Technology

59080 readers

3886 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

409

Adobe’s ‘Ethical’ Firefly AI Was Trained on Midjourney Images (www.bloomberg.com)

submitted 6 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

53 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When Adobe Inc. released its Firefly image-generating software last year, the company said the artificial intelligence model was trained mainly on Adobe Stock, its database of hundreds of millions of licensed images. Firefly, Adobe said, was a “commercially safe” alternative to competitors like Midjourney, which learned by scraping pictures from across the internet.

But behind the scenes, Adobe also was relying in part on AI-generated content to train Firefly, including from those same AI rivals. In numerous presentations and public postsabout how Firefly is safer than the competition due to its training data, Adobe never made clear that its model actually used images from some of these same competitors.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world -4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

It doesn't really matter how much it is. An image is an image.

[–] balder1991@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Data augmentation is a thing since a long time, but of course if the majority of your data is synthetic your model will suck on real world data. Though as these generative models get better and better at mimicking real world data and we select the results we want to use (removing the nonsense and hallucinations, artifacts etc.), we’re still feeding them “more data”.

I guess we’ll have to wait and see what effect it’ll produce on future models. I think overall the improvements on LLMs have been good, even at slow steps we’re still figuring out how to better turn them into useful tools. I don’t know how well the image generation models have improved in the last 2 years though.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

we’re still feeding them “more data”.

Yes, that's one way of putting it. What gets into the Adobe stock database is already curated. They also have the sales and tracking data.

Though as these generative models get better and better at mimicking real world data

Also yes on this. It doesn't matter if your data is synthetic but only if it's fit for purpose. That's especially true in this case, where the distinction between synthetic and real is so unclear. You're already including drawings, renders, photomanips, etc. I have no idea what kind of misconception people have that they would think it matters if some piece of digital art is AI generated.

[–] Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm just talking about synthetic images affect model quality.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It doesn't matter how the image was made. It only matters what it is like and how it is used to affect the model.

[–] Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 months ago

That's what I'm saying. Synthetic images can help your model look better, but if you're aiming for “realistic” output, but synthetic images are fundamentally not real images and too many will bias your model in a slightly different direction.