Chatbot creativity

Web-based search engines are commonly used as an ideation tool. Yet their longtime dominant position has attracted sponsored content fuelled by "search engine optimisation" techniques which are pushing down genuinely useful results. In response, chatbots, such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini are poised to shake up how traditional online search works. That is, rather than typing in a string of keywords, chatbots are conversational or interactive agents using natural language that provide instant response to the user. But there's a catch. Whereas most of these chatbots have free versions, they typically limit the number of queries that can be made. So, chatbot platform providers offer premium levels that provide smarter chatbots with additional features which, however, have to be paid for. A usage-paid pricing model, however, and particularly in education, raises the question of users' equal access to chatbots, as paid versions unlock privileged access. Another concern with the use of chatbots is that, and unlike conventional online search producing matter-of-fact results, they have been known for providing deceptively convincing responses, known as “hallucinations". In fact, chatbot generated content may be inaccurate or false. The new generative AI tools, then, open a can of worms regarding accuracy, trustworthiness, bias, hallucination and plagiarism - ethical issues that pose risks to human interaction, performance and equality. But used responsibly, chatbots can assist in stimulating, provoking, and reviewing thoughts and ideas. In short, the extensive knowledge base that chatbots build upon can be a very useful ideation tool. Indicative source:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2713374523000250

The medium is the message?

'In a culture like ours,' wrote Marshall McLuhan (1964) 'long accustomed to splitting and dividing all things as a means of control, it is sometimes a bit of a shock to be reminded that, in operational and practical fact, the medium is the message.' That is to say, the medium that is used for communication is more important than the actual message itself. More important?, or rather that the value of any message should be viewed through the medium by which it is communicated? What ,then, does McLuhan's expression mean for ideation in the digital age? Is the idea the medium, or the message? Or, both? In human-technology relationships, does ideation reflect the ethos of modernity to transform ourselves, our ideas and the material world through technology? Or, in post-digital society, does it suggest design can be perceived purely as a conceptual medium liberated from the need of realisation? If so, are designers conceptualisers first, and makers second, if makers at all? Discuss.

AI: creative vox populi?

Generative AI is being promoted as a tool for creating new ideas, or augmenting content such as audio, text, images, and video, which is often shared on social media platforms, such as Instagram or TikTok. Indeed ideas are content. But more than this, generative AI has the potential to democratise design allowing greater participation in decisions around societal innovation. However, new ideas or content thus generated may not be that original but rather reconfigured versions of something done in the past. In fact, much creative content on media platforms is about remaking existing ideas, or piggy-backing off the creativity of others. Moreover, as generative AI is apt at generating variations of ideas, this may lead to a feedback loop where AI generates content that is already popular or proven to be successful on social media. That is, generative AI is socially embedded giving a boost to creative vox populi. Yet what is originality in the age of AI?  Revisiting older ideas, however, can be fruitful in problem solving ("what's wrong"), or in solution finding ("what's right"). That is, the circularity of ideas, in which each idea is revisited at intervals, at a more sophisticated level each time may help generate ideas for the emergent circular economy, defined as an industrial economy that is restorative or regenerative by value and design.

Train of thought

Train of thought, as understood by Thomas Hobbes, the English philosopher (1588-1679) was the succession of one thought to another. A train of thought, then, refers to the interconnection of a sequence, series or succession of thoughts or events. It may also refer to a path of reasoning. Or, how this sequence leads from one idea to another. The sequence, however, is not necessarily a linear one. And so, and notably in ideation, the sequence is rarely straightforward but rather an iterative or cyclical process, of trial-and-error. However, train of thought can also be interpreted literally. For example, Charles Dickens, the English novelist (1812-1870) found that, on a train journey, observing from a railway carriage was 'always a wonderful suggestive place'. Indeed, there are many places and spaces - and activities that can inspire creativity or trigger imagination, from the inherent character of nature to divers social or cultural settings. Indeed, the more unique or unusual the physical spaces or place, or unconventional the activity, on their own or in imaginative combinations, the greater the chance to set in motion pioneering thoughts or breakthrough ideas.

Idea curation

The rapid advancement of generative AI may suggest that AI and automation could replace entry-level designers, that is, designers whose main tasks are with creating repetitive designs. But even more senior designers might be at risk as their roles are becoming impacted of AI which is capable of keeping up with the latest design trends and fulfil the needs of mainstream clients,. One approach to turning the risk into opportunity could be designers adapting to a new role where they can act as curators of AI-generated products and services, rather than being sole ideators themselves. That is, using AI as a tool, pulling and filtering ideas from as many places and people as possible (sourcing, organising and prioritising) and then, in conversation with others (sharing insights), asserting and selecting the best. In this way, AI can augment creativity as well as making it more challenging. Indeed, many designers prefer using generative AI over working without it, and they collaborate more effectively when using it. AI-proofed designers, then, may be those whose ideas are crafted and curated with AI integrated in their workflow.

Blank canvas

The idiom "blank canvas" traditionally refers to a painter's canvas that has yet to be painted on. As such it implies the canvas can be easily filled with entirely new things, or, a metaphor for limitless possibilities. But when anything is possible, where to begin? This highlights the reality of most design activities which are full of constraints as expressed in the design brief (objective, site, time, budget etc). Limitation, then, forces the designer to embrace constraints imposed by the design brief. Paradoxically, then, constraint heightens rather than feebles the ideation process. That is, constraint acts as a driver for innovation, not unlike the proverb "necessity is the mother of innovation", or, "if someone really needs to do something, they will find a way of doing it."

Idea theft?

The quote "good artists copy, great artists steal" is often attributed to Pablo Picasso, but it is actually a paraphrase of a statement made by T.S. Eliot, who said, "Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal." But what is the difference between stealing and copying in creative contexts? One interpretation is that to steal is to be inspired whereas to copy is to imitate. Another, and according to artist Adam Kurtz, is that the difference is intent: ”Imitation is laziness or refusal to accept your influences. Inspiration is recognizing that influence and turning it into something new". So, you may copy, or steal an idea, perhaps change it a bit and then claim it as your own. But also, there is a difference between imitation and best practice. Because learning best practice may involve copying, say, traditional techniques or methods used and handed down by masters of the past. So, paradoxically, to generate and develop your own ideas in order to innovate you may both copy and steal from what already exists. And potentially more so with help of artificial intelligence, AI, that is, using generative AI as a powerful ideation tool for "appropriating" others' ideas. But also using AIdeation to explore further or be inspired by others' ideas. So the notion of "idea theft" seems distorted. That is, culture, both material and non-material has largely evolved through the borrowing and reinterpretation of previous ideas. Moreover, AI is not capable of stealing ideas in the same way that a human can. Idea theft, then, highlights the ethics of ideation. That is, for creatives to give credit, proper attribution or reference to someone or something that has influenced their creations.