• Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    22 hours ago

    That “Adobe Stock” photo from the article is just some generic AI crap.

    The door is wide open for a stock photo business right now, I guess.

    • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      Isn’t that kinda what AI images should be used for? Meaningless stock images? Like, if the article was about a specific person, or an interesting activity or place, then yea that’s not for AI. But a generic article about “jobs” seems fine.

      • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        19 hours ago

        No?

        People are paying for those pictures, either as a subscription or per-use basis. They’re paying a rate to reflects work; photographers, models, rights - all kinds of different costs up front. None of that exists with AI.

        It’s sort of like sitting down to a restaurant, ordering and paying, and then getting served food from your own home. Some horseshit Kraft mac and cheese and fish sticks.

        • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 hours ago

          A better comparison would be if the menu at the restaurant had AI art on it. It doesn’t matter, I’m not there for the menu art. The menu is not the main product I’m there to consume. It’s the food. The menu art is there to give a quick visual and because it looks marginally better than a blank piece of paper, nothing more. Whether it was painted by an artist or created in 2 minutes by someone with Stable Diffusion makes no difference in the food quality.

          If people are really losing money because others no longer want to use their work for meaningless article headers, I don’t know what to say. Maybe get in line with phone operators and VCR repair men?

          • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 hours ago

            I wasn’t really arguing for the artist. I was arguing that Adobe is ripping people off by selling horseshit when the prices they’re charging are for a different product entirely. A more expensive one.

            If they want to make AI stock photos available they should have a different tier. It should be cheaper. They shouldn’t just mix it in with their regular stock photos. It’s a different product and it’s a hell of a lot cheaper.

    • Hackworth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Hop on Adobe stock right now and search for something. Half of the results will be AI-generated. There’s a search filter that can exclude them.