641–650 of 784 posts
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.
So after the honeymoon with Bluesky ends, what will be the next friendlier social media platform? And after that one? Will this just keep repeating?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not buying "a year's worth." Adobe can't roll a truck up with all your future project rendering hours on it and dump them on your lawn, such that they would have a valid legal argument of "you can't cancel, we already gave you the whole thing." What Adobe are giving you, each month — each second, even — is the DRM licensing functionality built into Photoshop continuing to spit out a "valid" signal. Because tha…
This is useful and informative. But also, no I don't expect companies to keep track of everything that is illegal anywhere in the world, and then not offer it anywhere. Otherwise we'd have no alcohol or chewing gum or pet cats.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would be too lazy to bother with a throwaway in almost all circumstances, but I would 100% attempt a charge back in anger. I'm uncertain how my bank would ultimately respond though.
Throwaways/virtual cards are my default state. If it's worth subscribing, it's worth the seconds it takes to generate and copy. Think about it: you're in control. Not being at the mercy of... whoever is great. You said it yourself: attempt . Why play with your money? The toys/experiences it can afford are way more fun. Chargebacks are more effort, and IIRC, weigh negatively on you as well. Can only do so many. I expe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're extrapolating to cases that are different to a subscription to a digital software service. Companies have slowly but steadily made us shift and put subscriptions in our heads because is the easiest way to make more money and strictly control their software. This is just as pushing ads everywhere is the easiest way to make money on almost every website. The ideal, most fair consumer approach is to charge the us…
>You're extrapolating to cases that are different to a subscription to a digital software service. Companies have slowly but steadily made us shift and put subscriptions in our heads because [...] Sounds like you're less against the concept of "annual, billed monthly" or even the "dark patterns" that Adobe is using, and more against the fact that Photoshop is now behind a $30/month subscription rather than an one-tim…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That must be why AI image prompts never reference an artist name.
The vast majority of AI image prompts don't reference an artist name, and the ones that do are typically using it as a proxy for a given style and would generally get similar results by specifying the name of the style instead of the name of the artist. The ones using the name of the artist/studio (e.g. Ghiblification) also seem more common than they are because they're the ones that garner negative attention. Then t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's rather the opposite - there's way too much going on in their life, specifically stuff that they have no control over, so they vent all that stress wherever they can.
Disagree. I think when people are that busy they don't have time to find and attack a corporation on BlueSky.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One could say much the same thing about photographers, or digital artists. They don't use paint, or sculpt marble, so they're not real artists.
Who talked about "real" here? Photographers do manipulate cameras, and rework afterwise the images to develop. Digital artists do manipulate digital tools. Their output is a large function of their informed input, experience, taste, knowledge, practice and intention, using their own specific tools in their own way. Same with developers: the result is a function of their input (architecture, code, etc.). Garbage in, g…
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I’m saying call them out on the shit they _are_ doing that you don’t want them to do, and don’t drag every mention of them into the same topic ad nauseum.
> ad nauseum I disagree. Abusive relationships need constant call-out and their BlueSky post was exactly that, a reminder. Just because your fed up with hearing it; I am not. It's a a real history to how they acted, got away and demonstrates that they would happily screw you again. They are just another $corp who show no respect to their users, they've done it once, they will do it again. Let it be a count of permane…
> They are just another $corp who show no respect to their users,
Great, so talk about the ways they're actually doing that not just getting mad about something that's no longer an issue.
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…