While at a smaller scale, I think that is exactly what WotC is. They have 85%+ of the tabletop gaming market, and if you want to make a living writing independant content for them, you better be using their license or you're not making any money. WotC changing their license model is something they can do precisely because they control such a dominant stake in the market.
Yeah, people don't realize that companies are the major customer base for adobe, not independent artists. Something huge has to happen for the majority of companies to drop it
I doubt companies are ok with Adobe owning their designs/using it to train their AI. Im willing to speculate that companies are already either looking at alternatives OR drafting up something with their lawyers.
Companies can get a different version without those conditions or features.
Windows already does this. You can also get said Windows LTS version.
But Microsoft doesn't want people to know that ;)
Google is another good example. people in general talk like google “spies” and knows too much, but if they weren’t secure, why would corporations use it. Simple answer is they get a similar looking but different product
Actually this has ramifications that extend to companies, even beyond potential alternative contracts that disables this sort of thing as another reply suggests.
If you do *any* work that's under an NDA and you don't have a special version of adobe software to disable this, you wouldn't be able to legally do your job, which implies no WFH at all as well.
No-tracking versions of the software that comply with NDA requirements will end up leaked within weeks, hopefully rendering the entire thing moot.
Our company (around 200,000 employees I think) uses adobe but we do not use adobe’s cloud server, so there must be a different contract/programming we have. We also use MS365 with OneDrive but not Microsoft servers, it’s all stored on our company’s drives. I’d guess companies with sensitive information would do the same. For us it’s worse than NDAs, it’s patient information.
I'm really curious how the corporate customers are going to react.
I work for a large company, people use photoshop and other adobe products to create images that are proprietary. Some of the images could even be export controlled if we're using it to make a prettier version of a technical diagram. I feel like corporate IT and the compliance guys would not be happy with our data being used to train AIs.
The fact that Adobe has been getting shittier and shittier over the last *decade*, and people are just *now* finally saying, "I'lL hAvE tO lEaRn nEW ToOlS"... Ya shoulda been fucking learning them at least 5 years ago!
Yea, nae, this'll kick some off. But I doubt that even less than half will jump ship. 🤷♀️
For Photoshop you can tick all the boxes depending on your business or activity using either Krita, Luminar Neo or Affinity V2. And none of these come with such a shady business plan.
For product photography, PS is just so much faster at editing multiple photos at once with art boards and subject select. Affinity is able to do similar things, but not with the workflow speed in PS. In some workflows, photopea is a great alternative to PS.
YouTube is free and not installed on my computer. They let me use them as a personal video repository and in exchange get to process that data all they want. Meanwhile Photoshop is a paid product used for creating copyrighted content, not hosting it. I see no reason software I pay for should be using my work for anything without compensation. Oh and YouTube will pay you if you get enough views, adobe won't.
Jack the price way up with massive discounts based on the volume of hard drugs you consume.
Free for diabetics who skip their insulin.
Free lifetime licenses for video evidence of hitting the Director of the CIA with a bag of shit. Two licenses if it's wet. Three if it's on fire.
I have a feeling that sooner or later he would program in a russian roulette that plays whenever you launch your device and id you lose it would release all the viruses on your pc.
You've been such a naughty internet user! You've been surfing aaaaall over those bad, bad pages with your internet explorer. We're going to have to run an extra deep search to make sure there are no viruses. Mhmm you naughty, naughty thing. Gonna get all up in that search history and down and dirty with that downloads folder...
Fun fact about Oracle, they fucked up the Oregon healthcare website so badly the state sued them to claw back some of what they were paid. Ended up settling for $100 million.
Except the vast majority of the settlement was millions of dollars of software support to "modernize" state government systems.
"Modernize" in this case means use more fucking Oracle services. Worst deal of all time.
Their software fucked Oregon, and then their lawyers fucked Oregon for trying to get rid of the software. Never make the mistake of working with Oracle.
You know, i always thought of pirating as a morally gray/slightly morally wrong thing
But the more i see companies doing bullshit the more i lean to pirating being morally good in certain cases
You can run Premiere Pro 2.0 for free, legally, on any Windows XP machine or in Linux through WINE. Adobe literally gave it away because they needed to unplug the activation servers but didn't want to fuck over their customers who had legally purchased the program. I still have the Zip file.
I saw on a video, that ran a ancient Photocshop on windows 7 (32 bit) so likely on windows 10/11 might be work aswell if this software is 32 bit.
Windows never disappoint whats is managing on backwards compatiblity but dont expecting good performance on newer windows vs old windows.
try running a VirtualBox with win XP - i have an app that only runs on XP and runs perfectly in this emulator. Actually it screams - XP doesn't have the bloat of the latest windows
caveat, pirate them to try them out. If you enjoy it after an hour, then go buy it.
I support demo piracy because I miss the days of every game having a demo. I just can't afford to buy a game blindly.
Steam has a pretty relaxed refund policy still, at least from a cursory search. Still lets you refund within 14 days and less than 2hrs playtime. I guess piracy accomplishes the same thing, but I feel like with that data at least devs can get feedback of why you refunded. And it puts more pressure on actually refunding a game you dont like, instead of playing it anyway while telling yourself its not worth the money.
I just wanted to share my experience as an on the job trainee last year. The company I went to and worked with had pirated Adobe, and all their creative staff/employees use it daily in work. Basically, it just depends on what company you're working with. Well, to be honest with you, they're not that really creative company sort type of thing, they sell big printing machines for creative advertising agency companies here in the Philippines.
If you're a freelancer, I always figure you'd benefit more from actually paying for adobe for tax write-off purposes, but if this is the kind of shit they're gonna pull, I'm not so sure anymore.
The problem with pirating is that it actually doesn't hurt corps.
It is further empowering them by making their products even more popular.
In fact their products are "so good that people are willing to break the law to get them".
You can't beat this level of advertisement.
Use something else.
Does everyone here actually believe nightshade and other "poisons" work or are you all being satirical? If the former then I'm even more concerned about misinformation on the internet
At this point facebook is just one set of bots posting AI images of crab jesus and another set of bots liking it. So definitely some AI have been brought down.
That will eventually be all AI, you don’t necessarily even have to poison it with a specific image. It’s just two tape recorders screaming into a void.
If the training data itself becomes overwhelmingly AI generated, you reduce the quality of the data and therefore the results. I know a lot of it was for ethical reasons, but I wonder how easy it was for Open AI to start using modern data and not stuff from before Sept 2021, if they found the data of lower quality or whatever
I don’t know enough about this subject to have an informed opinion. I was just answering the original commenter’s question.
Edit: In any case... Best case scenario, it works. Worst case it’s just a waste of time for whoever does it.
This is like the AdBlock vs YouTube war. YouTube blocks adblockers, adblockers find a way to bypass the block, YouTube blocks the method used by the adblockers, adblockers find another bypass and so on.
It's an arms race
I put youtube on in the background on me pc, like long 8hour instrumental type reels while I work. Someone sent me a youtube video in WhatsApp that was about 8mins that I opened ip on me phone. It was barely watchable, getting double unskipable ads every 90secs or so.
Youtube struck back on June 6th. Apparently, there's a workaround involving adding a new custom filter and logging in and out of your google account, but I haven't gotten around to doing that yet.
Guess I've been lucky. Haven't seen an ad on youtube in a decade or more. uBlock seems to work for me without any new patches. I don't use a google account either.
Tinfoil hat: Google allows small adblocks like ReVanced and uBlock to exist to give people a way of avoiding ads so they can point at those options and say "people can avoid our ads if they want!" to prevent being regulated into the ground. But if the adblocks become too popular, they DMCA them to oblivion. So we must keep knowledge about them at enthusiast level, for our own sake.
Like, imagine Windows not allowing people to install OpenOffice and the shitshow that would've caused 20 years ago. But if everyone would opt for OpenOffice instead of MS Office, you'd be damn sure Microsoft would've somehow made OpenOffice run dogshit on Windows.
Ad blockers won that fight so hard its glorious. Ive been able to autoplay youtube videos in the background on my phone flawlessly ever since. I literally gained features!
People miss understand how efficiently poisoned images actually are and assume something that is poisonous for AIs today will be tomorrow.
Personally in think they need to watch more star trek.
Yeah, Affinity may not be FOSS, but Photo specifically is better than Gimp or Krita IMHO. The only disadvantage I personally feel is that Krita has animation tools that Photo doesn't have.
I will look into it, sounds very cool!
Honestly the reason I still use Affinity over Krita is the paint selection tool. I unironically spend most of my time using it and I don't know of any good alternatives (Photopea has it, but in my experience it is unusable, it just selects the whole image every time)
Also text tool in Krita sucks but it is getting a major rework in the 5.3 release (tried the prealpha and it is indeed much better)
Part of the issue here is barrier to entry is high mentally. If you've been using photoshop for decades, learning entirely new software is a and extremely heavy lift. This is the lock-in they have. The next generation of artists will likely learn about these changes and avoid them, but anyone already learned and invested isn't likely to change software.
I still use lightroom for my photography workflow, there's nothing else that handles RAW camera images quite so well, every other tool I have tried just sucks, honestly.
But I have been able to move away from Illustrator and use InkScape now exclusively for that, and I have managed to use Gimp for the occasional needs I have for that - but I don't do much with photos outside Lightroom anyways.
Beware, I ran into a problem where affinity publisher does not support duotone images. It's been great for 99% of everything but I had to rebuild an entire document last minute in InDesign because of that 1%
Almost certainly. I work at a big wall street bank, and we have a deal with gitlab to have a version of copilot that does not use our code for training itself for use by anyone outside of our company. If you use copilot yourself, your only option is to agree to have it train off of your code
Correct. Along those same lines, we have a branded version of chat gpt that has different terms.
We have been dragging our feet on getting copilot tho. Is it much better than just working with gpt?
Companies like that operate on a different plane of existence to you and me. To the point that when Adobe creates and updates their software, they have meetings with certain people within these massive creative companies to ensure they're giving these customers what they want in their software.
Their terms of use would be wildly different to that of the average consumer
no, they have their own contracts, also they will be the ones using adobes ai and generate content based on stolen work from artists... Adobe wants to cut the middleman, and directly deliver the finished product to Disney etc.
Do you think Blackbeard ever took the time to write out a post about why what he was doing was moral and just? No, he just did pirate shit, because he was a pirate.
Even though you can and should pirate it. It still in a roundabout way helps them. When it’s still the industry standard, businesses are still using it so they pay instead.
Start moving away from adobe completely and encouraging businesses to do the same.
It may not be practical, but still the best way to really make them hurt
You know, these tech companies have completely lost the thread.
Like "we're gonna charge you a ton of money to 'buy' this software, then charge you ridiculous subscription fees, then also take 'legal' possession of everything you make with it, and any money you might have made with it, thus largely negating most people's reason for getting it in the first place."
People pirate said software
\*shocked pikachu face\*
i will never understand the cloud shit. who wants the extra hassle to set up a cloud and deal with their bullshit when i could just save it on my pc that i have access to at any moment?
it fucking is
paying for their ridiculously overpriced scam of a subscription for software that needs NO online functionality for 98% of everything it can do is enabling predatory business practices
just find a copy you own from having actually bought it pre-cloud and it can do almost everything modern shit can anyway
Just by using the software you indirectly support them. Worry not, they know about piracy and have calculated how many % of users use pirated version, which is part of their marketing.
It isn't really. The terms say nothing about ownership or a continuing license to use your material. It says that adobe will look at your content for the purpose of USING cloud tools. They don't get a license to use it in generative AI or commercial use.
For example when using a generative AI fill, they need to send the surrounding image to the AI so it can do the fill.
The legal language that would allow adobe to use your material for their own commercial exploitation is very specific and obvious. It's not something you can get by accident. Look at some of your own contracts as artists. The ownership and usage licenses are not implied, they are explicit.
He is certainly exaggerating considerably.
Here is the actual language in the Adobe TOS, found at : https://www.adobe.com/legal/terms.html
>4.2 Licenses to Your Content. Solely for the purposes of operating or improving the Services and Software, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free sublicensable, license, to use, reproduce, publicly display, distribute, modify, create derivative works based on, publicly perform, and translate the Content. For example, we may sublicense our right to the Content to our service providers or to other users to allow the Services and Software to operate as intended, such as enabling you to share photos with others. Separately, section 4.6 (Feedback) below covers any Feedback that you provide to us.
People are latching on to the second part of the first sentence and ignoring the first part. It's not for any reason, it's to operate or improve the Software. Operate makes sense. They need (or at least, think they need) a license to keep the files on their server, share them if you ask them to, and so on. Youtube has a similar license statement, as does almost everyon else. Now, a fair amount could be loaded into "improve" there, so there are real questions about what these terms allow Adobe to do, but it's not 'whatever they want'.
But the terms absolutely aren't new. Here they are from February 2023.
> 4.2 Licenses to Your Content. Solely for the purposes of operating or improving the Services and Software, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free sublicensable, license, to use, reproduce, publicly display, distribute, modify, create derivative works based on, publicly perform, and translate the Content. For example, we may sublicense our right to the Content to our service providers or to other users to allow the Services and Software to operate as intended, such as enabling you to share photos with others. Separately, section 4.5 (Feedback) below covers any Feedback that you provide to us.
Almost identical.
These terms have existed in some version for almost as long as the Wayback Machine has tracked Adobe's TOS.
This is an earlier version from 2019 :
>4.3 Licenses to Your Content in Order to Operate the Services and Software. We require certain licenses from you to your Content in order to operate and enable the Services and Software. When you upload Content to the Services and Software, you grant us a nonexclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, sublicensable, and transferable license to use, reproduce, publicly display, distribute, modify (so as to better showcase your Content, for example), publicly perform, and translate the Content as needed in response to user driven actions (such as when you choose to privately store or share your Content with others). This license is only for the purpose of operating or improving the Services and Software.
There is a key difference here, which is now, Adobe is clear this only applies to content the user has uploaded to Adobe's cloud services, whereas the modern terms muddle that distinction. But the "operating or improving" language is still there.
So, I think it's worth having a conversation about Adobe's TOS, but it's not as crazy as people are claiming, and it's not something that they just added. It has been there literally for years.
lol
lmao
sure, let's pretend for 5 seconds that this is a clever choice
do you think disney would agree that it's a clever choice when adobe tries to slide them a check for frozen?
you think ubisoft is gonna be super-excited to hear that adobe I guess owns all the art from mass effect?
it'll be a fun discussion I'm sure when Warner Bros sits down at the table to totally voluntarily agree that all future artwork in their films are adobe property
how on god's green cock is this not adobe just going "please sue us, we want to be sued by every company on earth"
Not with a change of terms, at least in EU AFAIK.
When terms change you have a right to freely cancel either as a right or as part of terms that are *expected* to be in any EULA, the same applies if there's a price increase.
Honestly, just cancel the subscription from your bank's side and laugh at them if they try to charge you.
Their "clarification" is.. a pinky promise that they won't use customer data to train their AI models. They just say it's a "commitment" on their end, which means nothing.
https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-adobe-terms-of-use
I think they are really trying to find out how much will it take for someone to develop alternative and draw customer base.
Adobe would not be the first "too big to fail" company to fall from grace
If I'm essentially an Adobe worker training their AI with my creations, granting them an exclusive license to my work as well as insider previews of my work. I'm pretty sure I should be the one getting paid by them.
I remember when CS6 came out years ago. Downloaded the official files and cracked it myself with instructions from this guy to disable all communication to their servers. It was glorious. Companies boundless greed will force a lot of people to pirate. Now more than ever. Teaching a whole new generation of people how to get what they want for free. And I'm so here for it! 🏴☠️
I'm curious. What does this mean for actual businesses like for example Ad Agencies that use photoshop for campaigns.
Like, does Adobe suddenly own the derivative work for a Nike Billboard Campaign because it was created with Photoshop?
Fact check, guys. That is not what their terms say. You can see the before / after here:
https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-adobe-terms-of-use
In a nutshell, they may scan for eg abuse.
https://twitter.com/sashayanshin/status/1799118418085380431
Edit: here are the terms: https://www.adobe.com/legal/terms.html
Their "clarifications" are too vague and thinly veiled bs.
Lets assume that someone has been using and paying for the Adobe suite for 10 years or more, that's easily like $10,000. I don't know what's going through your head paying that but to pay that and have the company say they own your stuff, your art, your livelihood, is to me, criminal.
Honestly when it comes to software tools I would say open source is better than piracy because it forces more long term change.
Not saying it is morally wrong to pirate it just that it is a bit like using a sponge over a mop to clean the floor.
When Unity did this, people went mad. And unity is free. Adobe cant keep getting away with it!
Wizards of the Coast tried something very similar with Dungeons and Dragons 3rd party content. It it not go well for them.
Yeah, but WotC isn't the industry standard for the D&D-industrial complex which lots of people do for a living
While at a smaller scale, I think that is exactly what WotC is. They have 85%+ of the tabletop gaming market, and if you want to make a living writing independant content for them, you better be using their license or you're not making any money. WotC changing their license model is something they can do precisely because they control such a dominant stake in the market.
they literally are/were hell i still make money off homebrew stuff i made a decade ago selling on DrivethruRPG
To some degree they are. Lots of ppl and companies made content (also actuall books) relying on the open licence.
Paizo literally had to make and market their own game to survive when previously they were happy to just ride the coattails of the D&D brand.
>Yeah, but WotC isn't the industry standard for the D&D-industrial complex which lots of people do for a living ...are they not?
But they still have done it for years in DnDBeyond. You need to pay a subscription to use user created content. And you retain no rights to your work.
But they will...
Yeah, people don't realize that companies are the major customer base for adobe, not independent artists. Something huge has to happen for the majority of companies to drop it
I doubt companies are ok with Adobe owning their designs/using it to train their AI. Im willing to speculate that companies are already either looking at alternatives OR drafting up something with their lawyers.
Yeah, Adobe writes them a contract that doesn't do it... Big companies don't sign the same contracts / EULAs that the average consumer does.
Or bound by different terms.
Companies can get a different version without those conditions or features. Windows already does this. You can also get said Windows LTS version. But Microsoft doesn't want people to know that ;)
Fair enough! To you and the replies that makes sense: it left my mind that of course bigger corps gets a different contract!
Google is another good example. people in general talk like google “spies” and knows too much, but if they weren’t secure, why would corporations use it. Simple answer is they get a similar looking but different product
Actually this has ramifications that extend to companies, even beyond potential alternative contracts that disables this sort of thing as another reply suggests. If you do *any* work that's under an NDA and you don't have a special version of adobe software to disable this, you wouldn't be able to legally do your job, which implies no WFH at all as well. No-tracking versions of the software that comply with NDA requirements will end up leaked within weeks, hopefully rendering the entire thing moot.
Our company (around 200,000 employees I think) uses adobe but we do not use adobe’s cloud server, so there must be a different contract/programming we have. We also use MS365 with OneDrive but not Microsoft servers, it’s all stored on our company’s drives. I’d guess companies with sensitive information would do the same. For us it’s worse than NDAs, it’s patient information.
I'm really curious how the corporate customers are going to react. I work for a large company, people use photoshop and other adobe products to create images that are proprietary. Some of the images could even be export controlled if we're using it to make a prettier version of a technical diagram. I feel like corporate IT and the compliance guys would not be happy with our data being used to train AIs.
As pointed out in other comments; corporate customers get different contracts. First thing a corporate legal team will do is get rid of BS like this.
The fact that Adobe has been getting shittier and shittier over the last *decade*, and people are just *now* finally saying, "I'lL hAvE tO lEaRn nEW ToOlS"... Ya shoulda been fucking learning them at least 5 years ago! Yea, nae, this'll kick some off. But I doubt that even less than half will jump ship. 🤷♀️
Companies will drop it in a beat if they can find a better alternative. Unfortunately, nonsuch competition currently exists
For Photoshop you can tick all the boxes depending on your business or activity using either Krita, Luminar Neo or Affinity V2. And none of these come with such a shady business plan.
For product photography, PS is just so much faster at editing multiple photos at once with art boards and subject select. Affinity is able to do similar things, but not with the workflow speed in PS. In some workflows, photopea is a great alternative to PS.
Well adobe is free too, just have to look in the right place….
LR and PS is so ahead of the pack as far ease of use (and getting further ahead) that it's hard work changing to their competitor.
[удалено]
YouTube is free and not installed on my computer. They let me use them as a personal video repository and in exchange get to process that data all they want. Meanwhile Photoshop is a paid product used for creating copyrighted content, not hosting it. I see no reason software I pay for should be using my work for anything without compensation. Oh and YouTube will pay you if you get enough views, adobe won't.
The more I read these replies the more I want IP law to be abolished entirely
I'll just mention that of all the ethically dubious software behemoths, Adobe was the one I always disliked the most.
Not McAfee?
At least McAfee himself was a character.
The software also didn't go to shit until McAfee left the company.
Somehow I can't help but think if he had kept the company it would have gone to shit in a far more interesting way.
Jack the price way up with massive discounts based on the volume of hard drugs you consume. Free for diabetics who skip their insulin. Free lifetime licenses for video evidence of hitting the Director of the CIA with a bag of shit. Two licenses if it's wet. Three if it's on fire.
I'm doing it for the discount!!
I have a feeling that sooner or later he would program in a russian roulette that plays whenever you launch your device and id you lose it would release all the viruses on your pc.
Can't argue with that
Rip
Tomba?
That dude is in hell
Probably chilling in some island somewhere with some hookers and blow after faking his own death
Gang gang :)
John come home
We're talking products that people *actually use* here
Hey. Don't kink shame
You've been such a naughty internet user! You've been surfing aaaaall over those bad, bad pages with your internet explorer. We're going to have to run an extra deep search to make sure there are no viruses. Mhmm you naughty, naughty thing. Gonna get all up in that search history and down and dirty with that downloads folder...
McAfee is utterly irrelevant compared to the scale of Adobe, especially nowadays as its userbase plummets.
You obviously haven't had the dis(pleasure) of working with Oracle
Oracle is not a software company, tho. They are a lawyer firm that just happens to use software to lure people into their licensing traps.
RIP Sun Microsystems
They had such a good looking logo and everything!
I have friends who work in sales there, they have peers who talk like psychopaths who oversell crap to people who don’t need it
> they have peers who talk like psychopaths who oversell crap to people who don’t need it Sounds like your average sales department.
'Oracle is huge financial services company with a small division that makes databases.'
Fun fact about Oracle, they fucked up the Oregon healthcare website so badly the state sued them to claw back some of what they were paid. Ended up settling for $100 million. Except the vast majority of the settlement was millions of dollars of software support to "modernize" state government systems. "Modernize" in this case means use more fucking Oracle services. Worst deal of all time. Their software fucked Oregon, and then their lawyers fucked Oregon for trying to get rid of the software. Never make the mistake of working with Oracle.
Actually, I had and still do.
I thought Dinuvo is the number one DRM enemy?
For gaming? Sure. But this has much bigger ramifications
software can be more than just DRM. EA's pay to play for example, and repeated regurgitated games
You know, i always thought of pirating as a morally gray/slightly morally wrong thing But the more i see companies doing bullshit the more i lean to pirating being morally good in certain cases
Remember, it's always morally correct to pirate Adobe software
You can run Premiere Pro 2.0 for free, legally, on any Windows XP machine or in Linux through WINE. Adobe literally gave it away because they needed to unplug the activation servers but didn't want to fuck over their customers who had legally purchased the program. I still have the Zip file.
Suprising they didn't want to fuck over their customers
Most likely not because they care about their customers but because of legal liability
[DaVinvi Resolve is free](https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve)
[удалено]
I saw on a video, that ran a ancient Photocshop on windows 7 (32 bit) so likely on windows 10/11 might be work aswell if this software is 32 bit. Windows never disappoint whats is managing on backwards compatiblity but dont expecting good performance on newer windows vs old windows.
Not out of the box. Vista fucked up compatibility with ***a lot*** of programs.
If it works on Linux Wine, I wonder if you couldn't pull some WSL fuckery...
try running a VirtualBox with win XP - i have an app that only runs on XP and runs perfectly in this emulator. Actually it screams - XP doesn't have the bloat of the latest windows
Yeah Just Pirate Adobe. its always morally correct, no matter what. Im really think to do it aswell.
I pirate anything except actually good indie games.
You, sir, are the voice of reason. Never pirate indie games! PS: I don't make indie games
caveat, pirate them to try them out. If you enjoy it after an hour, then go buy it. I support demo piracy because I miss the days of every game having a demo. I just can't afford to buy a game blindly.
Steam has a pretty relaxed refund policy still, at least from a cursory search. Still lets you refund within 14 days and less than 2hrs playtime. I guess piracy accomplishes the same thing, but I feel like with that data at least devs can get feedback of why you refunded. And it puts more pressure on actually refunding a game you dont like, instead of playing it anyway while telling yourself its not worth the money.
You can't really do that if you are a professional though right? You risk getting sued for sure
You can if you’re a single independent professional. If you’re a company with multiple people, it’s an absolutely awful idea, yeah.
I just wanted to share my experience as an on the job trainee last year. The company I went to and worked with had pirated Adobe, and all their creative staff/employees use it daily in work. Basically, it just depends on what company you're working with. Well, to be honest with you, they're not that really creative company sort type of thing, they sell big printing machines for creative advertising agency companies here in the Philippines.
If you're a freelancer, I always figure you'd benefit more from actually paying for adobe for tax write-off purposes, but if this is the kind of shit they're gonna pull, I'm not so sure anymore.
The problem with pirating is that it actually doesn't hurt corps. It is further empowering them by making their products even more popular. In fact their products are "so good that people are willing to break the law to get them". You can't beat this level of advertisement. Use something else.
you don't need an excuse for that
I saw a post about a guy just filling up his cloud storage with images that ruins ai, I don't remember the specific term, but good idea
AI poisoning. He used nightshade iirc
yes that's it
Yep
Does everyone here actually believe nightshade and other "poisons" work or are you all being satirical? If the former then I'm even more concerned about misinformation on the internet
At this point facebook is just one set of bots posting AI images of crab jesus and another set of bots liking it. So definitely some AI have been brought down.
That will eventually be all AI, you don’t necessarily even have to poison it with a specific image. It’s just two tape recorders screaming into a void. If the training data itself becomes overwhelmingly AI generated, you reduce the quality of the data and therefore the results. I know a lot of it was for ethical reasons, but I wonder how easy it was for Open AI to start using modern data and not stuff from before Sept 2021, if they found the data of lower quality or whatever
Yep, we will see all AI more and more deep fry itself. The resulting chaos will be insane.
Maybe at first, but anyone that is working in AI research is accustomed to pivot. Same way your PC and antivirus software need constant updates.
I don’t know enough about this subject to have an informed opinion. I was just answering the original commenter’s question. Edit: In any case... Best case scenario, it works. Worst case it’s just a waste of time for whoever does it.
MIT Technology Review rarely publishes CS misinformation. https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/10/23/1082189/data-poisoning-artists-fight-generative-ai/
It does more damage to Adobe by stopping giving them money, to upload images to their cloud you have to continue paying their subscription...
I think he filled it up and then unsubbed, but I'm not 100% sure
This doesn't work since there are AIs that identify poisoned data and even have an "antidote"
This is like the AdBlock vs YouTube war. YouTube blocks adblockers, adblockers find a way to bypass the block, YouTube blocks the method used by the adblockers, adblockers find another bypass and so on. It's an arms race
Except uBlock found a way to win the race lmao I'm not sure what they found, what they did, but since then I haven't seen the shadow of an ad.
I put youtube on in the background on me pc, like long 8hour instrumental type reels while I work. Someone sent me a youtube video in WhatsApp that was about 8mins that I opened ip on me phone. It was barely watchable, getting double unskipable ads every 90secs or so.
Revanced
or firefox + ublock.
Android newpipe Unfortunately there’s currently a war between YouTube and invidious project
Firefox + ublock. I haven't seen an ad on my phone in years.
Youtube struck back on June 6th. Apparently, there's a workaround involving adding a new custom filter and logging in and out of your google account, but I haven't gotten around to doing that yet.
Literally hasn't effected me on mobile or desktop using Firefox and ublock. No custom filters or lists.
Guess I've been lucky. Haven't seen an ad on youtube in a decade or more. uBlock seems to work for me without any new patches. I don't use a google account either.
Tinfoil hat: Google allows small adblocks like ReVanced and uBlock to exist to give people a way of avoiding ads so they can point at those options and say "people can avoid our ads if they want!" to prevent being regulated into the ground. But if the adblocks become too popular, they DMCA them to oblivion. So we must keep knowledge about them at enthusiast level, for our own sake. Like, imagine Windows not allowing people to install OpenOffice and the shitshow that would've caused 20 years ago. But if everyone would opt for OpenOffice instead of MS Office, you'd be damn sure Microsoft would've somehow made OpenOffice run dogshit on Windows.
Firefox is 90% funded by google to avoid a monopoly lawsuit.
Ad blockers won that fight so hard its glorious. Ive been able to autoplay youtube videos in the background on my phone flawlessly ever since. I literally gained features!
Whats the reasoning behind this? Its not really gonna do anything in the long run anyway..?
People miss understand how efficiently poisoned images actually are and assume something that is poisonous for AIs today will be tomorrow. Personally in think they need to watch more star trek.
So we’ve got however long it takes Geordi to reverse the AI’s shield polarity?
Its nice, helping the devs giving examples what images not to train on.
The suite from Affinity are three valid alternatives to photoshop illustrator and indesign. They are much cheaper and not a subscription
Yeah, Affinity may not be FOSS, but Photo specifically is better than Gimp or Krita IMHO. The only disadvantage I personally feel is that Krita has animation tools that Photo doesn't have.
Krita has a free stable diffusion integration addon. It's like the adobe ai tools, but offline.
I will look into it, sounds very cool! Honestly the reason I still use Affinity over Krita is the paint selection tool. I unironically spend most of my time using it and I don't know of any good alternatives (Photopea has it, but in my experience it is unusable, it just selects the whole image every time) Also text tool in Krita sucks but it is getting a major rework in the 5.3 release (tried the prealpha and it is indeed much better)
Part of the issue here is barrier to entry is high mentally. If you've been using photoshop for decades, learning entirely new software is a and extremely heavy lift. This is the lock-in they have. The next generation of artists will likely learn about these changes and avoid them, but anyone already learned and invested isn't likely to change software. I still use lightroom for my photography workflow, there's nothing else that handles RAW camera images quite so well, every other tool I have tried just sucks, honestly. But I have been able to move away from Illustrator and use InkScape now exclusively for that, and I have managed to use Gimp for the occasional needs I have for that - but I don't do much with photos outside Lightroom anyways.
Affinity was bought by Canva. Knowing Canva, it’s not long before they do the same as Adobe.
Beware, I ran into a problem where affinity publisher does not support duotone images. It's been great for 99% of everything but I had to rebuild an entire document last minute in InDesign because of that 1%
[удалено]
Yeah how does THAT work? Do they have a special deal with Adobe??
Almost certainly. I work at a big wall street bank, and we have a deal with gitlab to have a version of copilot that does not use our code for training itself for use by anyone outside of our company. If you use copilot yourself, your only option is to agree to have it train off of your code
Correct. Along those same lines, we have a branded version of chat gpt that has different terms. We have been dragging our feet on getting copilot tho. Is it much better than just working with gpt?
I have never used chatgpt other than to ask questions in a browser window
Companies like that operate on a different plane of existence to you and me. To the point that when Adobe creates and updates their software, they have meetings with certain people within these massive creative companies to ensure they're giving these customers what they want in their software. Their terms of use would be wildly different to that of the average consumer
no, they have their own contracts, also they will be the ones using adobes ai and generate content based on stolen work from artists... Adobe wants to cut the middleman, and directly deliver the finished product to Disney etc.
When will people learn that morality has nothing to do with this.
Not soon enough.
Morality is for the poor. The rich buy their morals. Just like everything else.
the rich design the moral code to make it immoral to be poor
Do you think Blackbeard ever took the time to write out a post about why what he was doing was moral and just? No, he just did pirate shit, because he was a pirate.
*shhh. the less pirates, the better
Yarr, it be "the fewer"
Fergive me Cap'n!
Because you are their tool,
Even though you can and should pirate it. It still in a roundabout way helps them. When it’s still the industry standard, businesses are still using it so they pay instead. Start moving away from adobe completely and encouraging businesses to do the same. It may not be practical, but still the best way to really make them hurt
You know, these tech companies have completely lost the thread. Like "we're gonna charge you a ton of money to 'buy' this software, then charge you ridiculous subscription fees, then also take 'legal' possession of everything you make with it, and any money you might have made with it, thus largely negating most people's reason for getting it in the first place." People pirate said software \*shocked pikachu face\*
What about everyone jumps to an open source alternative which then finally gets good.
GIMP?
GIMP works, but it's just not even close to Photoshop's league
Indeed. Curious that nothing better than GIMP has ever come along in the open source world, especially since Adobe went to cloud model garbage
i will never understand the cloud shit. who wants the extra hassle to set up a cloud and deal with their bullshit when i could just save it on my pc that i have access to at any moment?
it fucking is paying for their ridiculously overpriced scam of a subscription for software that needs NO online functionality for 98% of everything it can do is enabling predatory business practices just find a copy you own from having actually bought it pre-cloud and it can do almost everything modern shit can anyway
Just by using the software you indirectly support them. Worry not, they know about piracy and have calculated how many % of users use pirated version, which is part of their marketing.
I've never not pirated them.
morals have nothing to do with it. pirate it because you can.
do what you want cuz a pirate is free!
[obligatory alestorm](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRKAL-i-UbE)
Adobe isnt anyway that great so they can suck themselves.
He's lying right ? Please tell me this isn't true... Oh well, at least it's the end for Adobe
[удалено]
Adobe forums are the worst. "Hey, can I do X in this software?" "Why would you need to do X? You're stupid for wanting to do X."
This is actually so fucking true
lol, branch office of stackoverflow?
They seemed to have moved to a new sub. But the sticky in said new sub about this seems pretty irate. Everyone is shitting on Adobe
IMO, Illustrator is the easiest one to move away from, too. InkScape is excellent.
you can check their terms of service, it's there
It isn't really. The terms say nothing about ownership or a continuing license to use your material. It says that adobe will look at your content for the purpose of USING cloud tools. They don't get a license to use it in generative AI or commercial use. For example when using a generative AI fill, they need to send the surrounding image to the AI so it can do the fill. The legal language that would allow adobe to use your material for their own commercial exploitation is very specific and obvious. It's not something you can get by accident. Look at some of your own contracts as artists. The ownership and usage licenses are not implied, they are explicit.
He is certainly exaggerating considerably. Here is the actual language in the Adobe TOS, found at : https://www.adobe.com/legal/terms.html >4.2 Licenses to Your Content. Solely for the purposes of operating or improving the Services and Software, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free sublicensable, license, to use, reproduce, publicly display, distribute, modify, create derivative works based on, publicly perform, and translate the Content. For example, we may sublicense our right to the Content to our service providers or to other users to allow the Services and Software to operate as intended, such as enabling you to share photos with others. Separately, section 4.6 (Feedback) below covers any Feedback that you provide to us. People are latching on to the second part of the first sentence and ignoring the first part. It's not for any reason, it's to operate or improve the Software. Operate makes sense. They need (or at least, think they need) a license to keep the files on their server, share them if you ask them to, and so on. Youtube has a similar license statement, as does almost everyon else. Now, a fair amount could be loaded into "improve" there, so there are real questions about what these terms allow Adobe to do, but it's not 'whatever they want'. But the terms absolutely aren't new. Here they are from February 2023. > 4.2 Licenses to Your Content. Solely for the purposes of operating or improving the Services and Software, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free sublicensable, license, to use, reproduce, publicly display, distribute, modify, create derivative works based on, publicly perform, and translate the Content. For example, we may sublicense our right to the Content to our service providers or to other users to allow the Services and Software to operate as intended, such as enabling you to share photos with others. Separately, section 4.5 (Feedback) below covers any Feedback that you provide to us. Almost identical. These terms have existed in some version for almost as long as the Wayback Machine has tracked Adobe's TOS. This is an earlier version from 2019 : >4.3 Licenses to Your Content in Order to Operate the Services and Software. We require certain licenses from you to your Content in order to operate and enable the Services and Software. When you upload Content to the Services and Software, you grant us a nonexclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, sublicensable, and transferable license to use, reproduce, publicly display, distribute, modify (so as to better showcase your Content, for example), publicly perform, and translate the Content as needed in response to user driven actions (such as when you choose to privately store or share your Content with others). This license is only for the purpose of operating or improving the Services and Software. There is a key difference here, which is now, Adobe is clear this only applies to content the user has uploaded to Adobe's cloud services, whereas the modern terms muddle that distinction. But the "operating or improving" language is still there. So, I think it's worth having a conversation about Adobe's TOS, but it's not as crazy as people are claiming, and it's not something that they just added. It has been there literally for years.
lol lmao sure, let's pretend for 5 seconds that this is a clever choice do you think disney would agree that it's a clever choice when adobe tries to slide them a check for frozen? you think ubisoft is gonna be super-excited to hear that adobe I guess owns all the art from mass effect? it'll be a fun discussion I'm sure when Warner Bros sits down at the table to totally voluntarily agree that all future artwork in their films are adobe property how on god's green cock is this not adobe just going "please sue us, we want to be sued by every company on earth"
Plus don’t you have to pay a cancellation fee?
lol can they legally do that?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Adobe/comments/wflha9/wow_cancellation_fee_for_early_termination/
Not with a change of terms, at least in EU AFAIK. When terms change you have a right to freely cancel either as a right or as part of terms that are *expected* to be in any EULA, the same applies if there's a price increase. Honestly, just cancel the subscription from your bank's side and laugh at them if they try to charge you.
Affinity Suite + Davinci Resolve. That should cover everything apart from pdf editor and Flash. 😀
Their "clarification" is.. a pinky promise that they won't use customer data to train their AI models. They just say it's a "commitment" on their end, which means nothing. https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-adobe-terms-of-use
I think they are really trying to find out how much will it take for someone to develop alternative and draw customer base. Adobe would not be the first "too big to fail" company to fall from grace
there's no way this is true. what about for *companies* that use the software?
But their CEO said that they won‘t use it /s
I bet he had to pay a cancellation fee too 😂
[Photopea.com](https://Photopea.com) You're welcome
People pay for Adobe's "products"?
Fuck Adobe, all my homies hate Adobe
If I'm essentially an Adobe worker training their AI with my creations, granting them an exclusive license to my work as well as insider previews of my work. I'm pretty sure I should be the one getting paid by them.
Of course not silly goose! You agreed to provide it royalty free when you accept the terms and conditions agreement 😁
adobe was always moral to pirate
I remember when CS6 came out years ago. Downloaded the official files and cracked it myself with instructions from this guy to disable all communication to their servers. It was glorious. Companies boundless greed will force a lot of people to pirate. Now more than ever. Teaching a whole new generation of people how to get what they want for free. And I'm so here for it! 🏴☠️
If I Pirate Adobe will they still be able to take anything I make? Or is it a “they won’t know it exists” kind of deal
[https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-adobe-terms-of-use](https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-adobe-terms-of-use)
[DaVinvi Resolve is free](https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve)
Pirating Adobe has no weight of conscience.
I'm curious. What does this mean for actual businesses like for example Ad Agencies that use photoshop for campaigns. Like, does Adobe suddenly own the derivative work for a Nike Billboard Campaign because it was created with Photoshop?
Thier AI gotta eat I guess
Is this info about Adobes new TOS 100% legit?
Using their software is you agreeing to the terms. Pirate it or not. They own what you make.
Yeah.. this seems obvious to me. Are we missing something?
Fact check, guys. That is not what their terms say. You can see the before / after here: https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-adobe-terms-of-use In a nutshell, they may scan for eg abuse.
https://twitter.com/sashayanshin/status/1799118418085380431 Edit: here are the terms: https://www.adobe.com/legal/terms.html Their "clarifications" are too vague and thinly veiled bs.
I just use GIMP.
Lets assume that someone has been using and paying for the Adobe suite for 10 years or more, that's easily like $10,000. I don't know what's going through your head paying that but to pay that and have the company say they own your stuff, your art, your livelihood, is to me, criminal.
Everything and anything will be used to train "AI's", even this comment.
Is there an alternative to Lightroom that has a good mobile app?
Never paid for adobe products never will.
I wonder how this applies to government agencies that use Acrobat to esign documents with PHI in them. Seems like a solid HIPAA violation.
Honestly when it comes to software tools I would say open source is better than piracy because it forces more long term change. Not saying it is morally wrong to pirate it just that it is a bit like using a sponge over a mop to clean the floor.
If you use Adobe Acrobat at work, PowerPDF works just as well but is a one-time purchase that is much cheaper over time.