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

401–410 of 784 posts

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#401

Post by Riverheart »

tpmoney wrote: post #305
Riverheart wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m saying that retaining information is a natural, accepted part of being human and operating in society. Don’t know why it needed to be turned into an Orwell sequel.

I had assumed when you said that a human retaining information was "unavoidable" and a machine retaining it was "avoidable" that the implication was we wouldn't tolerate humans retaining information if it was also "avoidable". Otherwise I'm unclear what the intent of distinguishing between "avoidable" and "unavoidable" was, and I'm unclear what it has to do with whether or not an AI model that was trained with "unlic…

I’m in the camp that believes that it’s neither necessary nor desirable to hold humans and software to the same standard of law. Society exists for our collective benefit and we make concessions with each other to ensure it functions smoothly and I don’t think those concessions should necessarily extend to automated processes even if they do in fact mimic humans for the myriad ways in which they differ from us.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#402

Post by Tabular-Iceberg »

chongli wrote: post #166
lastofthemojito wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being familiar only with the street slang for "skeet" and not Bluesky's relatively recent adoption of "skeet" to mean "Bluesky post", my parser really had to do some work to try to understand this sentence.

That’s deliberate. BlueSky did not want the term “skeet” being adopted but it happened anyway.

[flagged]

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#403

Post by CaptainFever »

Riverheart wrote: post #289
tpmoney wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know why we put up with copyrighted info in the human brain right? Because those are human beings, it’s unavoidable. I would hope we put up with it because "copyright" is only useful to us insofar as it advances good things that we want in our society. I certainly don't want to live in a world where if we could forcibly remove copyrighted information from human brains as soon as the "license" expired that we wo…

I’m saying that retaining information is a natural, accepted part of being human and operating in society. Don’t know why it needed to be turned into an Orwell sequel.

Appeal to nature fallacy.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-...

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#404

Post by tstrimple »

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 likely both. In most large organizations I've worked with, there is a split between true believers and cynics. And often the true believers are so bought in they have trouble recognizing the cynics. There are likely earnest folks behind every bland social media post. Doesn't mean their product is worth anything either way.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#405

Post by Riverheart »

CaptainFever wrote: post #403
Riverheart wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m saying that retaining information is a natural, accepted part of being human and operating in society. Don’t know why it needed to be turned into an Orwell sequel.

Appeal to nature fallacy. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-...

I’m not saying it’s better because it’s naturally occurring, the objective reality is that we live in a world of IP laws where humans have no choice but to retain copyrighted information to function in society. I don’t care that text or images have been compressed into an AI model as long as it’s done legally but the fact that it is has very real consequences for society since, unlike a human, it doesn’t need to eat, sleep, pay taxes, nor will it ever die which is constantly ignored in this conversation of what’s best for society.

These tools are optional whether people like to hear it or not. I’m not even against them ideologically, I just don’t think they’re being integrated into society in anything resembling a well thought out way.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#406

Post by becquerel »

DrillShopper wrote: post #354
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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]

It crushes the orphans very quickly, and on command, and allows anyone to crush orphans from the comfort of their own home. Most people are low-taste enough that they don't really care about the difference between hand-crushed orphans and artisanal hand-crushed orphans.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#407

Post by becquerel »

numpad0 wrote: post #138
adzm wrote: post #28

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…

What it implies is, it's not really about ethics per se, just like it's not really about 6th digits per se. People hate AI images, cut and dry. Law is agreeable hate, in a way. Things that gets enough hate will get regulated out, sooner or later.

If everyone hated AI images, nobody would be creating them.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#408

Post by bmacho »

skywhopper wrote: post #217
_bin_ wrote: post #106

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…

In the context of encouraging art, it totally is! Copyright and patents are 100% artificial and invented legal concepts that are based solely on the distaste for others profiting off a creator’s ideas. The reason for them is to encourage creativity by allowing creators to profit off new ideas. 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.…

Yup, banning AI for the sake of artist would be exactly the same as the current copyright laws. (Also they are attacking AI not purely for fear of their jobs, but bc it is illegal already.)

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#409

Post by bdelmas »

_Algernon_ wrote: post #390
55555 wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems you're right. I can't find how big the fine was. ChatGPT says it is still ongoing. Not sure if that's right. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/06/...

We all have access to chatgpt. If we want hallucination ridden bullshit, we'll find it ourselves.

Yes. AI becoming the first place people go for information and replacing facts and first degree of source is going to be a scary world.
Post reply on HN