@MMikeMMa There’s a fair amount packed into my half-quip. 1) The original thread is valid. 2) It’s doing from an art-history perspective what you might think of as spotlighting structural aspects of the different systems in play: the contest, the critique, the art piece itself.
by
–
Recent Posts
- Long-Term Outcomes: Customer-Centered Product Strategy For Machine Intelligence – Part 4
- Jaunt: “a social platform for sharing and discovering documents & presentations”
- Foundations: Customer-Centered Product Strategy For Machine Intelligence – Part 3
- Voice Over and Video – Flying Blind On a Rocket Cycle: Customer-Centered Product Strategy
- ‘The Present Future: AI’s Impact Long Before Superintelligence’
- Talking Product Strategy for Machine Intelligence @ ProductCamp Boston
- 16 years of @mojoe: (re)publishing a twitter archive
Tags
ai ai / ml augmented reality customer centered cyberpunk dead_media design systems enshittification enterprise enterprise architecture human agency infrastructure internet history llm machine intelligence patterns portfolio planning productcamp product development product discovery product management product strategy professional practice social utility technology and society transformation twitter ubiquitous computing user experience
4 responses to “”
@MMikeMMa 3) Much of the reflection I’ve see on this contest, the latest wave of AI origin art from DALL E, uses ideas from a generative domain (what’s good art, who makes art, how is art made, etc) to talk about a system that’s at core derivative. So it’s a sense making category mismatch.
@MMikeMMa 4) Bc the mismatch is using a generative view, a bigger pattern to note is that we often apply these generative perspectives to new tech by default, even where they’re obviously not tools that do creation / origination.
@MMikeMMa 5) And *that’s* a bit ironic, bc the point of the original thread is to understand more about the art that DALL-E made by looking at the built-in limitations coming from art-history lenses like Orientalism, etc.
@MMikeMMa 6) This ironic mismatch of a sense making approach that still offers some insightful criticism was part of what made the Monty Python bit from the Holy Grail so brilliant: it was hilarious, accurate, and self-aware in its functional limits all at the same time.