P:Limitation of Adobe Generative AI user guidelines [merged thread]

It's a problem I'm experiencing a bit with all American-made products:
there is a real “offense syndrome” in the USA, where everything that might
offend someone is considered politically incorrect. This is a relative and
very hypocritical concept because there is concern about not offending
those who think in a certain "Western" way, not about not offending at all.
For instance, a bare breast is considered offensive, but not an uncovered
head, which would offend many Islamic fundamentalists. So, it's just
hypocrisy. The problem is that if I am a writer and need to write an er0tic
scene, I don't want an AI that bothers me every three seconds telling me
that certain terms are offensive because if I use them, it's because they
are part of the story. If I am a photographer and take a glamour photo, I
want to be able to use the photo editing product without the application
complaining. The choice
of what to write, what to photograph, or what to film in a video should be
left to the author. It will be their responsibility to decide, not the
tool's. Imagine a hammer refusing to drive a nail because it's three in the
afternoon and a neighbor might be taking a nap! We are adult, not children,
and software houses should respect us.

[abuse removed by moderator]

@locusofeden I have sent you a message.

Ich möchte auf den Beitrag von Henrik Heigl eingehen,

"Ich habe eben z.B. "schönes weibliches Model mit schwarzem Kleid und großer Oberweite" ausprobiert und das klappt ohne Probleme oder Fehlermeldungen"

Das Problem ist dass "große Oberweite" manchmal funktioniert und dann wieder mal nicht. Man kann nicht vorhersehen ob ja oder nein.

Ich habe mir von Firefly ein Bild erstellen lassen dass einen Mann zeigen sollte. Unter den erstellten Bildern war eine dass einen Mann mit freien Oberkörper zeigte. Da es für mich gut passte wollte ich es weiter bearbeiten, was mir aber nicht gelang da Photoshop es unter Berufung auf seine Richtlinien verweigerte. Photoshop erstellt also Bilder die es dann selbst als Verstoß sieht. Außerdem sind 80% aller Bilder die Photoshop (Firefly) von Personen erstellt sowieso unbrauchbar, da fast immer irgendwelche Gliedmaßen verdreht oder verstümmelt sind und viele Gesichter verzerrt sind.

And a third version for childish adults? 😉

"Adobe should create an adult Firefly and a children's Firefly..."

==========

And who would supervise access -- the Internet police? 

Seriously, if this matters so much, find an Open AI model you can run offline & train it to suit.

Adobe should take the responsibility to create an adult Firefly and a children's Firefly to avoid putting the brake on professionals.

@Starsson it's not necessarily that it's considered "pornographic" - it's that the current algorithms cannot determine the differences yet. Once it is trained up enough I'm sure Adobe and others will lax some restrictions or users will start to find that bikini pictures (example) are suddenly allowed.

@Starsson no offense, but thats a very simplistic view of a complex issue which is why some solutions are limiting outputs. Unfortunately limitations like this affect everyone without exception. Until an AI can detect with absolute certainty and identify intent, algorithms will restrict erroring on the side of too limiting rather than allowances.

AI competitors to Firefly - Dall-E, Stable Diffusion, Topaz, CoPilot, Midjourney, even Canva are all cloud based and do not require you to build a local system to support or run them. Some require subscriptions but also have free-to-use options to test with.

The links I posted were examples offered through the Adobe Exchange - they aren't spam but also vary in support and updates for latest versions, etc. If you do your own research you can find stable plugins for Photoshop or use the competitor solution outright.

Either way, we all can debate the merits of "censoring" nudity in Adobe Firefly AI but until a realistic solution to prevent it's misuse beyond the "honor system" is avaible and flawless, I doubt things will change. Adobe has to limit their liability due to misuse both in training AND generative results.

Read up on the current lawsuits going on with other companies and you can quickly see why Adobe took the stance they did with their AI. If you don't agree with it - use one of the many competitors that still allow nudity.

I responded to this, but I think even the forum censored me, because I said something like ". . . urinating in the wind.", but I used another word for urinating.  It didn't post my reply.

Here's the gist.  These are half measures.  It's not using Adobe's AI and those specific links look very sketchy to me. 

This fight is noble, but I have many other hills I've got to go die on.  This is a sad day though.  I always thought Adobe was a different company.  I've used Adobe since the mid 90s and it's always been the best.  Maybe someone with decision making capacity and a backbone will see enough users reacting to this and make course correcting changes some day.

For now, my genuine thanks Kevin and all of you who took the time to look at my posts.  Seems like a good group of people.