“AI can amplify human creativity”: the vision of Catalan curator Lluís Nacenta

Curator , mathematician, musician and writer, Lluís Nacenta (Barcelona, ​​1976) came to Argentina to participate in the Desplazamientos series, with a schedule of talks in Córdoba, Rosario and Buenos Aires in which he addressed artificial intelligence and its cultural implications.

Nacenta's curatorial research, titled "AI: Artificial Intelligence," presented at the Centre de Cultura Contemporània de Barcelona— an exhibition about the history, functioning, creative possibilities, and ethical and legislative challenges of artificial intelligence —is the starting point for talks that will analyze how art and culture intertwine with science and technological development.

“Artists are especially well-equipped to find meaning in novel situations, and artificial intelligence is a technology dedicated to finding patterns, to finding order , in complex or seemingly chaotic situations. And it seems to me that artists are perhaps the most skilled in this task,” Nacenta reflected in an interview with Clarín .

The author of the essay "Calculus of Metaphors" (Penguin) proposes thinking of AI not only as a technical phenomenon, which is shaping its own aesthetic in contemporary art, but also as a new form of language that challenges both artistic creation and our way of conceiving thought itself.

“Unlike what has been happening in the modern scientific and philosophical tradition, artificial intelligence, and specifically large language models like ChatGPT and others, are showing us that a computational model of human language is possible. I try to reflect on what it means that two seemingly distinct languages, such as mathematical language on the one hand and natural language on the other, are currently interconnected to the point of being interchangeable, as is the case in the large language models of artificial intelligence,” Nacenta added.

–Do you think AI is a tool that amplifies human creativity or poses a risk to artistic authorship? Are we facing a terrain that's impossible to regulate?

–I think there are already enough artistic works that allow us to affirm that Artificial Intelligence can undoubtedly be a very interesting tool to amplify, complement, and further human creativity. This does not prevent its use in art from being without risks, which do exist. But I don't think the risk lies in authorship, because throughout the 20th century and even before, in different artistic disciplines, there were technologies that have forced us to rethink the concept of author. For example, the entire hip-hop scene at the time, or electronics. In this sense, artificial intelligence takes a step further in that direction and doubles down. The different professional sectors of the arts are prepared to operate with a different idea of ​​the author than that of the original source of the work's creation.

The problem is rather the deregulation of the professional cultural and artistic market. If not properly regulated, AI can exacerbate what has already been a systematic precarization of cultural and artistic work for decades. Regulation must come to help and support the creative sector, which is fundamental to the societies in which we live.

AI must be regulated, in all aspects, not just the artistic. But despite very clear and well-directed efforts in this regard, it is very difficult to implement artificial intelligence regulation that is truly enforceable and compliant. Mainly because legal frameworks remain subject to the nation-state, and digital technologies, by their very nature, challenge that context and operate globally. There is a very important challenge to establish strong, solid, and enforceable international consensus for the use of artificial intelligence that is creative, beneficial, and productive, and that does not lead to abuse, the precariousness of human work, or cognitive damage, especially in younger people.

–Today, anyone can generate sophisticated images with a simple prompt. Do you think this democratizes creation or trivializes art? Do you think writing a good prompt could become a new form of “virtuosity” comparable to painting techniques?

–The democratization of these tools doesn't mean everyone becomes an artist, but it does mean that many more people have the opportunity to try it, which is beneficial. I don't think that the fact that everyone has the tools at their disposal makes everyone an artist. Despite the sophistication of the tools, it's still as difficult as it's ever been to produce an interesting, memorable, moving piece of art that's capable of attracting the public's attention and being meaningful to a relevant segment of society. I mean, it seems to me that making good art is still extraordinarily difficult. I do think that prompt writing is becoming a full-fledged art form.

–One of the biggest challenges for the future seems to be a world saturated with fake, realistic images. In Germany, the Freelance Photojournalists Association suggests that media outlets should have a system that indicates A for Authentic, M for Manipulated, and G for Generated. What do you think the realistic chances are of implementing something like this?

–Indeed, it's very interesting to note that we can no longer believe anything we see because everything could have been generated by artificial intelligence. Until recently, the image was the guarantee of the veracity of the text it accompanied. Now that's no longer the case. And in this context, journalistic or editorial mediation will be more important than ever. The only way a viewer will know if what they're seeing is true or false will be the trust they have in the medium. I think there's going to be a very significant reinforcement of editorial mediation of content.

– Do you think AI can offer a new perspective on what it means to think?

–Yes, in the sense that it takes further than ever the idea that thought can also occur outside the human body, or in cooperation with the human body, or in technological complements that cause that thought to expand, modify, and alter. This forces us to adapt the philosophy of mind.

–Some people think that the advancement of AI will presumably lead to the emergence of a radically different society than the one we know. Are you optimistic about this?

–It certainly seems that such a powerful technology, which intervenes in so many aspects of individual and social life, is going to significantly transform the societies in which we live. If I try to be realistic, I'm pessimistic. Because we're seeing that this powerful technology is dominated by a few hands, a few companies, mainly North American and Chinese, who have the power to decide how it's used. That paints a grim picture of the future. However, I think of young people, my students, my children, and I believe we have an obligation to be stubbornly optimistic, to disseminate information, research, think, and fight tirelessly for a fair, creative, and enriching use, which is perfectly possible. So I would tell you that I want to be optimistic and I try to actively fight for such an interesting technology, so full of possibilities, to help us humans build fairer, more creative, and smarter societies.

The Spanish Cultural Center in Buenos Aires (CCEBA) continues to debate the role of AI in artistic creation. Now, it's the turn of Martí Perramón, an expert in cultural management, who will address the challenges of sustainability, authorship, and the social impact of these technologies. His talk, titled "Art and Artificial Intelligence: Sustainability, Authorship, and Social Impact in the New Creative Era," will take place on September 12th at 11:00 a.m. at Paraná 1159.