[stale2002]

> well, what's Adobe's moat, now that this exists?

Although this is debatable, lets accept it for the sake of argument that adobe has no moat.

If this is the case, this may be bad for adobe, but it is amazing for the design world. Producing more art for cheaper is real value.

And we may not know who specifically will capture that value, but it is undeniably value none the less that will go somewhere. That still benefits the economy as a whole, even if we can't guess which AI startup will win the race.

[ben_w]

> That still benefits the economy as a whole, even if we can't guess which AI startup will win the race.

One possible outcome is that the entire economy benefits without any AI startup winning — even if Stability AI goes under for whatever reason, the various Stable Diffusion models are still out there getting used to make pictures.

[trashtester]

> Producing more art for cheaper is real value.

Except that if art production becomes too easy, the prices go down, and the only party benefiting is the consumer/customer.

[stale2002]

Fortunately, the only party that matters is the consumer.

Businesses may exist and be necessary to serve the consumer. But they are not valuable in and of themselves.

[zirgs]

As if that's a bad thing.

[trashtester]

Generally, it's not.

Though it tends to disappear into effects that are taken for granted.

Like the improvement in mobile phone quality since 1990.

Just like how easy access to music through Spotify may make us appreciate music less than if we have to actually put a vinyl record on, easily accessed art may also reduce our perceived appreciation.