{"id":17584,"date":"2024-10-28T18:20:44","date_gmt":"2024-10-28T18:20:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/2024\/10\/28\/making-art-that-tells-the-future-interview-with-david-young-makersplace-editorial\/"},"modified":"2024-10-28T18:20:44","modified_gmt":"2024-10-28T18:20:44","slug":"making-art-that-tells-the-future-interview-with-david-young-makersplace-editorial","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/2024\/10\/28\/making-art-that-tells-the-future-interview-with-david-young-makersplace-editorial\/","title":{"rendered":"Making Art that Tells the Future \u2014 Interview with David Young | MakersPlace Editorial"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\n

David Young has built his career at the forefront of emerging technologies, from early internet projects to recent explorations in AI and quantum computing. His work uses technology to create new forms of beauty while encouraging reflection on \u201cthe new\u201d and its obsolescence. Holding degrees from MIT\u2019s Media Lab and UC Santa Cruz, Young\u2019s art has been exhibited internationally and featured in collections like the GENAP Collection in Zurich. Based in New York, he continues to innovate at the intersection of art and technology.<\/p>\n

In this MakersPlace Spotlight interview, David Young delves into how AI and quantum computing influence his art and challenge our understanding of these technologies. Through projects like Learning Nature<\/em> and Hallucinations<\/em>, Young explores how AI \u201csees\u201d the world and invites us to consider its implications and limitations. In conversation with Brady Walker, Young reflects on his journey, inspirations, and views on today\u2019s rapidly shifting tech landscape.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: Welcome to MakersPlace Spotlights. I\u2019m here with AI-based artist David Young. David, thank you for joining us. Maybe you can start with a little about your journey as an artist.<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Sure. My background is in computer science, and I studied visual studies at MIT\u2019s Media Lab. I\u2019ve always been enthusiastic about technology\u2019s potential for good, but in recent years, I\u2019ve become concerned about AI\u2019s impact. Social media, for instance, is destroying democracy. So, I began using art to spark deeper conversations about AI, bringing more diverse voices to the table. Art can act as a backdoor, intriguing people visually and leading them to think about the technology behind it.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: That\u2019s interesting. In a 2018 essay, you asked, \u201cCan beauty help us imagine new possibilities for AI?\u201d How has your thinking evolved?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: We typically view technology in terms of efficiency, optimization, and growth. I wanted to shift that narrative. My Learning Nature<\/em><\/a> series invited AI to explore nature, a setting far from corporate applications, hoping viewers would have a wordless aesthetic experience. That experience can act as a Trojan horse, encouraging people to learn about the technology behind the art. I\u2019m optimistic that grassroots creativity can help shape the future of tech.<\/p>\n

\n
From Learning Nature <\/em>(2018) by David Young<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

BW: How has working with AI influenced your creativity?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Working with AI is funny; we often anthropomorphize it as an intelligent participant, but it\u2019s just code on a machine. My background helps me see through the hype cycles and recognize the opportunism of some developers. We need to view AI for what it is, but we also can\u2019t ignore the cultural excitement around it. My work plays with this duality, showing both AI\u2019s \u201cthinking\u201d and its underlying mechanics. For instance, my Tabula Rasa<\/em> series highlights the machine-like nature of AI.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"\/
From Tabula Rasa <\/em>(2019) by David Young<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

BW: In a recent essay, you explored whether AI will truly revolutionize things, comparing it to blockchain\u2019s initial hype.<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Exactly. There\u2019s always an obsession with the latest \u201cnew thing,\u201d and AI won\u2019t be the last. I explored quantum computing for that reason\u2014it could make technologies like blockchain and NFTs obsolete, turning them into digital dust. It\u2019s another example of how we should approach hyped technologies thoughtfully.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: Regarding quantum computing: Are we doomed? From my perspective, the work in NFTs and blockchain has been about raising up artists, raising awareness, and giving digital artists a profile they didn\u2019t have. So, if that work is done when quantum computing comes around and \u201csquashes us,\u201d something good will still have come out of it.<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: I don\u2019t think quantum computing is going to squash us all. I do agree that NFTs have been fantastic for artists to get their work in front of new audiences and build practices and successful careers. It\u2019s been wonderful for creativity and the diversity of artistic voices. The only challenge with quantum computing is that it makes the underlying platform less secure. Eventually, we\u2019ll need new fixes or patches to restore the security we need.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: What does studying Visual Studies at MIT involve? Is it like an art degree with computers?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: It was hands-on. I was in the Media Lab, founded by Nicholas Negroponte to invent the future of media. When I was there in the late \u201980s and early \u201990s, the group I was in invented anti-aliased text and explored the screen as a medium, which was revolutionary. Led by Muriel Cooper, we worked in a chaotic, open space with advanced tech and the directive to \u201cinvent something amazing.\u201d My AI background had me thinking about how AI might impact visualizing information. Much of the tech we use today emerged from this early exploration.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"\/
From Manipulations <\/em>(2020) by David Young<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

BW: Has your aesthetic sensibility evolved since working with AI?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Interesting question. Working with AI is different from writing traditional code. With code, you create an image through procedural, rule-based processes, so the results, however complex, are traceable. With AI, you feed it images, and it develops an understanding based on that\u2014but its \u201cthinking\u201d remains impenetrable.<\/p>\n

In terms of aesthetic evolution, I\u2019ve developed an intuition for what the AI is doing and how to guide it. I approach AI as a user, not a technical expert, encouraging others to do the same. Creating with AI involves a unique collaboration\u2014it\u2019s not just code, but a tool you work with to explore new visual expressions.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: I use AI all the time for work and fun. It\u2019s interesting\u2014the relationship I\u2019ve developed with it. In some ways, it\u2019s like using a synthesizer; adjust one knob, and you get a different result.<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: That\u2019s a good analogy. AI is like any other tool\u2014keyboard, camera, or paintbrush. The more skilled you are, the more you can bring out something unique.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"\/
From Hallucinations <\/em>by David Young<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

BW: Let\u2019s talk about your <\/strong>Hallucinations<\/em><\/strong> series. You trained an AI on a few images to explore its \u201cconfusion.\u201d What were you hoping to learn?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Hallucinations builds on my earlier work, exploring what it means for AI to \u201csee.\u201d Traditional AI-generated images look recognizable, but I wanted to bring out elements that were invisible at first but become clear when amplified, suggesting the AI sees something different from what we see. This series plays with the idea of AI \u201challucinations,\u201d where the machine creates something perceptible to it but not obvious to us.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: That reminds me of the book <\/strong>The Immense World<\/em><\/strong>, about how animals perceive things differently\u2014like how a peahen experiences a male\u2019s feather display as raucous sound.<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Exactly. We tend to think AI sees as we do, but I want to question that assumption. With Hallucinations<\/em>, I took the idea further to add personal expression, exaggerating subtle patterns to make them visible. The term \u201challucination\u201d became popular around this time with systems like ChatGPT, where AI makes up facts by reshuffling learned data. I titled each piece with quotes from tech leaders, reflecting the \u201challucinations\u201d they have about AI\u2019s power and infallibility. I wanted the images to be strange, reflecting the glitchiness and non-human vision of AI, showing how different they are from typical outputs.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"\/
From Hallucinations <\/em>by David Young<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

BW: There\u2019s talk about AI \u201challucinations\u201d as models start to get trained on their own output, possibly creating incoherent junk. What\u2019s the future of AI if this continues?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: The idea of AI polluting the internet and relearning from it is interesting. We might be at peak AI now, with future models becoming less useful as they\u2019re trained on junk. There\u2019s already so much low-quality content online, AI-generated or clickbait. It feels like everything is shifting.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: I wonder if smaller, purpose-driven AI models would be better, avoiding the large-scale pollution issue.<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: AI will continue to evolve, but we need awareness of its biases and who controls these technologies. My Manipulations<\/em> series explores how AI \u201csees\u201d differently. I amplify elements that may be invisible to us but obvious to the machine. The works you\u2019re showing were generated by training AI on only a few solid colors instead of photographs. Limiting the data creates a mix of machine-like grids and organic shapes, revealing AI\u2019s mechanical and organic sides.<\/p>\n

My Tabula Rasa<\/em> series follows the idea of treating AI like a blank mind, giving it minimal data to learn from. This image here was trained on just a couple of solid colors, and I then manipulated the output to reveal more hidden details.<\/p>\n

\n
Tabula Rasa (b67j,1000,1)<\/em> (2019) <\/em>by David Young<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

BW: So, you\u2019re saying this is kind of an underlying expression from the AI that you extracted and made your own?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: I did it backward. That Tabula Rasa<\/em> animation you showed a moment ago\u2014that\u2019s from the Tabula Rasa series, where the machine was trained on just a handful of solid colors. It generates an animation of its learning process, moving through what\u2019s called latent space. Its understanding of a few colors creates images that are both organic, with smoky and curvy patterns, and machine-like, with grid-like repetition.<\/p>\n

Training the machine on just a couple of solid colors creates these strange, organic patterns. I take an image from this output and manipulate it to pull forward patterns or qualities that are obvious to the machine but invisible to us. That\u2019s what that other image was that you had on the screen.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: This piece is just stunning\u2014it\u2019s like watching a machine Rothko its way through.<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: That\u2019s an interesting response. It raises the question: is there a shared sensibility that makes a machine create something with a quality like Rothko? Some might say there\u2019s a universal consciousness that connects us, the machine, and everything else. But I trained this on a GAN that had just been turned on, with no prior exposure, so it only saw a few solid colors. This might reflect our tendency to see patterns rather than the machine capturing some universal awareness.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: You just released some pieces on Verse from your quantum computing investigation called <\/strong>Quantum Drawings<\/em><\/strong><\/a>. What sparked this series?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Quantum Drawings<\/em> came from my interest in quantum computing as an emerging technology, like AI, that\u2019s \u201cpromised\u201d to change everything. Quantum computing is radically different from any other type of computing\u2014it\u2019s almost incomprehensible. I wanted to experiment with it creatively to develop an intuition for what quantum computing might mean or become.<\/p>\n

This approach is similar to my work with AI, where I use off-the-shelf code to explore. For Quantum Drawings<\/em>, I run code on an IBM quantum computer, then use the output to create visuals.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"\/
From Quantum Drawings <\/em>by David Young<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

BW: So you got your hands on a quantum computer? What is the IBM quantum computer?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Now that I\u2019ve noodled around with it, I can talk a bit more about it. Here\u2019s the basic premise of what makes a quantum computer different from a regular computer, and I\u2019ll keep it simple. In a normal computer, the smallest unit of data is a bit, which is either a one or a zero. In a quantum computer, you have a qubit, which exists as both zero and one simultaneously.<\/p>\n

Quantum processing is unlike traditional computing because it operates on nearly every possibility at once. Only when you ask the computer, \u201cWhat is the value of this qubit?\u201d do you get either one or zero. So it\u2019s very different. The promise is that with enough qubits, quantum computers could solve problems in moments that would take a normal computer longer than the age of the universe. Quantum computers will do things that normal computers can\u2019t.<\/p>\n

I thought, \u201cThis is weird, this is important.\u201d Just as with AI, I don\u2019t think people need to be technical experts in quantum computing. Hopefully, art and visual experiences can make this technology less intimidating and inspire people to want to participate in its future.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: I\u2019m curious about your experience. What was the difference between working on an IBM quantum computer and a traditional computer? Like with AI, where you aim to give people an aesthetic experience\u2014what\u2019s different about this?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: What struck me about emerging technologies like AI and quantum computing is how awkward they are. When I worked with AI and GANs in 2018-2020, you\u2019d start a program, but it could take days or even a week before you got an interesting output. It was slow and fragile\u2014one small change could break everything. It made me take note of how slow and brittle this supposedly world-changing technology was.<\/p>\n

With the quantum computer, there\u2019s a similar retro quality. You write a program, submit it to run when the machine has time, and it could take minutes or even days to process. It reminded me of the early days when people coded on punch cards and waited for their results. There\u2019s something retro-futuristic about it, like the early days of any new technology\u2014all strung together in a jury-rigged way.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: So, you write the code, send it off, and they send you the output when they can?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Exactly.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"\/
From Manipulations <\/em>by David Young<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

BW: What was the creative process like, not knowing what the output would be?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: At first, I didn\u2019t fully understand what was happening on the quantum machine. I\u2019d get back a data file and think, \u201cWhat do I do with this?\u201d Some early images were simple grids, but then I started treating it like a drawing\u2014a line moving over time as the machine processed data.<\/p>\n

As I researched quantum mechanics, I tried to visualize its strange qualities, like entanglement and the multiverse. For example, when a quantum bit is measured, it can split the universe into two outcomes. Each action could mean moving through an infinite number of universes. It\u2019s fascinating, and as an artist, it\u2019s a compelling concept to explore visually.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: I won\u2019t keep you long. What\u2019s your daily workflow like?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Do you think digital artists have a more unified workflow than painters? I know many artists, and everyone has their own process\u2014some treat it like a business, others follow inspiration. I\u2019d like to say I have a regular approach, but I\u2019m not disciplined enough. I have endless ideas and to-do lists, but most ideas get lost.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s a balance between production and creative modes. Creative mode is often unexpected\u2014I\u2019ll start something, fall into flow, especially when coding, and time disappears as I adjust and see results. That\u2019s different from using an AI generator, which isn\u2019t always flow-like but can spark new ideas. Not sure that\u2019s a very satisfying answer.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: It seems like you\u2019re often tackling something completely new. Can you stay consistent when you\u2019re reinventing yourself from project to project?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: I\u2019d like to say there\u2019s a methodology\u2014that each stage is logical and progressive. But I\u2019m also exploring things aesthetically, letting them go in directions I might not have expected.<\/p>\n

\n

BW: Let\u2019s say you\u2019re alive at this stage of your career, but it\u2019s 1924. What would you be working on?<\/strong><\/p>\n

DY: Good question. Technology was bringing about incredible changes back then. Photography was transforming creativity, allowing painting to become more expressive. Photography and early cinema were exploring abstract and generative techniques, even new ways of using time visually. It would\u2019ve been an exciting period to experiment. It\u2019s a reminder that everything we think is new has had versions throughout history.<\/p>\n

\n

For updates on all of our upcoming editorial features and artist interviews, subscribe to our newsletter below.<\/h4>\n

\n\t\t<\/div>\n

Source link <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

David Young has built his career at the forefront of emerging technologies, from early internet projects to recent explorations in AI and quantum computing. His work uses technology to create new forms of beauty while encouraging reflection on \u201cthe new\u201d and its obsolescence. Holding degrees from MIT\u2019s Media Lab and UC Santa Cruz, Young\u2019s art […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":17585,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/rare.makersplace.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Blog-Heroes-4.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17584"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17584"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17584\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17585"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17584"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17584"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nft.runfyers.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17584"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}