Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | skoskie's commentslogin

There’s a video right on the landing page that shows it in use. Played fine on mobile for me.

But to answer the question, it looks a lot like a Canva competitor.


AI is going to kill Canva, Figma, and Adobe. Without a doubt.

Nano Banana alone obsoleted all of Photoshop. (And the Chinese versions of Nano Banana are even better!)

I'm most worried for my friends in creative though. I have some extremely talented friends at WPP and other agencies. Everyone is shaking in their boots.

Nobody's buying ads because of the economy, then these tools are nipping at their heels. They've already had one massive round of layoffs, and there's another one supposedly happening early next year.

Where are these millions of people going to go? These are six figure income earners.

There are five million marketing professionals in the US. If half of them lose their jobs, then what? What's lined up for them after this?

If AI fails, the economy goes boom.

If AI succeeds, the economy goes ... bigger boom?

I used to think the tools would wind up creating more work, especially in narrative creative work. Outside of A24 and indie/foreign films, Hollywood is so trite. These models drop Pixar/Disney VFX into the hands of every YouTuber - and that could be really cool when used by the right people. Like the Corridor Crew folks.

Maybe gaming and media will see a boost, but advertising and marketing folks are really going to get hit hard.


The reason most creative media is good is because you see the vision of a creative team or individual.

If the vision is diluted due to lack of control afforded by AI tools, then the tools won’t be used.

Many times in Hollywood have we seen directors spend unjustifiable amounts of money in the pursuit of creative control.

Hand camera tracking a dinosaur in Jurassic Park, developing a novel diffraction algorithm for THE ABYSS, hand-drawing 3-Dimensional computer animations for 2001, creating an entire scale model practically for a single fight scene in LOTR.

AI allows you to get anything. The best movies are a direct reflection of a particular vision. AI can’t provide this and I see no way to solve it.

A natural response is - well directors already outsource some creative control to VFX artists so why not to a machine instead.

Because an artist can control everything. Even if the artist is prompting a model, at the end of the day an artist can drill right down to the tooling itself (photoshop for example) and exactly achieve the vision.

I don’t see AI achieving this granularity while maintaining its utility. It’s a sliding scale of trading utility as a time saving device for control.

If you lean too far to the control side, well you might as well fire up photoshop. If you lean too much to the utility side, you sacrifice creative control.

When looked at under this lens the utility of AI generation is actually limited as it solves a non existent problem. One can think of it as an additional piece of tooling for use only as a generational tool where there is less need for control, such as for background characters.

The team at Red Barrels, for example, train a local model on their own artwork to automatically generate variant textures for map generation. Things such as this. No need to be doom and gloom about this stuff.


> lack of control afforded by AI

You should look at ComfyUI.

Control is here, it's just not widely distributed or easy to use.

If you're patient, you can fully control the set, blocking, angles. You can position your characters, relight them, precisely control props, etc. You have unlimited control over everything. It's just a mess right now.


> and Adobe

Have you seen their announcements during Adobe Max? The AI features are mind blowing. Adobe is alive and well.


> Adobe is alive and well.

I wonder.

They're doing well with their existing customer base of digital creatives and related industries/professions.

Who may all be the buggy whip makers of the late 2020's.

Way too many of the people/companies who traditionally paid highly skilled and creative Photoshop users are rapidly moving away from doing that in favour of cheap GenAI slop.

I'm sure there are people in graphic design, illustration, videography, photography, UI/UX, 3D art, augmented reality, social media, creativity and design, collaboration and productivity, and education who are super excited about what Adobe is doing. I'm also sure almost all of those people are very concerned about their career choice and future (or are ignoring the reality of what's going on around them).

Sure, the top graphic designers in the world will still earn great money being highly creative for key clients. But the vast majority of people in those fields are not the top in their field, and the vast majority of clients those people invoice are going to consider cheap AI slop "good enough" for their businesses and use cases.

I have a 30+ year career in web related roles, working more or less closely with graphic designers, artists, illustrators, photographers, and other website development related professions. All of the ones I've remained friends with over that time are either deeply concerned about their career future, or have already jumped ship and become nurses, carpenters, teachers, caregivers, and even priests and drug dealers...


> All of the ones I've remained friends with over that time are either deeply concerned about their career future, or have already jumped ship and become nurses, carpenters, teachers, caregivers, and even priests and drug dealers...

Aside from the last one, that kinda sounds like a win for society.


> The AI features are mind blowing.

It doesn't look like they developed any models. The 3d relighting and 3d manipulation are all 3rd party models given a UI.


Thinking this through… I spent around $3500 and $4500 on my last two MBPs, but got 9 years of use out of each of them. That’s only $450/yr.

But where I used to get a new iPhone every other year, I’m now on the fourth year of my 13P and it still works great. That’s only $300/yr.

It’s interesting to think about.


For us as consumers to think about, but there are multiple teams in many companies (not just Apple) that are dedicated to (exploiting) this interesting fact.


I still use my iPhone SE after 8 years and bought it for 170€. That’s under 25€ per year :-). (Ok I had the battery replaced for 30€ once.)


That is not at all what they said. Your interpretation seems disingenuous.


This is too cute.


Good times. I used to fire it up, go eat breakfast, and come back just in time to see the weather forecast.


And in my state I needed more documentation for an ID than was required for my passport. It varies wildly.


That’s why we have classes and namespaces.

Anyone can write good or bad code. Avoiding new functionality and syntax won’t change that.


Is this not the logical result of fighting spammers? It’s easier to trust messages coming from mega corp when you know mega corp has invested in mechanisms that ensure their systems aren’t being used to send spam. I certainly don’t like the negative impact on people who choose to self host, but I also don’t see it as an intentional effort to shut out legitimate emails.

Case in point a bit further down in the comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43902653


It's always good to have an alternative reason beyond "we want to crush the competition", especially if one of these pesky anti-trust lawsuits comes around.

It's very easily possible for both to be true, there is a "fight spam" reason and there is also a "monopoly" reason, and of course unless you very stupid you never mention the second.


Their systems still do send spam. Yes probably an extremely low percent, but I do see @gmail.com spam.


I’m bothered by the UK thing because beyond just the marketing, we had Tim declare that “Privacy is a human right.”

Marketing is BS, and I expect companies to screw customers and ideals (“Do no evil”) whenever it’s convenient. But I really thought Tim understood the assignment and would keep Apple on track for at least the duration of his tenure.

Now every nation knows they can pass similar laws and Apple will do nothing.


Tim Cook is all about the money and has no integrity. That's why he caved and why he also got the kneepads out to kiss Trump's feet.


The idea is pretty brilliant. I hope it takes off. Good luck.


Thanks for the positive reply, will 100% post here when it launches fully!


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: