Adobe Photoshop's AI tools put women politicians in bikini bottoms and their male colleagues in suits
Adobe Photoshop's AI tools put women politicians in bikini bottoms and their male colleagues in suits
After Nine blamed an 'automation' error in Photoshop for producing an edited image of Georgie Purcell, I set out to find out what the software would do to other politicians.
After Nine blamed an 'automation' error in Photoshop for producing an edited image of Georgie Purcell, I set out to find out what the software would do to other politicians.
You're viewing a single thread.
Looks like it does do the thing Adobe claimed it wouldn't after all.
Still poor form from Nine for using it in the first place, and for not catching it in the editorial process. But seems this is just another reminder this week of the biases of generative models.
Does it though? Adobe simply claimed it would require human intervention and approval. Which is true and easily provable. You can’t replace someone’s clothing without selecting a part of the image you want to replace.
Someone had to go and do that. Someone hit generate on an AI prompt. Someone saw the result of said AI prompt (which gives you 3 possible alternatives each run) and said “yep, print it”.
This is not a tale of the biases of generative AI. There’s literally no reason for Nine to have even invoked any such thing in the first place.