←back to thread

Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

(petapixel.com)
553 points bookofjoe | 3 comments | 11 Apr 25 14:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.51s | source
Show context
adzm ◴[11 Apr 25 15:22 UTC] No.43654878[source]▶
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 peerless. Illustrator has a ton of competitors catching up. After Effects and Premiere for video editing are getting overtaken by Davinci Resolve -- though for motion graphics it is still hard to beat After Effects. Though I do love that Adobe simply uses JavaScript for its expression and scripting language.

replies(36): >>43654900 #>>43655311 #>>43655626 #>>43655700 #>>43655747 #>>43655859 #>>43655907 #>>43657271 #>>43657436 #>>43658069 #>>43658095 #>>43658187 #>>43658412 #>>43658496 #>>43658624 #>>43659012 #>>43659378 #>>43659401 #>>43659469 #>>43659478 #>>43659507 #>>43659546 #>>43659648 #>>43659715 #>>43659810 #>>43660283 #>>43661100 #>>43661103 #>>43661122 #>>43661755 #>>43664378 #>>43664554 #>>43665148 #>>43667578 #>>43674357 #>>43674455 #
crest ◴[11 Apr 25 22:28 UTC] No.43659378[source]▶
> Adobe is the one major company trying to be ethical with its AI training data and no one seems to even care.

It's sad that it's funny that you think Adobe is motivated by ethical consideration.

replies(6): >>43659406 #>>43659537 #>>43659649 #>>43659659 #>>43659699 #>>43659924 #
jfengel ◴[11 Apr 25 23:12 UTC] No.43659699[source]▶
They don't have to be motivated by ethics. I'm fine with them grudgingly doing ethical things because their customer base is all artists, many of whom would look for an alternative product.
replies(1): >>43659964 #
1. djeastm ◴[11 Apr 25 23:49 UTC] No.43659964[source]▶
You are fine with it, of course, because you're reasonable. But OP's claim was that Adobe is "trying to be ethical with its AI training data and no one seems to even care" as if we're meant to give special consideration to a company for doing the only economically sensible thing when most of its customers are artists.
replies(2): >>43660044 #>>43665118 #
2. ambicapter ◴[12 Apr 25 00:02 UTC] No.43660044[source]▶
The great thing about loudly painting Adobe with the brush of "ethical AI training" (regardless of why they're doing it) is that the backlash will exponentially bigger if/when they do something that betrays that label. Potentially big enough to make them reverse course. It's not much, but it's something.
3. nearbuy ◴[12 Apr 25 15:17 UTC] No.43665118[source]▶
You should be. Otherwise, you're showing Adobe and other companies that ethical training is pointless, and isn't economically sensible after all.