I’m 99.9% sure that Adobe and all other big tech companies are using LLMs to generate code. So it’s slop either way, but one is at least free and open source
Of course the established alternatives like Krita, Gimp, Inkscape and others are even better, no questions there
I can confirm for Microsoft. AI is pushed on us so hard that we must use it everywhere, even for those processes that can be automated with a script (I.e.deterministic).
There’s an annoying popup ive had to deal with at work where it prompts to have AI summarize my document or some such. Takes up only ~5% of the viewing pane, but needs to be manually exited out of for EVERY document opened.
Lemme be the first to say fuck Adobe and I’ve been sailing the high seas for their products since CS4, and it pains me to say this but Krita and GIMP have a long way to go before they can match the range of functionality on Photoshop.
I genuinely really hope an open source project comes along to blow Photoshop out of the water but as someone who has been using it for 24 years, no one else is quite there yet.
Air can simplify the agent part, but not the four-machine SSH part. At least not yet.
Inside IntelliJ, Air can give you a single place to run Gemini CLI, Codex, Claude Agent, and Junie, including running agents in parallel (you can also add other ACP-compatible agents).
So your workflow could be:
In the Air prompt window, use Claude for a complex refactoring
In the same window, use Codex for a separate implementation task
In the same window, use Gemini for another task or review
…
Become more dependent on the AI, atrophy gradually
Think less, pay more
Pay more, think less
Pay more
Depend more
Pay more
Give everything to those who run DataCenters or have unlimited access to LLM/AI
Become homeless
Devalue and obliterate your art and history
Devalue and obliterate human art and history
Depend more
Depend more
Depend more
Become biomass
Die
…so infinitely much is getting devalued, dehumanized, ruined…
…I’ve been a developer for more than 20 years now…
…such an ineffably sorrowful time to live…
Source (JetBrains Air: Building a System of Products for Agentic Software Development…) [comments]
I think it’s worth reminding people where the general left wing FOSS conscious was before AI. Every week we’d see an article that was the antithesis of ownership, from celebrating the end of Disney copyright to loopholes in trademarks and the like, it was the heart of a lot of content.
There is a fantastic foreword foreword in The Picture of Dorian Gray from Oscar Wilde about art for art’s sake that I think about a lot, which really boils down to a litany for art for art’s sake, (and by extension education for education’s sake), that is overlooked in favour of being for the sake of profit or capital.
I am of the opinion that in response to AI, we have drifted from a left wing overall movement that rejected ownership in this way, to a protective, defensive style that is largely that stance of a neo-luddide, without any awareness of what ended that era, which was an insufficient boycott and misspent manpower.
I want to say, I’m someone who is overall against AI, I’m not sure how to prove it, any any time I try to explain points like this, people claim AI wrote my comment.
AI is evil, and has enormous destructive capacity, but making the walled garden of large capitalist software irrelevant in favour of FOSS solutions is a huge win, even in regards to being a result of AI.
I’d rather the water, electrical and creative debt that is incurred by AI is paid off by programs like this, than see companies like Adobe operate, particularly considering they literally changed their TOS to train their internal AI on user data.
Either way, your data is being used to train AI, regardless of if you use Photoshop or Photocraft, but one is FOSS, and openly made with that data.
it’s very simple to understand: the companies stole everything and charge for access to it, and this is wrong. There is no contradiction with pre-llm leftist thought.
I very much agree that there is something to highlight in the conversation of private ownership and AI being trained on public work and sold as something private.
I do also think that in this case, a major monopolistic corporation being made irrelevant via the creation of open source software, it’s a net positive.
I continue to reject ownership. But the reactionary creep you describe existed before LLMs. It was often framed around discussing things like Spotify and piracy.
There are several rightwing thought patterns which “drifted” into leftwing spaces in the past 10 years especially. I see it as people who has some reactionary tendencies seeing Trump and thinking " well I don’t like that" and seeking out alternative spaces. But they didn’t purge themselves of their reactionary tendencies first. They didn’t do any introspection.
So we have a few of these. Private property being one. A weird, anti sexuality is another. Being pro genocide if it’s their preferred team doing it. I can go on.
As i recall, the claim for the entire suite was that it was “clean-room”. No code stolen… unless you are concerned that the entire model is the result of stolen code… in which case we are in agreement.
Aside from some very old models that were not that good, I don’t know of any recent LLM models that are not built on stolen properties, with complete disregard for any licensing term.
Can you point me to a model, capable of writing useful code, where the 100% of the codebase used to train the model came from people who explicitly consented to their code being used to train a model? Or was it all scraped from anywhere any everywhere they could find it regardless of consent?
If you’re advocating on the behalf of the vibe coded adobe alternatives, you’re essentially saying “I support stealing from everyone”. Yes, I hate adobe, I say eat the rich, but dont exploit the poor in the meantime
They were stolen from and they no longer have their property? Or someone else executed an idea they had faster with a different tool? Sorry all this liberal abuse of the word ‘stealing’ feels very 90s RIAA.
no i don’t support stealing from everyone. it’s possible to endorse a certain type of action only in certain context. like i don’t think stealing from walmart is morally wrong, but i think stealing from a mom-and-pop corner shop definitely is.
it would be even better if stole from adobe without paying the ai companies, i.e. open weights models.
Corporate theft engines being used to drink those same corporations milkshakes feels like karmic justice. This time, I will withold my objections and fetch some popcorn.
The “generating” from already existing has a particle of a relatively explainable sense in it, unfortunately… to “de-copyright” it…
Simply put, AI has made it easier than ever to launder image copyright infringement…
That, in turn, is where AI is changing the game. Previously, content laundering was about fooling computers. Now, it may be able to fool humans.
The foundational principle is deceptively simple: copyright requires a human author…
Writing a detailed prompt is not enough.
The machines are producing at extraordinary speed. The law is moving slowly, but it is moving. The businesses that fare best will be those that understood the difference in time.
Even though the models are based on “fair use” of now unknown artists and people, now scrambled and reconstructed… which is all utterly awfully disrespectfully disgusting… indeed…
Also known as “AI-laundering”…
Create or fund a non-profit entity to create the datasets for you. The non-profit, research-oriented nature of these entities allows them to use copyrighted material more easily.
Then use this dataset to create commercial products, without offering any compensation for the use of copyrighted material.
Source (How Stability AI managed to get millions of copyrighted artworks without paying artists…)
I’m not saying adobe is good, I’m saying this adobe alternative is also bad. Like I guess photocraft and its suite is a lesser evil, but you can’t say this project is by and for the people when its, again, built by stolen works
I don’t want to incentivize using tools made through stealing other’s work then claiming it’s for the people
I’m 99.9% sure that Adobe and all other big tech companies are using LLMs to generate code. So it’s slop either way, but one is at least free and open source
Of course the established alternatives like Krita, Gimp, Inkscape and others are even better, no questions there
I can confirm for Microsoft. AI is pushed on us so hard that we must use it everywhere, even for those processes that can be automated with a script (I.e.deterministic).
Can confirm, at least for Adobe Acrobat.
There’s an annoying popup ive had to deal with at work where it prompts to have AI summarize my document or some such. Takes up only ~5% of the viewing pane, but needs to be manually exited out of for EVERY document opened.
Well, I was thinking about the Adobe devs using LLMs for “coding” their new updates, but yeah, them pushing GenAI onto the users is also a good point
Lemme be the first to say fuck Adobe and I’ve been sailing the high seas for their products since CS4, and it pains me to say this but Krita and GIMP have a long way to go before they can match the range of functionality on Photoshop.
I genuinely really hope an open source project comes along to blow Photoshop out of the water but as someone who has been using it for 24 years, no one else is quite there yet.
Stockholm syndrome and cringe, name a more iconic duo
It’s wild to see the divergence between Hump and Qgis.
10 years ago both were barely functional. Qgis however, is now I would say better than it’s corporate alternative.
Probably a book could be written about the differences between the two projects.
I think it’s worth reminding people where the general left wing FOSS conscious was before AI. Every week we’d see an article that was the antithesis of ownership, from celebrating the end of Disney copyright to loopholes in trademarks and the like, it was the heart of a lot of content.
There is a fantastic foreword foreword in The Picture of Dorian Gray from Oscar Wilde about art for art’s sake that I think about a lot, which really boils down to a litany for art for art’s sake, (and by extension education for education’s sake), that is overlooked in favour of being for the sake of profit or capital.
I am of the opinion that in response to AI, we have drifted from a left wing overall movement that rejected ownership in this way, to a protective, defensive style that is largely that stance of a neo-luddide, without any awareness of what ended that era, which was an insufficient boycott and misspent manpower.
I want to say, I’m someone who is overall against AI, I’m not sure how to prove it, any any time I try to explain points like this, people claim AI wrote my comment.
AI is evil, and has enormous destructive capacity, but making the walled garden of large capitalist software irrelevant in favour of FOSS solutions is a huge win, even in regards to being a result of AI.
I’d rather the water, electrical and creative debt that is incurred by AI is paid off by programs like this, than see companies like Adobe operate, particularly considering they literally changed their TOS to train their internal AI on user data.
Either way, your data is being used to train AI, regardless of if you use Photoshop or Photocraft, but one is FOSS, and openly made with that data.
it’s very simple to understand: the companies stole everything and charge for access to it, and this is wrong. There is no contradiction with pre-llm leftist thought.
I very much agree that there is something to highlight in the conversation of private ownership and AI being trained on public work and sold as something private.
I do also think that in this case, a major monopolistic corporation being made irrelevant via the creation of open source software, it’s a net positive.
I continue to reject ownership. But the reactionary creep you describe existed before LLMs. It was often framed around discussing things like Spotify and piracy.
There are several rightwing thought patterns which “drifted” into leftwing spaces in the past 10 years especially. I see it as people who has some reactionary tendencies seeing Trump and thinking " well I don’t like that" and seeking out alternative spaces. But they didn’t purge themselves of their reactionary tendencies first. They didn’t do any introspection.
So we have a few of these. Private property being one. A weird, anti sexuality is another. Being pro genocide if it’s their preferred team doing it. I can go on.
As i recall, the claim for the entire suite was that it was “clean-room”. No code stolen… unless you are concerned that the entire model is the result of stolen code… in which case we are in agreement.
This is ArtCraft we’re talking about, right? The “Adobe” thing is just marketing. It’s just a bunch of AI tools sewn together.
Most certainly the latter but if it’s used for open source then in not too mad about it
Edit. I also won’t be angry if AI eventually cures cancer. I’ll celebrate.
Which model are they using in their product, how do we know it’s stolen?
Aside from some very old models that were not that good, I don’t know of any recent LLM models that are not built on stolen properties, with complete disregard for any licensing term.
Can you point me to a model, capable of writing useful code, where the 100% of the codebase used to train the model came from people who explicitly consented to their code being used to train a model? Or was it all scraped from anywhere any everywhere they could find it regardless of consent?
Photo editing apps like Photoshop do not use LLMs, they use ML image models
stealing from the people is wrong, but i support stealing from the bourgeoise.
If you’re advocating on the behalf of the vibe coded adobe alternatives, you’re essentially saying “I support stealing from everyone”. Yes, I hate adobe, I say eat the rich, but dont exploit the poor in the meantime
They were stolen from and they no longer have their property? Or someone else executed an idea they had faster with a different tool? Sorry all this liberal abuse of the word ‘stealing’ feels very 90s RIAA.
no i don’t support stealing from everyone. it’s possible to endorse a certain type of action only in certain context. like i don’t think stealing from walmart is morally wrong, but i think stealing from a mom-and-pop corner shop definitely is.
it would be even better if stole from adobe without paying the ai companies, i.e. open weights models.
Corporate theft engines being used to drink those same corporations milkshakes feels like karmic justice. This time, I will withold my objections and fetch some popcorn.
The “generating” from already existing has a particle of a relatively explainable sense in it, unfortunately… to “de-copyright” it…
-–
-–
Even though the models are based on “fair use” of now unknown artists and people, now scrambled and reconstructed… which is all utterly awfully disrespectfully disgusting… indeed…
Also known as “AI-laundering”…
Related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_washing
You wouldn’t download a car
If I did download a car, which I would, I would also seed said car.
I’m fairly certain that Adobe’s genAI offering is trained on licensed works.
I’m not saying adobe is good, I’m saying this adobe alternative is also bad. Like I guess photocraft and its suite is a lesser evil, but you can’t say this project is by and for the people when its, again, built by stolen works
It’s not 🖤