Businesses that rely on creatives should probably avoid angering them.

  • ekZepp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This just show how ready and willing are many companies to replace human creativity with cheap AI. If anyone really thought that this wasn’t the direction they were pointing to, he was just deluding himself. New creativity tools “my ass”.

    • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re jumping to conclusions. The image was a mislabeled stock image they bought. This is just a case of poor quality control.

    • RatherBeMTB@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      People will buy the cheapest product that meets their needs. A business not using AI as much as possible is in a disadvantage.

      • restingboredface@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe for companies that aren’t selling tools for digital artists, but WACOM is literally trying to sell a product that humans use to create these images. To usurp the their customer base and buy an AI image (even unintentionally) shows at best a complete lack of understanding about what kind of art is being made with their tablets and at worst a disregard for a major concern of their customer base.

        • RatherBeMTB@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The same arguments were made in the 80s when products like Adobe appeared in the design market. Capitalism is about survival of the fittest whether we like it or not, and AI is a tremendous advantage.