Live data from Hacker News

Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

petapixel.com

721–730 of 784 posts

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#721
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…

> 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…

> From the perspective of an artist, a corporation training an AI image generator in a way that isn't susceptible to moral or legal assault is worse

That's ignoring the fact that an AI image generator trained without infringing on existing works would have way worse quality, because of the reduced amount and quality of the training set.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#722
post #484
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.

As others mention, a reverse "class action" isn't a thing.

I see it a bit differently:

A solid, high value contract should make sense. And guess what? When they do make sense, most people have no reason not to pay and they will, barring emergencies and the usual risks that play out in all business. Most people, myself included, would side with Adobe. The peeps need to pay up.

However, when the contract is shady, abusive, just dripping with greed? A much higher percentage of people are gonna say, "fuck 'em! Plenty will find reasons too. And there is a higher inherent risk associated with all new accounts, potentially going as far as to raise it, while value dilution happens across the board to software subscriptions as a whole.

Who wants all that noise?

I am not sure whether the piece mentioned this or not (skimmed, Ok? LOL), but there are fairly strong second and third order effects playing out that are likely to persist for a very long time:

Network effects: A pretty healthy slice of Adobe users, or forced users I could say, reach their hating peak every year. When I was skill building for creative work, Adobe hate was modest. Adobe love was higher than average too. So far, so good, right?

Just half a decade later, I revisit this work about the time people could no longer buy the suite on physical media with a perpetual license. Hmmm... haters were right! That is exactly what they said Adobe was going to do. Some time after this change, and while watching how Adobe handles the users of one of their more hated acquisitions; namely, Alias and MAYA who came from industry culture that believes Autodesk could quite possibly be one of the worst to end up owning what many observers called "elite" or "career" type software packages with costs starting in the mid to high 4 figures and ending up a solid 5 figure purchase ... (Alias 10 forever hoo rah!) ... um, yeah, where was I?

Yes, Hating Adobe solid now. Not ever going to be a potential customer.

You are reading third order effects. People like me, and the very aggressive first order people are hard at work figuring out just how much they can do with alternatives and also realizing everything they can do with the OSS alternatives are publishing our work, sharing successes and when we are teachers, consultants, department heads, we de-recommend Adobe on sight, while at the same time being very forgiving as people ramp up on the other options.

That catches the attention of many who would never have a clue if it were not for social media bringing us the very best drama like this.

Takes years and real talent to grow a software business while also so damn consistently earning the hate. Amazing!

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#723

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is precisely where the analogy breaks down. The victim suffers damages in any theft, independent of any value the perpetrator gains. Damages due to copyright infringement don't work this way. Copyright exists to motivate the creation of valuable works; damages for copyright are an invented thing meant to support this.

That would only be a relevant distinction if the discussion were specifically about realized damages. It is not. The discussion is about whether or not ignoring something that is of little consequence to you diminishes a later case you might bring when something substantially similar causes you noticeable problems. The question at hand had nothing to do with damages due to piracy (direct, perceived, hypothetical, leg…

Oh, I agree with all that, I had sort of ignored the middle post in this chain.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#724

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That it gives no-one pause to make disparaging remarks against white males, and violent allusions towards the outgroup are tolerated. That is not the vibe I want to see. I would hope that, starting fresh, there would be more cultural backlash against racial and gendered stereotypes and violence.

Then you block those people, and never see their stupid opinions again.

Funny, this is exactly what people had to do on X. So much for a better, healthier platform huh?

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to cancel a card thanks to PayPal’s shenanigans. Now it’s much easier to deal with the subscription problems due to the new RBI norms.

Which norms?

Any renewal must be preceded by a notification from the vendor and the owner of the card has to enter an OTP to allow the transaction.

Earlier the vendor would just take your money and you’d have to fight a long battle to get it back.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. >…

> I'm not the one being rugpulled out of a career path by GenAI, That's quite a bold assumption. Betting that logic and reasoning ability plateaus prior to "full stack developer" seems like a very risky gamble.

I meant right now. I acknowledge elsewhere that software development is still near the top of the list, but it isn't affecting us just yet in the way it affects artists today.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#727
post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity I went to their website to understand how they sell it, because it wasn't clear... https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/plans.html I am not sure why this should face FTC or any similar mechanism to prevent "deception". It's written right there: US$22.99/mo Annual, billed monthly And if you slightly scroll down the very first question is how much it costs: > There are several Creative Cloud plans…

"Annual, billed monthly" is the deception. That's not a common thing and most users just see it as normal month-to-month billing. Annual billing still having a discount just adds to the confusion.

I think they fixed the deception.

Annual, billed monthly cannot be a deception the way it is phrased. Lots of contracts work like that, even my phone/electricity bill and they have been like that forever.

The issue, if you look in one of the links posted in the comments, is that some years ago they didn't mention this specifically. They made you believe it was a monthly subscription and when you canceled it, the termination fees were really high. You know, like those old contracts using 4pt fonts for the important stuff :)

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#728
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…

They want engagement for their new account, it's what anyone who posts on social media wants.

This type of vapid nonsense simply isn’t very welcome on Bluesky. Or really, increasingly, _anywhere_ (except LinkedIn, the most absurd of all the social networks); I think its day has largely passed.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The general mood on Bluesky is very opposed to AI, especially AI art. Since Adobe now has AI integrated into their products, people on Bluesky hate them.

Also, Adobe is in a weird place where it has a bunch of users who basically have to use its stuff, but _absolutely hate it_ due to its conduct over the last decade or so. Like, being annoyed with Adobe predates generative AI.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get it, honestly. It’s very clear. You get a discount for an annual commitment and they let you pay monthly. It’s super clear which you’re signing up for when you do it. I’m in the UK, and there’s a 14 day cooling off period on the plans too, unless you buy the full blown annual one. I’m no adobe supporter generally, and sure they could do more, but they take an awful lot of flak for people who won’t read two…

Non dark pattern sites show the total price for the annual subscription and the lower /month discount below.

I completely agree. They really should do that.
Post reply on HN