[–] 3 points 23 hours ago

In all fairness, I haven’t investigated it thoroughly myself, and my skepticism mainly comes from the proposed timeframe. I’d be less skeptical if they said they were going to focus only on, say, Photoshop and spend a few months reproducing a small subset of its features without decompiling the code while creating a public audit trail of their clean room process that a lawyer helped them create.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (2 children)

    I use LLMs for coding every day at work and also use local LLMs at home. From my experience, LLMs can be used to create a better end product than humans alone if the proper discipline is followed.

    However, my impression is that ArtCraft is a bunch of vibe coded slop where the goal is to reproduce several apps as quickly as possible by letting the LLM go wild. In that case, you usually end up with something that seems to work in many respects, but eventually collapses under its own weight.

    We will see whether ArtCraft ever gets out of alpha and shapes up to be solid, but as someone who has been a software engineer over 20 years, hastily creating a mountain of code and then expecting to come back and fix all the problems later never works. It’s always better to work incrementally and add one feature at a time while building in quality every step of the way.

    What I expect is that they will continue adding features and trying to fix the problems, play an extended game of whack-a-mole, then eventually get frustrated and abandon the project.

    I detest companies like Adobe and I’d be delighted to have my skepticism be proven wrong and see them end up with replacements for the whole suite that work well and are on solid ground legally. I’d also feel better about this if they were using local models, since spending a fortune in tokens to support a company like Anthropic is certainly not on higher moral ground than supporting Adobe with subscription fees.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 18 points 1 day ago* (8 children)

    Yeah, as much as I’d like to applaud this sort of thing, ArtCraft, for example, is going to end up with some major legal woes, in addition to the fact that it’s a pile of slop that doesn’t work worth a damn. The only winner is Anthropic or OpenAI getting big money for all those wasted tokens.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 child)

    It’s funny the Democrats won on the promise to clamp down on big tech given their history. Next election cycle, I bet the Republicans will be running on regulating the fossil fuel industry.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

    I suppose the reality is that we can’t fully trust any open weight or closed model. It’s worth checking the code for any open source harness or runner you’re using with open weight models for any data collection or other potential problems and being careful about what permissions agents have.

    Of course, LLMs can write bad, insecure code in general, so it’s always unwise to trust the output of any model in production without thoroughly vetting it.

    That being said, I trust Qwen 3.8 27B running in llama.cpp with OpenCode more than I trust anything from Anthropic or OpenAI, mainly because I’ve seen the code for llama.cpp and a OpenCode and I’ve never seen Qwen do anything suspicious, whereas I know Anthropic and OpenAI would be collecting my data and training their models on it, along with who knows what else.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago

    Even if it did work, Adobe’s legal team will obliterate them. I’m also not sure about the legality of using it for any paid work. It’s a moot point, though, since it’s slop, and better off using a cracked version that at least works.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 4 points 3 days ago

    Mr. McGuire: I just want to say one word to you. Just one word.

    Benjamin: Yes, sir.

    Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?

    Benjamin: Yes, I am.

    Mr. McGuire: Plastics.

    Benjamin: Exactly how do you mean?

    Mr. McGuire: There's a great future in plastics. Think about it. Will you think about it?

    A great future they said. 😭

  • source
  • view more: next ›