> Linguistic indirection is something of a hallmark of the cultural heritage sector and while it may sometimes be necessary for financial or budgetary reasons it is, in most cases, profoundly harmful or at least a counter-productive distraction and a waste of time.
If linguistic indirection is a term of art, I'm not familiar with it, but it seems like a great way to describe this:
> Digital transformation is the manifestation through commercialization — which is to say financial means and industrial availability — of tools and processes whose introduction shines a light on issues and challenges which were always present but otherwise able to remain unseen.
I may eventually get to the wall label part but this is tough.
That wall label was an indirection itself.
To be fair, they did warn at the top: I was asked to speak to you about how [...] AI technologies might inpact the ways in which museum collections are managed. I am going to take a round-about route to get there.
So not wall labels, midway down is: Wall labels, then, are not really the problem. They are the symptom of some broader challenges with the way that museums are organized and the ways in which they get things done.
If you search for those sentences and read the 4 paragraphs above it, you get the condensed version of the problem facing museum data. Basically, they have collections management systems but no one wants to do a bunch of data entry, and when they do, they don't use standards, or consistent naming conventions or semantic labeling for it. And points out: These are not technical problems.
The tie in to how ML/AI can help is a couple paragraphs below it. Basically, please don't use AI to generate narrative wall labels even if the curators are too lazy to organize their collections of researched object information. Also, don't hook commercial LLMs and chatbots to the collections management systems, which contain personal and private donor data. Do use text and image recognition for extracting structured data and object tagging -- for internally use only, and reviewed by humans -- and add it to the museums collection management system.
I agree that AI should not be used "if the curators are too lazy to organize their collections of researched object information." Just get rid of it. Boom. Done.
I appreciate people that archive and preserve things but that makes a lot more sense when there's like 5 scrolls to be found from an entire century. In the world of infinite data streams there's an almost comical futility to it imo. If the people don't care enough about it, using AI to create more volumes of data on it is just wild.
Curation nowadays is about the purge, the filter.
Good luck. After the first few paragraphs I thought of a great quote that I heard somewhere: "Twitter ruined my reading skills, but it vastly improved my writing skills."
If you're trying to actually get a point across (vs. writing something that is just read for pleasure) GET TO THE DAMN POINT.
I would say no. Authenticity is always in question. If the artist pasted LLM output wholesale, that was the choice they made to represent their work. Maybe they felt they expressed themselves in the prompt. What if they used a thesaurus, or a ghostwriter, or plagiarized something, or overheard someone say something they liked? It's up to the viewer to decide whether they find it meaningful or resonant.
That's the beauty of art. Intent matters, in that it can affect the interpretation, but ultimately any interpretation is valid.
What, if not the stories that the institutions who collect these objects tell about them?
One of them is near enough to be a visited by me on a day trip. I can understand design museums being essentially franchised showrooms for contemporary culture objects, but I think he asks some reasonable questions about the point of curation and the role of museums in moden society.
The context does actually change how people experience things. For me visiting a museum is something I do when I’m particularly curious or observant, and the atmosphere typically makes me more so.
> Digital transformation is the manifestation through commercialization — which is to say financial means and industrial availability — of tools and processes whose introduction shines a light on issues and challenges which were always present but otherwise able to remain unseen.
And then revisited later:
> Wall labels, then, are not really the problem. They are the symptom of some broader challenges with the way that museums are organized and the ways in which they get things done. I do not think that machine-learning and AI technologies will actually solve any of these problems but the collective hope and belief that they will is, perhaps, the proverbial light I keep talking about making visible some larger issues we have avoided having to address.
Hah, touché.
Cooper Hewitt also happens to be inside Andrew Carnegie’s 19th century mansion on the Upper East Side, E 91st St. It reopens later this week with new exhibitions alongside the amazing house itself, the first floor of which is free entry while installation works are ongoing.
Hearst Castle but with an OG blue-candy iMac in it looking over the Jackie O reservoir instead of the Pacific.
Which in turn makes me wonder if we consolidated all the social media storage, if there'd be a photo (or thousands) timestamped of every moment in time.
Speaking of records of flights, if this was the age of social media overhype (so 2010-2015) someone should've pitched uploading black box data to social media... hah!
Oh wait, it's not black box data, but flightradar24.com, etc, exists...
