue Adobe because the tool can circumvent IP and abuse it. “Draw a Disney logo but for adults” That image now lives on Adobe.com

> You don’t want Disney to sue Adobe

No, you don’t want Disney to sue Adobe.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#218

Post by ftufek »

adam_arthur wrote: post #211
dopeboy wrote: post #11

What this reinforces is that unlike with previous big innovations (cloud, iphone, etc), incumbents will not sit on their laurels with the AI wave. They are aggressively integrating it into their products which (1) provides a relatively cheap step function upgrade and (2) keeps the barrier high for startups to use AI as their wedge. I attribute the speed at which incumbents are integrating AI into their products to a…

Creating AI models has proven to simply be easier than other past innovations. Much lower barrier to entry, the knowledge seems to be spread pervasively within months of breakthroughs. People seem to take offense at this idea, but the proof is in the pudding. Every week there's a new company with a new model coming out. What good did Google's "AI Talent" do for them when OpenAI leapfrogged them with only a few hundre…

It's easier for large rich companies with infrastructure and datasets. It's very hard for small startups to build useful real world models from scratch, so you see most people building on top of SD and APIs, but that limits what you can build, for example it's very hard to build realistic photo editing on top of stable diffusion.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#219

Post by unreal37 »

egypturnash wrote: post #149
mesh wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That is, these companies are largely not doing the hard part, which is creating and training these models in the first place. fyi, for Adobe Firefly, we are training or models. From the FAQ: "What was the training data for Firefly? Firefly was trained on Adobe Stock images, openly licensed content and public domain content, where copyright has expired." https://firefly.adobe.com/faq (I work for Adobe)

I am definitely glad to see attention being paid to ethical sourcing of training images but I am curious: did the people who made all those stock images get paid for their work being used for training? Did they check a box that explicitly said "Adobe can train an AI on my work"? Or is there a little clause lurking in the Adobe Stock agreement that says this can be done without even a single purchase happening?

Nobody owes creators who have been paid fully for their work "extra" compensation just because AI is involved. Assuming they have been paid, the work belongs to Adobe.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#220

Post by nathanasmith »

neoromantique wrote: post #182
turnsout wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, that would be at least 50% of the joke! haha

AI Waitlist Management Solutions (AWMS) is a startup that aims to streamline and manage the ever-increasing demand for AI services by providing a one-stop platform for tracking and managing AI waitlists. Leveraging the advanced capabilities of GPT-4, our service will analyze the market, monitor AI waitlist positions, and provide customers with real-time updates on their status. Additionally, AWMS will offer recommend…

And they say AI can't be funny.
Post reply on HN