The first AI art gallery in Europe

Dead End Gallery, Amsterdam.

‘Art is not what you see, but what you make others see.’ – Edgar Degas

Earlier this year, I headed off on a research trip across Europe with a group of students to explore the potential of AI and social inclusion. This is an annual research trip funded by NTU Global. Our findings were fed back to councillors from Ashfield, Bolsover, and Mansfield with the hope that it may inform future policy. Suggestions had to be affordable, realistic, and sustainable, and take into consideration the ‘invisible labour’ required to maintain them in the future.

We took our main inspiration from Dead End Gallery in Amsterdam, the first AI Gallery in Europe. The gallery was established because nobody would host their AI artwork due to copyright issues. Presumably this was based on two concerns: Only humans can be granted copyright so who owns the artwork? Given the controversy created by David Slater’s ‘Monkey Selfie,’ this is understandable. In terms of generating images, what are they based on and how is the information sourced? Perhaps they wanted to avoid scenarios such as the Alden Capital lawsuit where eight U.S. newspapers are suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement.

This quote is usually attributed to Einstein but I think it is by the philosopher C.E.M. Joad.

Our main concern related to creativity. We create art because we want to share our stories with the world and these stories are based on our unique social circumstances and experiences. How could AI create art when it has no history or lived experience?    

Dead End Gallery have attempted to address this question of authenticity by creating profiles for its artists Irisa Nova, Maximilian Hoekstra, Lily Chen, and Amani Jones. Each artist is fed a series of questions (Do you have a partner? What is your favourite colour?) to slowly develop a profile and personality.

To ensure integrity, they created an AI curator which decides whether art submitted by the AI artists is displayed in the gallery. To be included, artists must score 8 or above out of 10. Likewise, they have attempted to replicate the process of learning an artist goes through by feeding the AI ‘drugs’ to see if this would lead to more surreal artworks or a different artistic outlook. This was partly to address criticisms that AI artwork lacks emotion.

Edgar Degas once argued that ‘Art is not what you see, but what you make others see.’ We want to develop this principle further and ask, how can AI help us see marginalised people? With training and support, AI has the potential to help marginalised groups participate in culture by creating art from home. This could be published at low cost across a variety of media to ensure to reaches a broad audience, as indicated in the table below.

Extract from poster created by students in their pitch to councillors.

But it’s always good to think big, too.

Ashfield has recently invested in the Automated Distribution and Manufacturing Centre (ADMC) which is a national centre of excellence for automation. Investing in the first AI Gallery in Britain would help develop the area further as a hub of digital innovation. It could act as a teaching space (perfect for school trips) or lead to new courses being developed at local education establishments. This would form part of a ‘clustering’ strategy to help regenerate the area.

It is worth noting that younger people, such as my students, feel excluded from politics, and that their concerns about the economy and the climate go unheard. Participating in this research project and having access to decision makers has helped them see they can make a difference and that their opinions are valued. Indeed, one council member has invited all the research groups to feed back their ideas at an Executive Board meeting. It is a fantastic opportunity, and has certainly restored my faith in the political process, at least on a local level.    

Dead End Gallery, Oude Braak 16A, 1012 PS Amsterdam

Tel. +31 (0)6-33677773 ai@deadendgallery.nl

deadendgallery.nl

Data Walk across Brussels

In March, I took a group of students from Nottingham Trent University on a research trip to Europe to explore ‘Ai and Social Exclusion.’ This is organised by NTU Global and is aimed primarily at students from socially and economically deprived areas in Nottinghamshire. As part of our trip, we went on a Data Walk across Brussels. This was part of the ‘Data and the City’ series and was kindly suggested to us by Tyler Reigeluth who we had previously met at Université Lille. The Illustrations are ‘freehand’ by Ella Rae Rowland, one of the members of our group.    

There are 100s of these devices spread across the Brussels region. The one we were shown was attached to a lamppost and at about head height. Air quality is measured with the Air Quality Index (AQI) which works like a thermometer that runs from 0 to 500 degrees. You can access data about air quality in Brussels and how this compares to WHO standards at iqair.com. This includes a real-time air pollution map. It’s the sharing of this data that helps create a smart city and enables local government to implement steps to improve ratings.

Mobile phone signals are tracked by the m2 to see how long people loiter outside a particular area. I think this is done via your normal signal rather than a free wi-fi at the location. This data is sold to businesses to inform strategy, such as replacing a window display to see if this lures people in. Public data gathering should include specific information about who is collecting the data, for what purposes, and how you can learn more. It did have a QR code detailing some information, but not enough.     

This gathers data on when a bin is full to stop rubbish spilling out onto the pavement. It’s a good initiative, but there are problems. For example, the data may inform a company the bin is full but there is no way of enforcing them to come and empty it as it makes economic sense to empty all bins in the area on the same day. Given the size of the bin, it’s easy to see it will get filled up daily. So what’s the point of collecting this data?  

This device detects light and changes the brightness accordingly. This has numerous benefits, such as energy efficiency and will help Brussels achieve its target of reducing energy by 25% by 2035. Lighting can also be adjusted to create safer spaces in the evening. This technology is excellent, but it could have more utility. For example, the post could go further into the ground to measure water levels.   

Belgium updated its laws on surveillance technology in 2020 in response to the increase in smartphone-related security devices. Camera doorbells need to be registered and positioned to the side of the door so that only 30% of the public are visible. Presumably this conforms to GDPR rules and regulations. Brussels is the heart of the EU and so I was surprised basics rules were ignored. If they can’t enforce it, who can? There are other issues with doorbells, not least hacking and gaining data on who enters a building. And who owns the data collected? Is it the person who buys the doorbell, the company that provided it, the building owner? Recently, Amazon passed on data from their Ring doorbell without the owners’ consent and Oxford Crown Court upheld claims against a U.K. resident for invading the privacy of a neighbour using Ring doorbell cameras.

Total Energies are one of the main providers of electric car charging points in Brussels. Understanding this demand helps councils develop their renewable strategy. However, this also raises the question of where they are positioned, and who can access them. I think this spot was for specific clients rather than public use.

Computer management systems in cars provide lot of data that can help councils identify and address problems. For example, if cars keep braking in a specific area, then perhaps the speed limit needs adjusting, or potholes need filling. The question is whether this information should be exchanged when a car is being charging and whether drivers are aware that such data is being collected in the beginning.         

This was an example of best practice in terms of surveillance technology. It has a big sign and clearly identifies who has put it there, what it is doing, and how you can find out more information about data collection and use. Given this was situated at a bank, it is a reasonable use of CCTV. However, Belgium police began to use Clearview Ai facial recognition tools in 2021 and this has raised various privacy concerns about who, when and where this technology is being used. Hence, the need for clear signage such as this.

Special thanks to FARI – AI for the Common Good Institute and Lea Rogliano for organizing the walk.