4 ms·

Does anyone know what they are using it for? Photoshop is improving its "remove background" like feature quite a bit lately. Sporting "AI" in their descripti

Does anyone know what they are using it for? Photoshop is improving its "remove background" like feature quite a bit lately. Sporting "AI" in their description. I am not as outraged if that is the main use case. I wonder if Google or Apple uses some form of the images they hold for similar purposes. I can easily argue though that once they have the data they can use it to train all sorts of features including generating art which to me is far more upsetting.

nkozyra 4y ago
> I am not as outraged if that is the main use case. Boy, I wish I could be this generous. No matter how noble the intended use is, they're taking someone's work and using it without explicit permission in a very sneaky way. And it's opt out Nope. Sorry, I can't find a way to look past that.
- hef19898 4y ago
  If it was opt-in, and creators would be compensated for the use of their work, it would be ok. As implemented it is just... well... on-brand for Adobe I guess.
actualwitch 4y ago
They are probably using those to train stable diffusion/dall-e/imagen like model as it's current state of the art AFAIK. As for whether google or apple do it too, unless some employee makes a throwaway account and shares, we don't know. If I had to guess though, I would say google probably does, as well as publicly crawlable images. Apple most likely does too, unless they just bought the data from some other service, because they too have ml powered image capabilities and they couldn't have achieved it without obtaining a sufficiently large dataset first.
janosdebugs 4y ago
The expectation from a cloud storage is that it's yours. They are not supposed to help themselves to your files in any shape or form. If the big could providers start breaking this unspoken promise to save on content acquisition costs, people will lose trust in the cloud. Even if this is legally ok (which is questionable), it is extremely short sighted.
- saiya-jin 4y ago
  Well, the issue of access is not a technical one for the manufacturer, only moral one. Fines for now rarely work, since they are so low and take so long to happen, management can comfortably sail away on their golden parachutes. Add jail time, properties confiscated and it will be a different topic. Basically we all have to trust forever some money-focused multinational corporations that they will keep being nice 'because its the right thing to do', or some similar marketing mantra. Look at any corporation and lawsuits around it and you will see very little morality anywhere. For me, cloud is dead for most of my purposes, regardless of data stored. The idea looks nice on paper but then so does communism.
- 0xCMP 4y ago
  In general I have always assumed this to be true, but iirc Adobe explicitly said their storage was private and now I have some photos I synced to my phone possibly wrapped up in this.

nkozyra 4y ago

> I am not as outraged if that is the main use case. Boy, I wish I could be this generous. No matter how noble the intended use is, they're taking someone's work and using it without explicit permission in a very sneaky way. And it's opt out Nope. Sorry, I can't find a way to look past that.

hef19898 4y ago
If it was opt-in, and creators would be compensated for the use of their work, it would be ok. As implemented it is just... well... on-brand for Adobe I guess.

actualwitch 4y ago

They are probably using those to train stable diffusion/dall-e/imagen like model as it's current state of the art AFAIK. As for whether google or apple do it too, unless some employee makes a throwaway account and shares, we don't know. If I had to guess though, I would say google probably does, as well as publicly crawlable images. Apple most likely does too, unless they just bought the data from some other service, because they too have ml powered image capabilities and they couldn't have achieved it without obtaining a sufficiently large dataset first.

janosdebugs 4y ago

The expectation from a cloud storage is that it's yours. They are not supposed to help themselves to your files in any shape or form. If the big could providers start breaking this unspoken promise to save on content acquisition costs, people will lose trust in the cloud. Even if this is legally ok (which is questionable), it is extremely short sighted.

saiya-jin 4y ago
Well, the issue of access is not a technical one for the manufacturer, only moral one. Fines for now rarely work, since they are so low and take so long to happen, management can comfortably sail away on their golden parachutes. Add jail time, properties confiscated and it will be a different topic. Basically we all have to trust forever some money-focused multinational corporations that they will keep being nice 'because its the right thing to do', or some similar marketing mantra. Look at any corporation and lawsuits around it and you will see very little morality anywhere. For me, cloud is dead for most of my purposes, regardless of data stored. The idea looks nice on paper but then so does communism.
0xCMP 4y ago
In general I have always assumed this to be true, but iirc Adobe explicitly said their storage was private and now I have some photos I synced to my phone possibly wrapped up in this.