Innovations in art:

* The ceramic kiln (29,000 and 25,000 B.C.E.)

* Stained glass (2700 B.C.E.)

* Woodblock printing (618 to 907 C.E.)

* The paint palette (1374 or prior?)

* Canvas (early 14th-century)

* The camera (1826 )

* The paint tube (end of the 19th century)

* The typewriter (1868)

… And now Artificial Intelligence illustration? (2000s)

Read in Artsy: (9 inventions That Changed the Way We Make Art)

Everywhere I scan for news, the AI revolution is happening in a renewed spirit: self-driving cars, Darth Vader’s voice, and now, make way for AI artists. I have never truly paid attention to what technological inventions shift art making or art practices. Today, we are living in a fascinating era of digital tools and technology shifting our approach, process, and outputs. In contrast to the hand developed photograph, which I learned to develop in a dark room when I was 15, I have recently been moved by a newer imagery innovation in AI called DALL*E 2. I see this technology be placed in the great line of conceptual art canons. The idea that it exists is almost greater than the output, as the technology stands currently. But, what about when artists push it to its limits?

I am often pulled in a lot of different directions in what I pay attention to and how I interact with new technologies. I don’t even consider myself an early adopter (the scale). I have a foundation and love for art history, objects, collections with the pull of the constant presence of the new digital world. I am not drawn as much to the intersection of these two industries as one might think. I have siloed my art historical passion as a hobby, a musing, or my time reading alone in my book nook. Art history for me is soothing, pleasurable, grounding, and informative. One might even say I learn for fun (geek alert 🤓). Digital technology on the other hand has driven my income, career, profession, and a job. I have strategically been able to leverage my cultural acumen in building digital products, experiences, and brands. It all intersects whether I like it or not. OpenAI (the company behind DALL-E) has some broad and sweeping mission: Our mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity. Seems like an impossible task for me. I ask myself, are the benefits necessary to all of humanity? Based on my travels through the developing world, I see very little “benefit” of AI in the developing world, particularly AI-generated imagery. I may be wrong. But, as it is often with tech, I might be missing the point. I do know when I first used the technology, I did get a small dose of awe. The only thing in tech that has ever really brought delight to my face is the Starbuck’s app stars. I know, I know. But, the stars are genuinely beautiful. Props to that designer. What I find most interesting about the introduction of the technology is that artists, image gatekeepers, and the internet was quick to protest. Cancel it, they say. Well, it is here to stay whether we like it our not. The website goes on to say “We will attempt to directly build safe and beneficial AGI, but will also consider our mission fulfilled if our work aids others to achieve this outcome.” Open Source is generally equated with a value of goodness. I see little goodness. I do not consider myself a techno-optimist, but I also understand that there will be humans on the constant quest of innovation. I support the quest. DALL-E is now open for all. So, I encourage you to try it yourself. A tip if you do: be as specific as possible. Write a long and specific sentence. Here are some of my musings:

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit gregorymeander.substack.com