The spaces they are working with often benefit from having talented creatives but this isn't a performance gig we're talking about.
I'm working with a bunch of autonomy guys (think PHD algorithms people) and ChatGPT lets them write code. Which is good.
Except the code is hot garbage. It works for the thing they're trying to do, but it doesn't handle errors, it's not extendable, it's not maintainable, and they'll fight you when you tell them how to make it any of the above because they didn't write it and don't really understand how it works.
There's no management buy-in--startup, so velocity matters more than anything--so I've resorted to letting them have their working garbage patch and I just let them deal with the consequences. Frustrating, but quality doesn't matter sometimes.
They use the technology, they make the decisions about technology (like which cameras to use), and they literally can't do their work without the tech —
— they better be at list a little "technical" for their own sake.
The idea of knowing your gear has nothing to do with artistry. This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
And if they're "not known for being technical", they better consult someone who is (that is, you) before making decisions about technology (like choosing equipment for the job).
The problem here wasn't their lack of technical expertise.
The problem was the artists suddenly showing up one day with strange equipment.
The solution here is asking the artists to check in with you about gear as soon as they are signed up, and talking to you BEFORE getting new gear.
That's it. They don't have to be more technical. They need to help you help them.
You said it yourself that this would not have been a problem for you without Claude if you had more time to deal with it.
The problem was a lack of advance warning. And it's a solvable problem.
These artists might not have been divas before that residency.
But the policy of not having to consult the tech before bringing in gear and expecting it to just work, on zero notice, while remaining "not technical" — that turns them into divas.
If they are not making these demands, who does?
If that's you, that sounds rather masochistic. In which case using Claude to dull the pain seems rather counterproductive in the short term.
Seriously though, Claude isn't a solution for setting expectations and communication, which is the real problem here.
You could've still used Claude to write that driver. But you could have also had the several days to do it, and it wouldn't be an example of Claude saves the day any more.
Or — better yet — you could've given the artists a chance to reconsider their gear choices.
There might not have been a reason why they picked that gear in the first place instead of one you could've worked with easily (did you ask?).
You didn't enable the artists to do their job. You enabled them to make uninformed gear decisions.
That's not helping them in the long term; it's just setting them up for failure. Claude can't code around an API that isn't there, or a hardware incompatibility.
And that's before we get to the most important aspect of art: limitation breeds creativity. This sort of babysitting isn't helping the art either.
If the goal is to help them develop as artists, then it seems you're accomplishing the opposite.
Have you at least told them that they've created a problem for you? They'd want to know that. People usually don't want to create problems for others.
As for me — I'm chill AF in the first place; and I'm not against using chatbots to solve problems — it's just that I'm not convinced that Claude is the right LLM to use here.
Perhaps asking ChatGPT about this situation, and how to talk to artists (and shape the equipment policy for your space) would do much more impact on the problem you said is recurring on a weekly basis than using Claude to put more bandaids on a pile of bandaids.
again, this is not a problem but a basic expectation when you do media arts residencies. Just like it's an expectation when you work in the event industry that you're going to get gigs for making something in the morning for an event happening in the evening.
If it isn't a problem, then the AI isn't a solution. You can't have a solution without a problem.
Saying that "this is just a basic expectation" is rather bizarre.
Who's setting that expectation?
And more importantly, why is it there? Who's benefiting from it? Why do you keep it?
FFS, you can proactively reach out to the artists and ask about what equipment they will use.
One doesn't just suddenly get an arts residency. There's an application process, I presume, and plenty of communication between the artist and the venue happening before any work begins.
There's no reason for discussion of the equipment not taking place early on where the entire point is using technology to create art.
And yes, "is just the way things are done in this industry" can be remarkably stupid. Doctors didn't wash hands until mid 19th century, that was just the basic expectation.
More soldiers were dying of disease in military hospitals than from battlefield casualties as a result.
The solution to the high death rate wasn't automating weapons (which did come with the Maxim gun). It was Florence Nightingale challenging the basic expectations.
Or, in modern parlance — calling BS on it.
You're not making a convincing case for that "basic expectation" existing.
>Just like it's an expectation when you work in the event industry that you're going to get gigs for making something in the morning for an event happening in the evening.
I've read this sentence three times, and it still didn't make any sense. Could you perhaps rephrase?
Again, when I gig with bands, I don't bring random gear for someone to set up.
It's my job. And we have a sound check. And if my gear doesn't work, the sound guy isn't fixing it.
Not sure what sort of analogy you meant to make, but it's not coming through.
