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

521–530 of 784 posts

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#521

Post by davidee »

PaulHoule wrote: post #504
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 went through a phase of using the A.I. tools to touch up photos and thought they were helpful. If I needed to add another row of bricks to a wall or remove something they get it done. I haven’t used it in a few months because I’m taking different photos than I was back then.

We used that particular feature quite heavily. A lot of our clients often have poorly cropped photos or something with branding that needed removal and the context-aware generative fill was quite good.

But we decided to drop Adobe after some of their recent shenanigans and moved to a set of tools that didn't have this ability and, frankly, we didn't really miss it that much. Certainly not enough to ever give Adobe another cent.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#522

Post by Crosseye_Jack »

As mush as I enjoy shitting on Adobe, I also want to encourage companies to embrace platforms other than Twitter. Simply because at times it's the best way to get customer service these days.

I think I would have had more respect for Adobe if they had left the posts up.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#523

Post by computerthings »

_bin_ wrote: post #106
f33d5173 wrote: post #85

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…

[dead]

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#524

Post by computerthings »

somedude895 wrote: post #434

> “Go back to the fascist-owned site where they enjoy supporting AI-generated art like your brand does,” wrote Evlyn Moreau. Yeah this is why Bluesky will never be a serious and widely used social platform. It's the same sort of cesspool as the right-wing alternatives that popped up a few years back, just more self-righteous.

[dead]

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#525

Post by TeMPOraL »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #284
skissane wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they have a legitimate argument that this is an unexpected, undeserved, unfair calamity for them, threatening to derail their lives, and lives of their dependents, across the entire sector - and therefore that laws should be changed to shield them, or compensate them for the loss. After all, that's what laws are for. Lots of people have had their lives disrupted by technological and economic changes before - entire…

Given society provided little or no compensation for prior such cases of disruption That's going to be hard for you to justify in the long run, I think. Virtually everybody who ever lost a job to technology ended up better off for it.

> Virtually everybody who ever lost a job to technology ended up better off for it.

That's plain wrong, and quite obviously so. You're demonstrating here a very common misunderstanding of the arguments people affected by (or worried about) automation taking their jobs make. In a very concise form:

- It's true that society and humanity so far always benefited from eliminating jobs through technology, in the long term.

- It's not true that society and humanity benefited in the immediate term, due to the economic and social disruption. And, most importantly:

- It's not true that people who lost jobs to technology were better off for it - those people, those specific individuals, as well as their families and local communities, were all screwed over by progress, having their lives permanently disrupted, and in many cases being thrown into poverty for generations.

(Hint: yes, there may be new jobs to replace old ones, but those jobs are there for the next generation of people, not for those who just lost theirs.)

Understanding that distinction - society vs. individual victims - will help make sense of e.g. why Luddites destroyed the new mechanized looms and weaving frames. It was not about technology, it was about capital owners pulling the rug from under them, and leaving them and their children to starve.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#526

Post by connicpu »

reisse wrote: post #484
r33b33 wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why you always use throwaway cards for this.

Of course it's highly unlikely they'll go in court for a single user, but if everyone starts doing this, they'll sue. It doesn't matter the payment failed, you still legally owe Adobe (or any other service) money.

Reverse class action isn't a thing, there's no way to sue thousands of people all at once, so they'd have to bring their suit against every individual who did it. Costs would be guaranteed to be much higher than any possible recovery.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#527

Post by buttercraft »

maccard wrote: post #520
Madetocomment wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nope. I just think it’s insane to attack a company for something they’re not doing, with the implication they are still doing it.

The implication is they can't be trusted

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#528

Post by karaterobot »

oreally wrote: post #445
torginus wrote: post #442

I just don't get how Adobe didn't get dethroned after being so unpopular for so long. There are so many Photoshop competitors, many of which are quite good, they seem to be ripe for disruption. The last version I used was CS6, which came out more than a decade ago, and even that had more than a good enough feature set. Blender is slowly taking over 3D, why can't 2D be disrupted similarly?

I'm pretty sure it's because just about every applicable art school has enforced their student's output to be done in adobe's products - meaning that Adobe has a firm grip on the educator's market. As the saying goes, hook them in when they're young and they'll be too lazy and vested to move away from their products for a lifetime.

The problem is that Adobe still makes the best tools in a lot of categories.

They also have the whole ecosystem lock-in model that also worked for Apple: their products work together, so if you try to replace Photoshop, you're probably still using Illustrator, and After Effects, etc. except your workflow isn't as smooth anymore, because there's one tool in the chain that works differently than the rest.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#529

Post by karaterobot »

vachina wrote: post #44
bni wrote: post #22

Has anyone actually stopped using Photoshop? What are they migrating to?

Any number of AI apps out there can easily replace 95% of Photoshop’s usecase.

95% of use cases is a stretch, even if you mean "a combination of many different AI apps with their own subscriptions, totaling more than the cost of a subscription to everything Adobe makes, not just Photoshop". Photoshop does a lot of stuff.
Post reply on HN