As we got the chance throughout the weeks to not only meet up with our project groups but also with reading groups, we were able to get an additional chance to get further insight into the future of work and the future world in general. There were readings that were more helpful than others in terms of relevancy regarding our own projects. We came across topics like Bitcoin, the UK housing market, job requirements, or the current school system, which commented on the issues the topics are related to for instance. This was certainly helpful to inspire us to think deeper into certain current concerns and how this could transition and advance in the future. It also made us reflect on topics like technology and what could potentially happen if humanity isn’t careful enough. Topics as such widened our minds to think more critically about ordinary matters we are surrounded by on a daily basis. Since we are so used to them, we often don’t see them as a threat and instead we tend to worry too much about new inventions, while the existing ones still advance and can harm us if we are not cautious enough.
The mentioned reading topics above were helpful in the sense of starting to make us think in different directions and from new perspectives. Nevertheless, readings about the recreation of certain art styles with the help of AI, such as the text “The zombification of Art History: How Al resurrects dead masters and perpetuates historical biases.” described was applicable to our own project of our group ”Pear”. It described the limitations AI has in certain sectors, such as art, and questioned how it ever could be original in terms of art creations. The narrators of the text also described how in their opinion the outcome of the AI artwork they examined wasn’t satisfying. This specific view on AI in relation to art reminded me of my interview, in which the questioning of creativity also came across.
To conclude this subject, it can be said that AI has a long way to go in the creative field in terms of creating on its own but should be taken advantage of when it comes to collaborating with the human or for ordinary routine tasks. This in particular could save humans time, which they could use for their own creativity.
Further than that, the reading ‘’ Enacting Reflection Through Sci-fi ‘‘ really influenced me positively into imagining the future world and how it could look like with a more realistic approach. The text is deeply connected to the tv series ”Black Mirror”, which is contrary to many other Sci-Fi movies or series, as Black Mirror portrays a rather realistic version of the future, which makes it on the other hand more shocking to the viewer. Nevertheless, this is what makes people start to reflect on themselves and the society we live in.
As Black Mirror depicts a different reality in each episode, it was especially helpful for this Unit and group project, as the task of the activity was to imagine a future institution for instance, and how it could look like, as well as operate.
Unquestionably, we came across particular other documents and contents that influenced us, and me for this specific project, nevertheless, those two texts were especially dominating and relevant for me to make me start envisioning a future sphere.
On Monday one day before the presentation, we gathered to finalize our presentation and made sure each part connected with one another. There were a few sections in the script that would get presented in form of acting, that needed change and rewriting. So we sat together and cut the parts that didn’t make sense to us and made sure that the two scenes match our imagined scenarios that would get presented by myself in a more theoretical way on the day of the presentation.
When we arrived at our official tutorial with our tutor, we had the chance to talk through our whole presentation. Since each member was part and we had someone to inspect us, we were able to get the feeling of how it might be on the presentation day. Overall, the first try in class together was satisfying and relatively smooth, only a few small points had to get revised. We got advised by our observing tutor, to make sure to have less description as regards to the performance, as we have enough explanation and information in detail at the beginning already. The reason to eliminate this part was to also verify to stay within the allowed time of 15 minutes.
On the 14th of March our group ”Pear” got to present our final work which got completed by us throughout the weeks to our tutor Jasminka, as well as two other tutors. For the performance, a peer in the group brought a wig for viewers to understand better who presents who in the performance. This was just an addition to the items we created out of sustainable materials and materials that can be reused, such as Lego and clay. We started our presentation with an imaginary story of how we envisage the future of work and how we picture our AI and robot agency in the year 2070. With this story, we simultaneously wanted to show what could go wrong within that institution. The peers who weren’t part of the acting attached a ”CARE” sign on their shirts to show viewers they are part of that agency. CARE combined the four core values of the company (collaboration, adaptability, responsibility, and empathy).
Subsequently, I described our mission, which is to create a balanced relationship between the 3 elements: ”human creator”, ”AI and robot” and ”human user”.
Each of those 3 components has an effect on the other, which can either be positive or negative, depending on the scenario. In the story that Arielle introduced our agency with at the beginning of the presentation, the creator of the robot was in a negative work environment which led to a defective and non-supportive robot. This could again have an influence on the human user. On the other hand, would a human user get a totally different experience if the creator of the robot would be in a positive state of mind, as smart and empathic features could get integrated into the system. Overall, we picture 4 different combinations and scenarios that could reflect the above-mentioned cycle between the human creator and human user. Here we concentrated mainly on the emotions of both.
Below I will list our 4 scenarios as a revision and the outcome the combinations could have.
Scenario 1:
The creator is emotionally healthy + the user is in a healthy mental state
->Outcome:
-Most effective combination
-Best user experience and engagement
-Empathy and understanding (which the agency highly values) from both sides
Scenario 2:
The creator is in a positive state of mind + the user is emotionally unstable
->Outcome:
-Robots would need to put more effort into the work (like motivating and understanding the user and his needs)
-Harder for the robots to get the user involved
-User would find it difficult to open up and trust the robot
Scenario 3:
(Reversed version of scenario 2)
The creator is in a bad mental state and the user is in a positive state
->Result:
-Lack of collaboration and compassion
-Robot isn’t adapting to his environment
-Unsatisfied client due to lack of interaction
Scenario 4:
Both the creator and user are unstable
->Result:
-Miscommunication or no communication at all
-Angry user due to lack of patience
-Horrible user experience
After the concepts got explained, our group member Rai explained the main values our company believes in followed by him being the narrator of our 2 scenarios that got presented in form of acting.
We decided to show two scenarios:
Scenario 2 and scenario 4 in order to show the observers two contrary examples.
After we presented questions like ”How did your main values (collaboration, adaptability, responsibility, and empathy) get reflected in your own work together thought-out the weeks? got asked by one of the tutors”
We all agreed that it was altogether interesting to not just work with students from our own course but also with peers from MA CCC. This developed and expanded the way we think of certain topics and how we approach certain problems or tasks. As we all come from different BA backgrounds, we noticed each member of the group had a different direction for completing this task. This felt difficult in the beginning as we all had to agree on only a few elements we want to present, but turned out to be extremely interesting, as we started to open up to concepts we were afraid of in the beginning or were not familiar with. Some members had a more creative way of thinking about the project while others had a rather theoretical vision.
In order to present slightly more unusual, we decided against a regular PowerPoint presentation and agreed on just adding a backdrop with images to each presented scenario while also having the posters in the classroom.
I have not only learned so much from our readings but also so much from my peers, as they made me create items by hand and not just digitally. As well as they showed me how to be more open to experimenting. Without them, I would have never known so many ways of presenting existed and that several different components can be introduced altogether. We all mastered how to combine our ideas and to adapt to each other, while each person in the group had their own responsibility.
Henceforward, I will surely think of many more ways how to bring a topic close to a crowd other than just with a regular presentation. This also makes it more interesting for the crowd. This group project will in many ways influence my presentation style permanently.
This poster was created by us as a group to show what a sign of our ethical business could look like, to portray to potential users what our values are and what we are trying to achieve.
On the day of the tutorial with the guest tutor Cvetana, we shared our ideas for our performance. Together with her, we came up with the idea of integrating the component ”care”. We all decided together, that this can be the short form for four of our main values, in which each letter stands for a principle. After our tutorial with Cvetana on Friday the 10th of March, we started to advance and focus more on the point of CARE and develop this point. Finally, we settled with ”CARE”: (collaboration, adaptability, responsibility, and empathy).
Since even though technology will become progressively important in the future, we as an agency believe that the values we believe in (collaboration, adaptability, responsibility, and empathy), should be equally as important in order not to forget, what we as humans stand for and what makes us unique.
On the day of the laboratory, we displayed our posters, as well as our robots, that we created out of different materials, such as lego and clay. It was inspiring to see what other groups created and enjoyable to interact with their creations. Nevertheless looking back at it we should have provided observers with even more questions regarding our project, in order to get more feedback overall. We saw some groups writing down up to 3 questions for people to engage with which would have been clearly helpful for our team as well. If we would repeat this laboratory again, we would come prepared to a greater extent, to get the most out of this experience and reach our full potential. Additionally, we would add more descriptions next to the robots, so viewers can engage more easily.
Finally, we received some feedback from the MACCC course leader, who advised us to also take ethical issues regarding our topic into consideration.
Yet, it has to be considered that this project took place for us to learn and to develop for our final presentation and this learning process had been surely achieved.
The ”AI Resources agency” group on the day of the laboratory and the presented itemsPeople engaging with the objects
In the last session of our reading group, we all met up again to discuss and present the readings we examined. The reading I received for this week was by Hassine, Tsila, and Ziv Neeman, “The zombification of Art History: How Al resurrects dead masters and perpetuates historical biases.” Journal of Science and Technology of the Arts 11, no. 2 (2019): 28-35.
This text mainly indicates problems in AI in connection to art history. We are aware that AI has been around for a while, but always with the thought of humans being replaced and losing their jobs due to AI.
This has been discussed in many sectors across industries and also in the field of arts. But is AI really helpful when we think of how it is right now in art (f.e. image recognition, etc.)?
In order for AI to be actually useful it needs to be renewed and advanced. The Dutch Next Rembrandt project for instance is an example of how recreations of certain historic styles from the past in art with the help of AI are being processed. This project created a new portrait using gathered data that was analyzed from other pre-existing paintings of Rembrandt.
It is certain, AI has the ability and potential to change the art world, and its environment and can be very innovative.
It can even change art just like photography changed and influenced paintings during the time of its invention.
But the question arises if this type of AI is creating something like forgery? Is this something we can call ‘’Zombie art’’? Since this AI tries to recreate artwork and a style from a dead person, in this case, Rembrandt’s work.
This is in a way trying to bring the dead alive. It is questionable if this is intriguing or recreating a fake. Additionally, it is questionable if in the end, it is actually worth something? One could say this project only does the recreation of fakes with the help of machines. This is called zombie art and can also be created by humans, but at least humans in fact bring in creative elements while creating.
The writers of the text almost describe ‘’The Dutch Next Rembrandt AI art project’’ as it is kind of creating a fake.
During the creation of the project, data was collected to recreate the painting. They looked at age, gender, and face the direction in order to gather this data, but would all this effort really trick an expert at the end of the day?
The writers describe those projects overall as disappointing when it comes to the artistic expression, and question the value of the outcome. The project might be more interesting when it comes to technology instead of art and also brings the value of the original creations down in a way.
Additionally, what the project tries to do is recreate a certain style by analyzing the different paintings of the artist, but Rembrandt actually tried never to repeat his work and style, hence, this is why it would be hard to pick up on similarities. He created a variety of different artworks, such as landscapes, animals, portraits and Dutch life, etc.
For recreating the new Rembrandt with AI, certain features were just taken out of his portraits, but the downside of an AI project like this is that there is no surprise factor involved and therefore remains average as a piece of art. Moreover, the recreations do not seem balanced in a way hence why they do not appear appealing to the eye.
Most AI projects overall seem limited when it comes to creativity and people always almost know what is coming when using AI tools. To gain and create the data, they needed to study the works and then decide on a subject.
Things like, how often you see women or men or both in portraits together were analyzed, but AI can simply not pay enough attention to the artist’s view on life.
Earlier, creating art with computers did not have a certain goal, but now AI almost has to learn in order to recreate the masterpieces of art.
Technology certainly has influenced art already just like photography and the invention of oil colors did, but using AI to recreate the art of certain masters does not always make sense. In the future, the recreation of masters could possibly become more important.
Perhaps the actual goal of reproducing such masterpieces is not to recreate them out of context, but to learn about the creation of the painting with AI and its meaning?
The overall conclusion was that out of Rembrandt’s work, the algorithms could work best with portraits out of all of the works.
An example of Rembranddt’s work (portrait)
The first question that came up in the reading group regarding this text, was the fact that we questioned if it is okay when people recreate and reference someone’s work and if it is different when machines do the same thing?
Nevertheless, we all agreed that AI could never achieve the work that was the goal. AI can do a lot in our opinion, but this is something that it could never do (to be an artist). The reason for that is that artists don’t think like that, as they are not machines and do not get their inspiration from algorithms. AI can surely do great things, but not be creative as can the human mind. Humans with AI in combination can be effective, but not forcing AI to be creative. We also agreed that it also should be illegal to allow this to happen, even though AI recreating the work of a dead person becomes legal after a certain time has passed. In addition, it should be at all times mentioned as a reference.
Another interesting book we had was about Crypto and what it can do for political perspectives. Our comments on crypto were that we all are aware that it never shows any good news and that it also makes it possible to do bad actions and buy illegal items. The investors are also mostly men and this allows them to perform more sketchy activities. It also separates communities, and its access is just for the privileged, which is worrying. It excludes people since it is not accessible to everyone, and in order to understand it you have to properly invest time. To keep up with crypto you have to be up to date every day, it almost becomes a hobby, as circumstances can change every day. It is also not based on predictions, unlike stocks.
Another discussion about a text reading covered a group of artists who literally took action with art and approached the public to detect and speak about existing problems within society. They interviewed locals and published their truths, including hacking systems. The book overall described how they did it and described what needed to be avoided within their group. We thought though that this art actually made a huge impact compared to art we see from time to time.
On top of that, we talked about software in another reading and how it is difficult for people to understand. Nevertheless, it is such an important topic, since it is hidden everywhere. Most of us have no idea how the code behind it makes things really work. It is interesting how software is visible but also hidden at the same time. An example of this are phones and how they take actions of their own most of the time. In our opinion, there should be an opportunity to learn more about software, since it is everywhere. Yet, we also realized, that data is only gathered in certain societies, so this creates a huge imbalance.
Looking back at the last few weeks, I can say that working with people from another similar, yet totally different course has already broadened my horizon. It made me start looking at topics from another angle, I learned more about other people’s countries and what exists within them. Examples of this are political views, as well as communities and waves. In the future, I hope to be able to still interact with people from my course and other courses in this way, as it is a perfect way to share knowledge and be able to share your opinion while seeing how other people think about it too, which is not always possible in a huge group. I learned so much from each person and maybe would have never come across such interesting articles that make people think and reflect on the world we live in and how this might impact the future.
The images below portray the process of when we created the robots with different materials (in this case the legos and clay).
Those would be used to support our performance of the robots, which would get acted out by peers in the group. Those two different scenarios would get played after the descriptive part of our presentation.
At the beginning of week 9, I also received a further late response regarding my interview question, from another creative professional via email.
Regarding the topic and usage of AI in the workplace, she clarified that she finds it extremely important to explore new areas of communication in any workplace in order to develop for the future. The technology can also be used to gain new ideas across and present new concepts with invented tools. This again reminded me of the fact that change can only happen when new devices are being used. The topic also reminded me of the texts we read with the reading group in which a few texts mentioned, and we discussed how certain integrations like photography and the paint tube changed the whole art scene and even created new waves.
As a painter, she also believes that robots can certainly advance our standards of living in a positive way, but this will still need to advance to make life easier, and additionally, it should be more accessible.
Nevertheless, she also stressed the other side and brought in a contrary opinion, which indicated that future inventions and advancement of existing technology will just show how important humans are in the workspace and in real life, as most likely, people will struggle for a long time with robots, as they will make mistakes for some time until it will become an almost flawless creation without defects. Therefore, humanity will certainly start to reevaluate its own importance and we shall see and question progressively what makes us human.
On the 6th of March, our group met up to share what we have worked on individually and what we want to present in our group presentation.
Before the meeting, I have worked on different scenarios regarding the creation of a robot.
Here I referred to the cycle of how the work environment, emotions, and the mental state (positive or negative state and positive or negative work environment) of the creator of the robot, affects the robot device itself and how this can have influence again on the user of the robot. Here again, I imagined two different scenarios within that. One in which the user is in a good mental state and one in which he is in a bad mental state in his or her life. Overall, this created 4 different scenarios which I am listing down below again:
(Creator: good mental space and work environment + Receiver: good mental state)
(Creator: good mental space and work environment + Receiver: bad mental state)
(Creator: bad mental space and work environment + Receiver: good mental state)
(Creator: bad mental space and work environment + Receiver: bad mental state)
We started adding this to our poster which we intend to show on Thursday’s presentation additionally to our idea to create robots with different materials or attach them to our bodies and perform with them, so observers can see how robots and users interact, and how each responds.
For that, we intend to create a script as well, so that it becomes an actual performance.
So within our robot agency, which is how we imagine the future, we thought generally deeper into what interactions between robot and user could look like with the help of the cycle of ‘’Human creators’’ – ‘’AI and Robots’’ – ‘’Human users’’.
Within this future, we also hope that robots will be able to adapt more to humans, also on an emotional level with being less monotone, as for now, humans always have to adapt and change their voices when communicating with AI.
The cycle and scenarios were portrayed on poster one.
On our second poster, we listed more information about our agency itself, such as what year we imagine this agency in, which we decided 2070 on, as well as what it overall provides people with. We see this agency connecting AI and robots to humans who require this service. Just as regular work agencies provide workers to people who need to get a job done; fundamentally the same concept, just with advanced technology. This business model would essentially encourage people to use AI more and make it easier to access it without spending a huge amount. This could theoretically lead to a high demand in the AI sector as people get to try it and if it turns out to be working for them and makes their life easier. The demand for purchasing robots would also rise. Overall, this model would make people most likely adopt AI more into their lives.
On the poster, we also created a story of how a scenario out of the 4 mentioned could look like.
The story explains how the workers behind the machines creating them are becoming invisible and are obviously not seen from the agency’s side. This is because the agency is just obtaining the machines from the companies, but the agency actually does not see what is happening in the work environment of the creation.
One day those invisible workers become really exhausted, due to the work overload they have to deal with and start to gradually influence the organization. Workers start to integrate errors and change contents.
With this, the system obviously starts to show many bugs and defects and the institution decides to investigate those workers.
With this investigation, the heads of the organization start to realize and learn from their mistakes. The problems start to come to their attention, and their business model is adapted for the sake of the workers’ health. With this, they want to secure the overall well-being of the workers, as well as create a better work environment. This will lead to improved work conditions and better robots that can be provided to the agencies for instance.
This is a general and broad example of how robots could turn out if workers were to perform their job with weak mental health and anger. This example will hopefully clarify and explain our thought about the future of work and how we imagine it with the example of the AI agency with additional explanation of how it could be affected within the workspace.
The text discusses how in most cases people find themselves to be adults when they are 20 or 30, but with LGBTQ people, that can happen at a totally different stage in their lives. The term ‘’adulting’’ is a general and uncertain word and state, but what is actually the meaning of growing up? Or what is the right age to commit to certain things in life like marriage, careers, kids, etc.?
Behaviors of people can be adulting and considered as this term.
If buying a house is adulting for instance, does that mean for people who are not in the position to buy one, they are not adults? This is quite controversial, as we can see many grown-ups who are hard-working with a stable life, however, are still not able to afford a home.
In an interview conducted by a sociologist, it was found that some 20/30-year-olds these days define the term more as ‘’overcoming an addiction or overcoming trauma’’ rather than thinking of mainstream prejudices.
Another sociologist suggests that there are 5 points, or so-called life events that are a part of adulthood: education, labor, financial independence, being a parent, and marriage.
But continued saying that those points are certainly out-of-date considering the society we live in today. For instance, it is different for queer people not to have a marriage and no children. Further than that, not all of these points are again accessible for certain classes in society, or even for people around the world. Finally, there are also individuals who value different points in life.
Queer is different from the conceptional.
Another sociologist surveyed queer people about unconventional things like partying, dancing, and drug use, instead of mentioning the standard elements of adulthood, and their response was that their behavior does not matter when doing certain activities in life, it is irrelevant to them and not age-related.
The group’s response to the text was that it was interesting to think about this topic from these angles, as it is such a current topic. Everyone agreed that in this day and age, it is so difficult to achieve all five points mentioned above.
It is strange to define adulthood with those factors, as life events like divorce, being single and bankruptcy can happen to anyone. But this does not simultaneously mean you are not an adult anymore.
We agreed that it is almost impossible nowadays for most people in our society to purchase a house, especially in cities like London. Life these days is so focussed on couples, as they can save up together to make a living. Therefore, single people are struggling to find a place to live in as they are on their own.
The housing market is still too concentrated in the traditional sense of living since many landlords also think of responsibility when seeing a married couple. Nevertheless, this market still has a long way to go to adapt to modernity and create possibilities for every group within our society.
In reading number 2, the presenter points out the fact that certain ideas and perceptions are biased, and that have often to do with privilege. He declares that change needs to happen, and education could make that happen. Nevertheless, this again could not reach everyone necessarily. He addresses problems in the modern world and mentions that the start of the change needs to happen within education, as there is no progress if everyone learns the same theories.
The point of this reading made total sense to our reading group, however, overall required more explanation.
The third reading of ours discussed the rights of workers in the UK. Topics such as how to understand your contract, and when you can and cannot go to court. The text claimed not to be legal advice and is only good guidance for people who start their employment. However, the rules only comprised employment in the UK, as internationally it is very different.
The reading can be recommended for people in their last year in high school. Further topics discussed were, ‘’how to read your contract, rules under 18, sickness, problems at work and more’’. The examination is pre covid based, but it would have been interesting to have an updated version also with topics like inflation, etc. that became very current. The positive points about this examination is that it is not on anyone’s side, it only assists in creating the best contract. This is especially supportive for people from outside the UK.
The group’s comment on it was that this was even helpful for people who are in the field already, as even those with work experience are often unsure about points within contracts. Generally, it would be great to get a guide that is current and also freelance-based.
The next text presented a list of laws in the UK in order to make people understand them better. This could assist with knowing your rights you have when it comes to topics like dealing with landlords for instance. Often, people are insulted because of their ethics, age, or nationality. Generally, the reading is useful to protect yourself from harassment in and outside the workspace.
In our group discussion, we realized that in the UK, jobs sometimes ask for odd information and one girl in our group mentioned that she often would not add one of her native tongues she grew up with into her job description, so as not to be questioned. Another person gave the example that some people of color sometimes change their voice on the phone to sound whiter in order not to become disadvantaged. Additionally, we mentioned how important it was to avoid putting your address on your CV or photos of you, as many people tend to make assumptions about someone they don’t even know yet. However, in some countries, it is in fact a requirement to add an image of yourself on your CV. Closely related to that, we thought of an example that occurs in Mexico where women sometimes do not apply makeup in their workplace, such as finance in order to be taken seriously. On the other hand, in many cases, people are also taken seriously because they look a certain way and people follow them because of this reason and not because of what they say. This will probably always depend on which field one works in, as you can spot female politicians cutting their hair short to fit in with male-dominated roles, in order to have a valid opinion and not appear weak. This again explains the opposite of what was just mentioned but just proves based on the situation one is in.
In addition, we had an abstract talk about the narrator explaining how in his opinion revolution does not lead to a change from another reading. In the 70s and 80s, much activism took place and since the text is from 1991, it makes sense that the text was written at this time.
He demonstrates how there is no need for evolution and offers a concept in which people live together in the same place with the same thoughts in return. He illustrates that people can live in a community who have the same perception of life.
While discussing this text we were reminded of a place in India that is not connected to the government and lives similarly to this idea, but this concept had problems with rape. Additionally, to that, Denmark has a place that exists within the country as well with a structure like that called Christiania and describes itself as a commune with a self-governing society. The concept the narrator offers is good to have in a country with a stable government to escape to but would be ignorant to integrate into a place with an unstable one.
The last document our group read and reviewed was about the writer explaining how he believes personal life and work are not separate, and how in his opinion, it is the individual that is making change, instead of a group together necessarily. If in a workspace the individual is changing and starts to do something different, then people often will follow if they agree.
Further to that, can individuals create a culture such as leaving work later and having longer lunch breaks? In our opinion, not everyone can be this individual, but if for instance, the boss himself would integrate these habits into the work environment then employees would be likely to adapt to them. This could go both ways: either becoming more neglectful or more structured. Overall, though there is often the belief that making change alone is harder than in a group context.
