• NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    26 days ago

    Yes. Photoshop is not currently equal to deepfake porn. It is a few popular plugins away from being it though. Hence getting out ahead of things with content policies.

    And… NSFW digital art is not as good money as you think it is. At least, not at the corporate/software level.

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        26 days ago

        I mean, have you seen Gadget?

        But also… that is kind of the point. Adobe and basically every company that isn’t a porn company doesn’t care about the revenue from porn. And the companies that DO care about the revenue are constantly fighting piracy.

        There are some patreon-like artists who make bank for getting their Source Film Maker on. But they are a handful of licenses, at best.

        • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          25 days ago

          That’s what I was thinking. Apart from the porn locked up in the Disney vault, big companies aren’t in the business of making porn. And the companies that do aren’t going to be interested in deep fakes. The people who are using Photoshop to create porn are small fries to Adobe. Deep fake porn has been around as long as photo manipulation has, and Adobe hasn’t cared before.

          Bearing that in mind, I don’t think this policy has anything to do with AI deep fakes or porn. I think it’s more likely to be some new revenue source, like farming data for LLM training or something. They could go the Tumblr route and use AI to censor content, but considering Tumblr couldn’t tell the difference between the Sahara Desert and boobs, I think that’s one fuck up with a major company away from being litigation hell. The only reason that I think would make sense for Adobe to do this because of deep fakes is if they believe that governments are going to start holding them liable for the content people make with their products.

      • Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        26 days ago

        Artists for furry porn aren’t generally paying for 100+ enterprise licenses. But then, people doing more questionable stuff probably aren’t paying at all so it still doesn’t make sense.

        • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          25 days ago

          That’s what I was thinking. Deep fakes have existed since photo manipulation was invented, and Adobe hasn’t cared one iota about it before. The only reason I can see for them to care now is if they think they can get in legal trouble for what people create with their products.