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

Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 784 posts

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#351

Post by AnthonyMouse »

Sir_Twist wrote: post #302
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Adobe is the one major company trying to be ethical with its AI training data and no one seems to even care. It's because nobody actually wants that. Artists don't like AI image generators because they have to compete with them, not because of how they were trained. How they were trained is just the the most plausible claim they can make against them if they want to sue OpenAI et al over it, or to make a moral argu…

I'd say that is a bit of an ungenerous characterization. Is it possible that it could be both? That while artists maybe do feel under attack in terms of competition, that there is a genuine ethical dilemma at hand? If I were an artist, and I made a painting and published it to a site which was then used to train an LLM, I would feel as though the AI company treated me disingenuously, regardless of competition or not.…

> Is it possible that it could be both? That while artists maybe do feel under attack in terms of competition, that there is a genuine ethical dilemma at hand?

The rights artists have over their work are economic rights. The most important fair use factor is how the use affects the market for the original work. If Disney is lobbying for copyright term extensions and you want to make art showing Mickey Mouse in a cage with the CEO of Disney as the jailer, that's allowed even though you're not allowed to open a movie theater and show Fantasia without paying for it, and even though (even because!) Disney would not approve of you using Mickey to oppose their lobbying position. And once the copyright expires you can do as you like.

So the ethical argument against AI training is that the AI is going to compete with them and make it harder for them to make a living. But substantially the same thing happens if the AI is trained on some other artist's work instead. Whose work it was has minimal impact on the economic consequences for artists in general. And being one of the artists who got a pittance for the training data is little consolation either.

The real ethical question is whether it's okay to put artists out of business by providing AI-generated images at negligible cost. If the answer is no, it doesn't really matter which artists were in the training data. If the answer is yes, it doesn't really matter which artists were in the training data.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#352

Post by [deleted] »

WatchDog wrote: post #294
simonw wrote: post #36

Yeah, they posted this: > Hey, we're Adobe! We're here to connect with the artists, designers, and storytellers who bring ideas to life. What's fueling your creativity right now? > Drop a reply, tag a creator, or share your latest work—we'd love to see what inspires you! That's such a bland, corporate message. It feels totally inauthentic. Do Adobe (a corporation) really "love to see what inspires you" or do they jus…

It’s so bland I don’t understand why it elicited any response at all.

[deleted]

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#353

Post by cosmic_cheese »

dylan604 wrote: post #314
Lammy wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 :)

Does it work on modern hardware running modern OS? Specifically, wondering if this was a Mac version. I could see WinX versions still running, but the Mac arch has changed significantly: 32bit -> 64bit, mactel -> AppleSI

I haven’t tried so I can’t say for sure but my hunch is that you’d have better luck running old CS versions on modern Macs with WINE, which can run 32-bit x86 Windows binaries on ARM just fine (via Rosetta).

Performance is obviously going to take a hit though. Depending on the machines in question one would probably get better results from a current gen x86 box running that same Windows version of CS1/CS2/CS3 running through WINE (or of course Windows 11, but then you’re stuck with Windows 11).

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#354

Post by DrillShopper »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #351
Sir_Twist wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say that is a bit of an ungenerous characterization. Is it possible that it could be both? That while artists maybe do feel under attack in terms of competition, that there is a genuine ethical dilemma at hand? If I were an artist, and I made a painting and published it to a site which was then used to train an LLM, I would feel as though the AI company treated me disingenuously, regardless of competition or not.…

> Is it possible that it could be both? That while artists maybe do feel under attack in terms of competition, that there is a genuine ethical dilemma at hand? The rights artists have over their work are economic rights. The most important fair use factor is how the use affects the market for the original work. If Disney is lobbying for copyright term extensions and you want to make art showing Mickey Mouse in a cage…

[flagged]

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#355

Post by energy123 »

d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #273
gradientsrneat wrote: post #20

I've become so disenchanted with internet vitriol that it's surreal seeing these trolls attack a social media presence that's geniunely deserving. Still, I wouldn't invite any of these people to my house.

> Still, I wouldn't invite any of these people to my house. I think this is one of the most profound statements I've read all year. Perfectly sums up all the quiet backlash by middle America against the trolls that have pulled the party into extremes. It's not that they're bad people, they just get over excited and nobody wants to deal with the headache right now. I see it at work in the lunch room conversations wher…

Negative people should be terminated after a few days of confirmation that they are negative. The dose makes the poison so you have to get them out quickly.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#356

Post by sureIy »

fxtentacle wrote: post #168
nonchalantsui wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For their pricing and subscription practices alone, they deserve far more backlash than they get.

I would describe my business relationship with Adobe as: "hostage" They annually harass me with licensing checks and questionnaires because they really hate you if you run Photoshop inside a VM (my daily driver is Linux), although it is explicitly allowed. Luckily, I don't need the Adobe software that often. But they hold a lot of important old company documents hostage in their proprietary file formats. So I can't c…

> proprietary file formats

Gimp can't handle them?

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#357

Post by stego-tech »

Man, this was fun to see in real time. A site whose earliest adopters were Twitter refugees who hated the crypto/AI/NFT boosters, created actual art, and ultimately left Twitter because of rampant fascism and bigotry, effectively cyberbullied the company and its Head of Social Media so badly the latter left the site entirely.

You have to be pretty bad at your job to misread the room so terribly. Just taking a casual look at Clearsky’s block rankings would show how many lists are specifically blocking and targeting brands, griftos, fascists, and bigots of various stripes, and likely dissuade you from approaching the community without some form of battle plan.

Treating BlueSky like a “new Twitter” is a dangerous mistake to make, something Adobe learned the hard way. To make matters worse, they also poisoned the community well to the point there’s a fresh witch hunt out for brands and companies to add to block lists, thus harming everyone else’s “engagement”.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#358

Post by cosmic_cheese »

nitwit005 wrote: post #150
megaman821 wrote: post #14

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 didn't get much negativity on Twitter, and after moving the Bluesky the same is true. The experience of a person following fantasy football stuff, and another person following politics, will be totally different, regardless of website.

I don’t use either lately because I’ve found that to be better for mental health overall, but to me it seemed that Bluesky was generally better about staying “on track” when it comes to showing relevant things, once trained. Xitter really, really likes to veer off course and so much as stopping scrolling for a second while an undesired post is on screen is enough for it to start showing more of the same type.

Bsky doesn’t have blue check replies which is a major point in its favor too. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a worthwhile blue check reply, it’s like if one purposefully dredged up the worst YouTube video comments they could find and pinned them at the top.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#360

Post by sureIy »

jmclnx wrote: post #7

Charging a subscription fee is crazy for a product that is very expensive. I do not know why they are still around.

I hate it too (and never had to use it) but $20/month is peanuts for people who use it professionally, unless they're from third world countries (which likely pirate it anyway)
Post reply on HN