Photoshop's newest terms of service has users agree to allow Adobe access to their active projects for the purposes of "content moderation" and other various reasons. This has caused concern among…
At this rate my owned outright copy of Adobe that requires no internet access, with hacks, will become a generational heirloom I can pass down to descendants with immersurable value.
Same choice as normal: whine about and then tolerate a change you don't want in proprietary software rather than spend time learning to use a software-freedom-respecting alternative.
The question I'd like to ask them is WHY they want to get involved in Content Moderation. They make a toolset, nothing more, so why do they care what someone is using the tools for? What could they possibly get out of this that makes it worth the time or expense?
Wild. My old place we relied on this despite me urging us to use Figma/Sketch and Blender (amazing for 2D art). Naturally logistics factored into it as our clients relied on Adobe as well, but there were plenty of projects that didn’t need it.
We also had the dumbest guidelines to ensure no leaks. I would routinely get app requests refused despite the fact their source was right there on GitHub.
So now what are they gonna do? Because if they use Adobe, they can no longer ensure that a clients work won’t hit the net. May not seem like much for small indie projects but if we snagged the next GTA or Valorant, you bet that would attract some serious lookiloos.
Not sure if a client would find “it wasn’t us it was Adobe” all that comforting!
Can Adobe be used on a machine that's sandboxed / offline? That way you can do your projects while disconnected from their servers, once the project is complete, just move your files onto an external drive and away from Adobe access?