211–220 of 784 posts
Companies should stay off social media … Unless they are social companies. Companies that try to advertise on social media to their consumer base do harm to the social aspect. This is why twitter and Facebook and instagram went from healthy social interactions to just marketing fluffs giving the media companies heavier valuation
Somehow Adobe can say thank you, for free they get honest feedback about the crap they do without having to hire an expensive consulting firm or a survey company. Now they can know why their sells are platoning at least and people would churn as must as possible.
As 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'm pretty left leaning and I don't like Bluesky. For me, it's too hostile and too much of an angry echo chamber. X is scattered wildly but I with muting I have been able to shape to get a more reasonable feed.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Procreate is also owned by Apple, who is definitely not taking that position. Not saying both can't be true, but if a strong anti-AI stance is what you seek--I would be worried.
Procreate is not owned by Apple, you're probably thinking of Pixelmator.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, but "distaste" isn't grounds for trying to ban something. There are all kinds of things people and companies do which I dislike but for which there's no just basis for regulating. If Adobe properly licenses all their training data artists don't have a right to say "well i think this is bad for creativity and puts my job at risk, ban it!!!" Or more precisely, they have a right to say that, but no moral justific…
> Right, but "distaste" isn't grounds for trying to ban something. It isn't, but it doesn't stop people from trying and hoping for a miracle. That's pretty much all there is to the arguments of image models, as well as LLMs , being trained in violation of copyright - it's distaste and greed[0], with a slice of basic legalese on top to confuse people into believing the law says what it doesn't (at least yet) on top. >…
Lots of people have had their lives disrupted by technological and economic changes before - entire careers which existed a century ago are now gone. Given society provided little or no compensation for prior such cases of disruption, what’s the argument for doing differently here?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Right, but "distaste" isn't grounds for trying to ban something. There are all kinds of things people and companies do which I dislike but for which there's no just basis for regulating. If Adobe properly licenses all their training data artists don't have a right to say "well i think this is bad for creativity and puts my job at risk, ban it!!!" Or more precisely, they have a right to say that, but no moral justific…
So there’s no reason why “distaste” about AI abuse of human artists’ work shouldn’t be a valid reason to regulate or ban it. If society values the creation of new art and inventions, then it will create artificial barriers to encourage their creation.
As 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.
Adobe 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…
They have burned so much of goodwill that the community is not willing to engage even with positive things now.
This broadly is happening to tech as well.
Adobe 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 is the one major company trying to be ethical with its AI training data and no one seems to even care. It's sad that it's funny that you think Adobe is motivated by ethical consideration.