I thought that Styx’s piece was all-encompassing in the ways in which it elucidated the various ways museums have benefited from AI over the past few years. This part is particularly enticing: “For example, by using AI to predict the amount of no-shows who took advance passes to a museum that operates at capacity, that museum can increase actual capacity and release more tickets in advance, eliminating that loss of visitors and bolstering museum visitorship.”
The sentiment analysis, alongside Google’s Arts & Culture app, Art Selfie, has a great participatory value to the museum world. It combined both technologies while still allowing humans to interact with each other, which, to me, I regard as a superior quality.
However, ethical responsibility remains an ongoing issue that requires the scrutiny of AI’s applications in museums or any other domain. Also, how much AI in the museum is too much? Many of the examples mentioned did not take away from the artwork itself. But with the rising integration of AIs in the museum, one should decide when it’s too much for AI to be implemented in the museum space.
In the Brock piece, I very much valued the use of AI in the backstage museum development “OpenCHM”: “Its core strategy is to harness new computing technologies to help us make our collections, exhibits, programs, and other offerings more accessible, especially to a remote, global audience.”
One interesting thing the article touched upon was designing the portal. They have used sophisticated and expensive technology over the past year. I wonder how that can change with ChatGPT. While it is different, what type of design ideas can be generated if I give ChatGPT certain prompts with specific goals? What types of prototypes can ChatGPT produce? I did ask ChatGPT for that, but I think the most important key is perfecting the prompt.