“Adobe does not train Firefly Gen AI models on customer content. Firefly generative AI models are trained on a dataset of licensed content, such as Adobe Stock, and public domain content where copyright has expired.”
This references a single particular product. lol. If they're training a model by a different name with customer data, it would still be a true statement.
The points about lawyers and NDA's hit the nail on the head. I thought something similar with the Windows Recall debacle. That's a juicy set of data for anyone looking to find journalist sources or scrape a hospital's network. In every case it relies on the end user (business or individual) to know how to disable those features with GPOs/registry options... There's no way 100% of them realize the issue and have the knowledge to fix it.
They just wanna review your work 😀. What if you're trying to put a penis on Trump's face and it's too big or it's pointing the wrong way or something? You know. Wouldn't you want to be told stuff like " the police is coming unless you erase this now!" You know, things like that? It would definitely come in handy to catch kids doing nudes of others. Or adults doing nudes of other adults who didn't know. I wouldn't want to end up in a collage of nudes that is 20MBb 1080p or 4K.
Where did you read that? I can bet it wasn't the TOS, because that's not in there. The TOS allows Adobe to review anything you create with its products using manual or automated means, and maybe restricted to normal screening for CSAM and such (although it's really ambiguous about what they'll actually do with it).
Interesting, we get to either hate them for going full big brother, or hate them for going full adobe in the first place. It's nice to have a choice sometimes.
Riiiight. And, pray tell Adobe, why in the everloving fuck woul you ever need to "review" private content that's not posted anywhere? Stop acting like you're the goddamned pre-crime agency from Minority Report and keep your dirty paws off stuff people are creating privately.
You are providing tools, and that's it. I can do horrible, illegal shit with my drill, but it doesn't give Black&Decker any right to break into my house to do random checks and see if I'm drilling through kneecaps instead of wooden planks...
Pirating Adobe software is exactly what they want you to do. Their business model relies on businesses paying for their license because people already know how to use their software, in large part because people pirate it, and also they have deals with schools to teach their software.
What Adobe actually doesn't want you to do is to learn the software of their competition, since that's how they will lose money in the long term.
The main reason we need to push for open source alternatives is this. The more people learn how to use them the more content around them we get and more people take interest in using it and helping develop it (and donate to it).
I went to Affinity Photo and Illustrator years ago, and I’m a fan. One time purchase, easy to use, and full tutorials from the creators on Vimeo. Only downside is that it’s only available on Apple devices. Turns out it’s available on Windows now too.
I didn't really move to another platform when I stopped using deviantart a few years ago, I just started sharing my work with small circles and local galleries instead.
It is sad that so much of technological advancement is not freeing people from labor has the opposite effect, making people fight to pay rent and necessities everyday and never having free time to live. There is so much to like in these new Ai technologies but they being wielded by capitalists to extract a little more money. I highly doubt that visual arts is a big expensive in movies and films since usually half the budget is marketing and another big chuck to secure big stars to the project.
In any case everyone already lost and the Internet is a little bit worst. Reading about this class actions I think no good will come out of it, or the draconian copyright laws will be even worst and small artists will already have lost to the prior models using their content or a "fair use" exception will be made but only for big companies AI and not help small artists and content creators that battle with DMCA abuse taking down fair use vídeos from YouTube and content from over the net anyway.
Technological advancement, thus power, is sometimes used against other people to reduce their power.
We live in a society.
I think what we still have is a lot. Saying it's all dead is a huge exaggeration.
I've just installed Encarta 98 for nostalgic feelings, and found it quite lacking (as in being false and on the side of the criminal and not his victim) on a few points. Wikipedia is better on those.
To take it from the publishing industry, A.I. is already decimating once-common job prospects. An April report from the Society of Authors found that 26 percent of the illustrators surveyed “have already lost work due to generative A.I.” and about 37 percent of illustrators “say the income from their work has decreased in value because of generative A.I.”
slate.com
Hot