Today's discussion about the news
Comments
-
The vast majority of the 'evolution' has been to speed up calculations and increase the number that can be calculated simultaneously. And that also necessitated greater miniaturisation There's not been a fundamental change in what it does.
It's also roughly the same amount of time between inventing a functioning railway locomotive and having a pretty comprehensive national rail network.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
I read an interesting argument that LLMs may be as good as they are ever likely to be. Largely because training them on the LLM generated content which will start becoming a large portion of the web was likely to make them worse...
0 -
I believe they've also passed a law that women cannot sing or read aloud in public
0 -
At least that one wouldn't change horses' existence too much, if they were the target of this idiocy.
0 -
I'm not sure this is a great argument. Saying "but horses don't have to!" would not convince anyone you shouldn't have to wear clothes while teaching, for example.
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Depending on the reports, they aren't allowed look at men they don't know, or laugh in public so that a man can hear, and some seem to suggest it's illegal to speak loudly in their own homes.
0 -
It's not supposed to be a great argument, just an illustration of how nuts it is to be so offended by the sight of something which isn't offensive to normal people. Teaching in the nude would be.
0 -
yes, there've already been some instances of modes effectively being poisoned because they ingest their own output or that of other models
another factor is that the original training data was taken without permission i.e stolen
authors, artists, and other rights holders, are rightly angry that their works are being used without payment or attribution to make lots of money for the thieves
some rights holders have struck licensing deals, others are taking legal action, personally i hope the thieves get sued into oblivion and are forced to delete the product of their thievery
either way, it's likely that getting training data will become harder and more costly
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
Pro photographers are upset with Adobe about this. If you use their AI then your photos are uploaded to their service for them to use as they see fit*. You have no opt-out. Once this knowledge becomes mainstream then there will either be big changes in the future or sensible people will stop using Lightroom.
*That stunning sunset you have just included in your photo was taken from another photographer for free, and you have just donated your foreground for free, including your family or whatever.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
The opt out is to not use their cloud storage. It applies to the full Creative Suite, not just Photoshop.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Katie Price has had a facelift costing ten grand. I don't really want to discuss it, it's a face and it's been lifted, hence the term facelift.
0 -
I don't use it as I bailed out when they went subscription only, but doesn't that mean stop using it all together? Reports I've had is they trawl your HD library, not just what you upload.
Try using Adobe CS while disconnected from the internet.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Ha, for my sins, I still follow Dan Neidle, not least for when they come across rather dodgy ways to evade/avoid tax. The takedowns are quite entertaining (as long as you're not the target, I guess).
https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/08/25/how_the_green_jellyfish_fraud_worked/
0 -
Wife is a graphic designer, so dumping CS altogether is not really viable. The bigger issue raised was that a lot of the stuff stored on their cloud will be confidential and subject to commercial NDAs. I suspect this is just waiting for a test case to slap them down.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
🤞
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Have just re-checked and Adobe do state that they only use data stored on their cloud storage. You also can opt out of AI data collection by switching off the AI features (which are not particularly useful for what we use, so no loss there).
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
"Have just re-checked and Adobe do state that they only use data stored on their cloud storage."
I've heard claims to the contrary though. Hopefully it will come to a head, clarity will be given, and everyone happy. Although I still won't subscribe to a practical app on a subscription basis.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
assuming adobe aren't lying, they did state that local content isn't being pinched and that they don't use your content to train their ai
as pretty much every application could be doing that anyway, not just adobe's, either you trust everything on the computer or you don't use it, anything needing to be really secure had better be air-gapped
as i get adobe cc and all the trimmings via work, after using various adobe stuff for 30+ years it's just easier to stick with, but once that stops i'm probably going to use affinity's stuff, simple one-off licence and it covers what i'm ever likely to need
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
FWIW, as long as it's not being used for nefarious ends, I don't care one jot what Facebook uses my content for, given it's storing 10s of 1000s of photos for free (yes, I know all the caveats about 'free').
0 -
You're going to find it increasingly difficult to find software without a subscription.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I'm currently using 3, and this could bring things to a head. I could also block updates and simply "stick".
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I have no problem with a subscription model. It's ideal for something that needs to be regularly updated. And sticking with old software inevitably leads to compatibility issues when you have to replace hardware.
I also have no problem with Adobe or anyone asking permission to use my online content or clearly stating that free use of a platform implies permission to use online content with some paid option to remove that. Businesses should be paid for the services they provide, either directly or in kind. I think it's the way Adobe have brought this in that is clumsy and poorly thought through.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I started this talking about other people's concerns. My concern about subscription is Lightroom cost £119.7/year while Affinity Photo costs £67.99 outright. Lightroom is much more popular but imo not much better. Certainly wouldn't improve my output.
An unpopular opinion of mine, popular ≠ better.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Here's a perfect example of AI-generated rubbish - despite the millions of pictures of violinists and humans on the internet, it didn't manage to realise that humans have thumbs. "Am I being an idiot?" I certainly wouldn't trust a system that can't ask itself that question.
0 -
I think given most people’s experience with ai is free language learning models, google ai or picture generators, they a) have a skewed idea of what ai is and b) don’t understand the benefit.
AI is already massively helpful in things like the protein mapping - AI can accurately predict the protein map of pretty much anything - so much so we don’t know why they’re mapped that way but ai does it. It’s utterly revolutionary in that field. It has huge implications for drug development.
AI is being used in intelligence to predict things like political unrest or political violence. In Afghanistan the us intelligence led AI model could accurately predict the time an size of political unrest 80% of the time - about as accurate as a human team but it could do it 100x faster.
You can tell when AI is useful when it accurately predicts things or maps things and we don’t actually know why it predicts that.
A lot of it is hype and that’s part of the hype curve but it is already transformational in parts of the world.
It is obviously best used when there are clear gates on the data and clear specific outcomes required.
0 -
You all know it's going to happen in time and given how rapid technology has evolved in the last fifty years. It ain't going to take long. There's a reason why companies like Nvidia's, shares prices are shooting to the moon.
0 -
0 -
I'm not very happy with that moon, it's a bit pixelated, you get the idea though.
0 -
Don't disagree with that at all. Absolutely pick the one that suits you, and buying for personal use is a completely different question than buying for commercial use.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0
