←back to thread

721 points ralusek | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.446s | source
Show context
ryandrake ◴[] No.41870217[source]
I'm making some big assumptions about Adobe's product ideation process, but: This seems like the "right" way to approach developing AI products: Find a user need that can't easily be solved with traditional methods and algorithms, decide that AI is appropriate for that thing, and then build an AI system to solve it.

Rather than what many BigTech companies are currently doing: "Wall Street says we need to 'Use AI Somehow'. Let's invest in AI and Find Things To Do with AI. Later, we'll worry about somehow matching these things with user needs."

replies(15): >>41870304 #>>41870341 #>>41870369 #>>41870422 #>>41870672 #>>41870780 #>>41870851 #>>41870929 #>>41871322 #>>41871724 #>>41871915 #>>41871961 #>>41872523 #>>41872850 #>>41873162 #
1. yalogin ◴[] No.41873162[source]
Counterpoint, the pandering to the market has better stock price appreciation :)

Also I am sure Adobe is doing both. They released an OpenAI competitor recently

replies(1): >>41873212 #
2. johnnyanmac ◴[] No.41873212[source]
Been doing both. Just look at their asset store as of late. Complete mess if you work professionally.

At the same time, apparently their generative autofill is top notch. It's just a shame the industry decided to mix together ML tools with generative art, so that it's hard to tell which from which on a casual glance