This is quite literally one of the best things of this fucking century. Imagine what is going to happen to these mother fuckers and their bottom line. They have been a knife in Linux’ side for decades holding so many people from switching and now look at this. Your love or hate towards AI right now actually doesn’t matter, because the end result is way greater than it. I’m rejoicing hard over this

you can't really copyright UI beyond the design itself, the functionality is free game as far as I understand.

It's not just copyright. There are also patents to worry about. Those cover a specific process, like "click here, and the code selects all regions matching the same color (+-5%)". If you make an exact copy, surely you've violated some patents.

Sure, patent protections don't last as long as copyright, and they can be defeated if you prove that it's "obvious" or can show prior art, but it's still an expensive legal battle against a megacorp. A vibe coder will likely fold at the first cease and desist.

I’ve used the photoshop clone, I’m not a digital artist so I don’t really know much, but it worked ok. I’m sure with time it’ll get better. I’m also using the word craft one and this one works no issues at all. Also on this one I don’t really do a lot of docs but I did some stuff on it and it worked fine

I do think some implications not many people think about is how companies will combat this. Of course there's copyright and patents, though I'm not sure how all that will pan out.

A more impactful implication, in my mind, is this will create a larger push to move applications and/or games to be online only and not distribute any version of the application; since, as far what I can imagine, that is the best and potentially only way to combat this. Just don't give people the compiled programs. Which sucks in my opinion.

This largely stemmed from modding games together and expanding the capabilities of modding, but I think this may seriously harm modding by preventing it from even happening on new games, which does scare me as a modder.

Granted, we sorta had this already - many Godot and Unity games were relatively easy to decompile, and many popular games are still released using those engines. Though, most, if not all, triple A games have moved away from Unity, if there even were that many to begin with. And that may be because of the fact that Unity games are easy to decompile.

This is all guessing, but I do suspect you'll see the largest impacts of this in triple A games and large consumer-oriented software; commercial-only software may not see as much impact due to security, liability, and licensing implications of using (potentially unsupported) clones.

The question for me is how this affects the copyright discussion. Microsoft and Adobe have been happy to use and promote AI which has stolen the work of others. When they go after Artcraft, and I’m sure they will, how do they manage to not look like the huge hypocrites they are?

I don't understand why anyone is interested in using these. They simply look like the real thing. There is nothing indicating they work remotely the same under the hood.

If you were to generate a bug for bug copy that would be one thing, this is just a doppelganger.

Were it made with Ai or not, its just not something that has any real value.

I'm an IP attorney. You don't have copyright over the thing you created with AI as you describe it. Copyright applies only to a minimally original expression by a human at this time.

Comedy gold.

Open source tools for all of these use cases have existed for over a decade and people still buy both adobe and Microsoft office. I don't think some slop apps are going to change that.

I'm a Microsoft hater but I don't think this will changes the wider publics opinion on them?

Open office and libreoffice have been around a good while now.

Honestly there is a good chance the LLM ripped code from the long standing projects to cut corners.

I think youre right, theyll try. Though for 'managing', I don't think that will matter. They don't really need to.

The point of being a legislative giant is that your lawyers use whatever angle will work on a technicality for whatever profit goal you're trying to achieve. Often throwing bullshit arguments one after another, to drown your opposition in paperwork, burden of proof or legal fees until they're forced to cave just to minimise losses.

Companies are abstract entities that don't have any actual principles of copyright to be hypocritical about, and the principles of the many people within them are scarcely relevant at scale as their jobs are dependant on compliance to rules imposed above them.

The owners of these companies won't have to manage anything, because they're insulated from consequence and the company is treated as a separate entity, for some reason.

Pirating Adobe products was common practice for poor uni students, or occasional users that didn't want to pay exorbitant rates to fix an image here and there. Adobe made that much more difficult. Then you have us Australians that have been getting charged well above the US retail price for years; at one point it was cheaper to fly to America and buy a physical copy.

These slop apps will absolutely let people go back to doing that, and get back at Adobe for overcharging, because the open source tools either don't work with the file formats required, or they just don't cut it. I use LibreOffice & GIMP and they're great, I love them. However, I'm not a graphic designer, and tools like Photoshop leave GIMP in the dust for professional work.

It's funny, but we've had LibreOffice for years. I'll take the human made one, thanks.

But continue making the unaccountable Epstein class uncomfortable. Autodesk next, yes please. I'll still use FreeCAD but boy is it quirky lol.

I refuse to discourage people from providing everyone free and open source alternatives. If you don’t like or want to try then don’t. If they are working at making it better then that’s great for us.

This is good and bad at the same time...

Valid

There may never be a need to challenge Adobe's patent lawyers in court.

This person used AI to clone commercial software, and then released the cloned software. Imagine instead someone developed an AI that could clone most commercial software...and then they simply published the AI open source. Now, anyone can download a tool that can clone software like Photoshop. They can clone Photoshop on their own computer, and that cloned copy never needs to be distributed anywhere.

Imagine Adobe trying to go after people that did that. It would be like trying to go after people that violate a patent for some device that they build in their garage, only use personally, and never sell. Could you in theory go after home tinkerers for patent infringement? Sure. But in practice it's impossible to do at scale. Adobe will never even be able to find the people to sue.

Pirating Adobe and MS products is a practice of Nerds which thought they were hackers, since the existence of alternatives which make useless the piracy of this products.

LibreOffice is used since years in Spain in companies and administrations

I don't know where you got that idea. The vast majority of people I knew who passed around a copy of Adobe stuff or MS Office, along with a working key or keygen program back in the day, were most definitely not nerds who believed they were hackers.

Yes. It makes software worthless. People doubt these things but it's done and set in stone already.

Massive nothing burger, those sloppy clones are fucking terrible in production, and dont believe me, look it up yourself.

Id love for it to be really of substantial value as it is now though.

We still don't have a good alternative for prepress production media. I've seen some workarounds, but Adobe is the only actively developed option feature complete for this use case. Mostly because the chances that prepress workers and offset printer operators are also FOSS fiends and developers abysmally low. Prepress is such a small industry too since most people don't really care if their print media looks like shit

Perhaps that's the problem. If it's bad, I can still tell and choose not to read it. If it seems to make sense but actually not, I'm just going to waste my valueab time.

There is still a distinction between bad human-written source code and AI slop.

The human holds the copyright of his work and can do whatever he wants with it, including distributing it under a open/libre license, i.e., open source.

AI slop? Not so much. The model is very likely trained on stolen work. It's tainted. Nobody owns the copyright of everything it generates. No one can "open source" it. The license every one receives is voided.

And both who (intentionally) releases bad code to the crowd lack the spirit of open source, but the AI one is also right out illegal.

I still use my copy of photoshop from time to time.

Photopea has been my go to alternative for opening actual psd docs for a while.

Paint.net was my go to for quick stuff back in windows. I've been learning Kirta on linux now.

But for certain work, the 10 year old copy of photoshop is still better at certain things. Specifically for editing actual photos (go figure).

I think they'd eat their own dogfood?

30 years after switching to Linux, I still have to use Photoshop because the gimp is still trash.

I played with PhotoCraft, it launches on less than a second, and while still missing features and isn't even a 1.0 release yet, it's better than the gimp already.

And it opened all my psds perfectly.

He already released cadcraft, I haven't tried it yet

Hmmm... So if someone used CoPilot, which is owned and operated by Microsoft, to copy something Microsoft owns, like Office, does that mean that no copyright infringement actually occurred, because Microsoft can't infringe on their own copyright?

It seems there may even be an argument that an agent of Microsoft willingly released that code.

I have a simple reason, I hate closed software, I hate adobe, I hate microsoft. Like every real free software advocate.

Did it crash on startup? No? Well then you lied. You lied for adobe, bootlicker.

And of course your worldview won't fall apart that easily, you can always just apply another layer of cope.

Decompilations do work the same under the hood.

Have you tried it to say that it just looks like the real thing and that it doesn't work the same?

I agree with this reply here 100%. My previous reply was just about the fact that code quality isn't important in discussion of what takes to be an Open Source code or not. Because your previous argument was "it's bad code, how can this possibly be Open Source" (paraphrased here just).

I also think if you cannot guarantee the process does not involve in any training data from Adobe software, then how can you proof this is really clean room implementation? And besides the fact that if majority of the code is vibe coded shouldn't be copyrightable, because machines are not humans who has copyright. And to anyone who argues that LLMs are just tools, no, they are not. It's more complicated than that.

Yes but you wouldn’t actually need to make your clone very different for the copyright to be entirely different and then surely you wouldn’t get sued?

Are you confident enough to bet 6-12 months of dev time and resources(possibly lawyer consultation fees) on that assumption ? because up until recently that's what someone would need to do to find out.

It might be fine, but the threat of litigation is a part of the deterrent.

But also you can’t really copyright UI beyond the design itself, the functionality is free game as far as I understand.

As with all of these things, it's region specific.

However, game mechanic patents and copyrights exists and are litigated regularly.

Looking forward for the coming months to see if any of these programs can have all the bugs ironed out

FOSS clones for software just to work on closed overengineered standards is stupid. We have had markdown for decades but still prefer oblong zip-xml files for writing rich text and slides!? Absurd.

Excel is the only MS Office product that makes sense to exist, and thus carries the brand to dominance largely by itself. Docs and slides have already been solved; I wish devs just focused on making the perfect Excel clone and abandon looking at all other MSOffice programs.

Why doesn’t the dev rather work on specific features sets on one existing project instead of building half baked fleet of slop.

But that only strengthens the argument that software is worthless now - I can copy existing software with AI and it is public domain basically is what you're saying? So again, I can make a copy and legally distribute it. How can anyone earn money on software in that world?

I think this may seriously harm modding by preventing it from even happening on new games, which does scare me as a modder.

I did think about games too and I was about to use it as an example, but as software, I think games are actually much harder to legally copy and distribute, because so much of a game is its art assets. Sure you can copy the software no problem, but you can't really copy the artistic expression of the game. You can't copy Hades and keep the great illustrations and animations. You couldn't keep the music or voice acting. All of that would be copyright infringement.

So games are actually somewhat legally protected still, I'd say, basically because they contain much more art and creativity than most other programs.

Did it crash on startup? No? Well then you lied

If you read again, you realize I am not talking about what they slopped, I was saying that I did mine and it is crashing at start, see by yourself:

I also created a Photoshop clone, the only caveat is it crashes at start, BUT I TOTALLY DID IT!

That's text comprehension, I am just going to end this charade right aboutttt... Here.

Spoiler alert: They won't.

You don't even need to use Microsoft's AI, you can use any AI you want that is capable enough for the task.

If this came to parity with any of the billion dollar apps it’s trying to replace we would have new laws banning it somehow within a month

I think (from a layman's perspective) that these would have far more potential if they didn't fully commit to the "100% from scratch reimplementation in Rust, btw" bit. Especially for this Office suite, where a wealth of options already exist that they could build upon (LibreOffice, OnlyOffice/EuroOffice, Collabora Desktop) for more proven support of these formats.

That said, I hope they decide to vibe clone Clip Studio Paint someday, then there'd finally be an open-source tool that can open .clip files. And maybe that could even allow someone else to implement the format in Krita, GIMP and the like

Has anyone actualy tried this slop stuff? Does it even work?

Good software doesn't grow on AI. He's going to maintain all this, and keep up rapport before people even want to trust it. Even then, most professionals don't learn on 3rd party stuff cause that detracts from the process itself. Adobe isn't standard because it's expensive or even well made, it's because everyone uses it. This guy's stuff it a toy, it probably "works" but I doubt it's making anyone any money.

CADCraft appears to only be 2D CAD.

It isnt even written in the same language. It won't be a bug for bug copy. Just slop.

I don't need to buy the Temu knockoff to know it'll be s shitty knockoff that looks good on the storefront.

Ok