Adobe deleted several Bluesky social media posts promoting its Firefly AI image generator after facing significant backlash from artists concerned about copyright infringement and the use of their work in training the AI model. The posts, which featured AI-generated images alongside prompts showcasing the technology, were criticized for being tone-deaf and dismissive of artists' rights. The company ultimately removed the content and issued an apology, acknowledging the community's concerns.
While the Wright brothers are widely credited with inventing the airplane, in Brazil, Alberto Santos-Dumont holds that honor. Brazilians argue that Santos-Dumont's 14-bis, unlike the Wright Flyer, achieved sustained, controlled flight without the assistance of launch rails or catapults, making it the first true airplane. This national pride is reflected in official records, educational materials, and public monuments, solidifying Santos-Dumont's legacy as the aviation pioneer in Brazil.
Hacker News users discuss the cultural and historical context around the invention of the airplane, acknowledging Brazil's strong belief that Alberto Santos-Dumont is the rightful inventor. Several commenters point out that the criteria for "invention" are debatable, with some emphasizing controlled, sustained flight (favoring the Wright brothers) while others prioritize public demonstrations and reproducibility (favoring Santos-Dumont). The complexities of patent law and differing standards of evidence also enter the discussion. Some users mention Santos-Dumont's open-source approach to his designs as a contributing factor to his popularity, contrasting it with the Wright brothers' more secretive approach. The general sentiment reflects an understanding of Brazil's perspective, even if not everyone agrees with it, and highlights how national narratives shape historical interpretations.
Nature reports that Microsoft's claim of creating a topological qubit, a key step towards fault-tolerant quantum computing, remains unproven. While Microsoft published a paper presenting evidence for the existence of Majorana zero modes, which are crucial for topological qubits, the scientific community remains skeptical. Independent researchers have yet to replicate Microsoft's findings, and some suggest that the observed signals could be explained by other phenomena. The Nature article highlights the need for further research and independent verification before Microsoft's claim can be validated. The company continues to work on scaling up its platform, but achieving a truly fault-tolerant quantum computer based on this technology remains a distant prospect.
Hacker News users discuss Microsoft's quantum computing claims with skepticism, focusing on the lack of peer review and independent verification of their "majorana zero mode" breakthrough. Several commenters highlight the history of retracted papers and unfulfilled promises in the field, urging caution. Some point out the potential financial motivations behind Microsoft's announcements, while others note the difficulty of replicating complex experiments and the general challenges in building a scalable quantum computer. The reliance on "future milestones" rather than present evidence is a recurring theme in the criticism, with commenters expressing a "wait-and-see" attitude towards Microsoft's claims. Some also debate the scientific process itself, discussing the role of preprints and the challenges of validating groundbreaking research.
Louis Rossmann criticizes Mozilla's handling of the Firefox browser, arguing they've prioritized telemetry and user tracking over performance and essential features. He points to the declining market share as evidence of their mismanagement and expresses frustration with the browser's increasing bloat and sluggishness. Rossmann believes Mozilla has lost sight of its original mission of providing a fast, open-source alternative to dominant browsers and is instead chasing trends that don't benefit users. He contrasts this with the Pale Moon browser, highlighting its focus on performance and customization as a better embodiment of Firefox's original values.
The Hacker News comments discuss Louis Rossmann's video about Firefox's declining market share. Several commenters agree with Rossmann's assessment that Mozilla has lost focus on its core user base by prioritizing features that don't resonate with power users and developers. Some point to specific examples like the removal of XUL extensions and the perceived bloat of the browser. Others argue that Firefox's decline is inevitable due to the dominance of Chrome and the network effects of Google's ecosystem. A few commenters defend Mozilla's decisions, suggesting they're trying to appeal to a broader audience. The discussion also touches on the difficulty of competing with a resource-rich giant like Google and the importance of open-source alternatives. Several users express nostalgia for Firefox's past dominance and lament its current state.
Summary of Comments ( 571 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43653885
HN commenters were largely critical of Adobe's social media strategy. Some felt their attempt at lightheartedness ("besties" post) fell flat and appeared out of touch, especially given the context of recent price increases and perceived declining product quality. Others saw the deletion of the posts as an acknowledgement of this misstep, but also an avoidance of genuine engagement with user concerns. Several suggested Adobe should focus on improving their products rather than managing their social media presence. A few commenters offered more cynical takes, speculating on internal pressure to appear active on new platforms regardless of having meaningful content.
The Hacker News post discussing Adobe's deletion of Bluesky posts after facing backlash has generated a moderate number of comments, focusing primarily on the nature of the original artwork, the implications of AI training datasets, and Adobe's handling of the situation.
Several commenters discuss the fact that the artwork used was a redrawing of a copyrighted piece, questioning whether the artist who redrew it had the right to give permission for its use. This raises questions about the chain of ownership and copyright when derivative works are involved. Some argue that Adobe should have performed better due diligence before using the artwork, regardless of the artist's granted permission.
The discussion also delves into broader concerns about AI training and copyright. Commenters point out the existing legal ambiguities surrounding the use of copyrighted material in training datasets, and the potential for lawsuits to clarify these issues. There's a sense that this incident with Adobe is a symptom of a larger, unresolved problem. Some speculate about the future legal landscape and how it might affect artists and AI developers.
A few comments mention the original "Loebner prize winner" artwork itself, expressing surprise at the amount of attention it's receiving given its relative simplicity. They contrast it with the rapid advancements in AI image generation and question why Adobe would choose such a basic image for their demonstration.
Several commenters criticize Adobe's decision to delete the posts, viewing it as an attempt to sweep the issue under the rug rather than engage with the criticism. This perceived lack of transparency fuels further distrust of Adobe's practices.
Some of the most compelling comments highlight the potential chilling effect this incident could have on artists. They express concern that artists might become hesitant to share their work online for fear of it being used without proper compensation or attribution in AI training datasets. This ties into the larger ethical questions surrounding AI art and the rights of artists.
A few comments offer alternative perspectives, suggesting that the backlash might be disproportionate to the offense. They argue that the use of the image, given the artist's permission, might not have been intentionally malicious. However, these views are in the minority, with the majority of commenters expressing disapproval of Adobe's actions and concern about the broader implications for artists and copyright.