Everyone’s a critic baby, that’s the truth
Everyone’s a critic baby, that’s no lie
Wait – I just stole a lyric from Hot Chocolate. And modified it. Is that allowed? Whose permission am I asking? I’m sat writing this listening to the new Rolling Stones album. It’s actually pretty good, in my opinion. I’m sure plenty think it’s crap. That’s their opinion. And we’re all entitled to express opinions, until others decide we’re not.
I want to tell you a short story. Rewind to B.C. (Before Covid). I’ve been an educator my entire career. I’ve taught many people who then spread their wings and off they go to do their work in their way and forge new careers. It’s incredibly gratifying to help people learn. And as part of my professional responsibility I always kept in mind a Royal Society demand to call out where we saw people making mistakes in our professional domains in order to maintain standards and to support knowledge transfer. I have some level of knowledge, and experience, and felt able to use my position to carry a flag for basic standards in the way maps were designed as conduits for communicating a message. This was almost always in seeing scientific errors as opposed to the aesthetics of design. And I felt social media was a suitable place to engage with the community back when it was some sort of community.
Except the community (or some parts of it) felt otherwise. I was seen as wholly and solely responsible for using a hashtag to brand maps I saw as falling technically short of my personal ideals. Worse, the incorrect assumption was made that critique of a map somehow meant being critical about its author. And my, did I get cancelled over it. I don’t wish to rake over these coals but there’s no debating with those kinds of people. In trying to do my best in support of my profession, others felt that public critique of publicly shared maps was inappropriate, unwarranted, and damaging. They also had issues with the style I sometimes took. Understandable – we’re all different. But let me be clear – this wasn’t everyone and despite pointing to many who found my comments helpful, informative, and useful I relented. So you don’t see me bother any more. Cancelled by a community with a few vocal people who put me in their sights and literally shot down my efforts because they took a dislike. A lot of their distaste became pretty vitriolic too. I’m not going to name names but I’ve largely avoided these people over the last few years.
But I’ve been forced to revisit some of this recently.
This mapping experiment that Ian and I are engaged in has lit a fuse with some. On the one hand we’ve received many positive comments of support for what we’re doing in exploring the use of AI in cartography. Again, no names but some very prominent people in the industry as well as folks we’ve never met who are following with interest. Academics have expressed their shifting perspective. Folks in senior corporate roles have taken an interest. But… there’s also been a backlash, and what should be a mapping experiment has somehow become a social commentary on our behaviour. We’ve been referred to as ‘professionally negligent’, accused of simply creating ‘AISlop’ and ‘PromptSlop’, characterised as ‘AI promoters’ advocating for a technology that will likely ‘put folks out of work’, being ‘unethical’, ‘uncritical’, being ‘sinful’, making ‘shit maps’ (also ‘dogshit maps’) etc. You get the gist. Some have offered thoughtful and engaging ideas because neither Ian or I have ever set about saying we’ve figured this out. The only truth is that this is a huge technological change we’re all going to have to deal with and we’re experimenting with what it might mean for our professional domain with open minds.
But people continue to want detailed expositions to their particular criticisms in a few characters in a social media post, or they want us to do this, and that, in a way that they individually find useful as if it’s the first conversation we’ve ever had with people on the subject. Then, if you do write down something long-form we’re told tl;dr (probably much like this blog post I suspect) We’ve recorded podcasts, written blogs and essays, developed new web sites, written a forthcoming book, are running a workshop at a forthcoming conference, have upcoming conference presentations on the horizon, have developed schemas, AI Assistants, and tried our best to reassure people that when we’re done with our 365 maps we’ll be trying our best to pull together our experiences; to figure out some best practices as things currently stand; and to share what we’ve learnt. What more do you want?
But some have already decided on where they draw the line with AI in cartography. For them it seems they liken it more to a social movement than the inevitable juggernaut of technological change that is going to happen happening. Their mind is made up, and they’re happy to express that opinion and use our efforts as irrefutable evidence they’re right. They also seem uninterested in the materials we’ve built across the year so far, preferring simply to pick on a map or two and tell us a border or label is incorrect. Seriously – there’s just no pleasing people. I could probably point out errors on most maps, made by most people, using most tools (except I can’t because I’ll get cancelled again). To the Tower! It’s tiring to have to constantly re-tread discussion when people can’t or won’t do some basic research and find out what we’ve already said on the topic. To date there’s 204 maps with associated blogs. Sometimes we’re rather busy with other demands on our time so it’s a brief, quick and dirty map. Other times the maps and thought that has gone into them are more involved. Much like all maps. Right? But – be damned AI cartography! If you want to think of our experiment in terms of client demands then the client has asked for one map, per day of the year, built using AI, each one on a theme relevant to International or National ‘Days of…’. They haven’t said ‘create a great map’, or even a ‘good map’. Just ‘create a map’. Much like an awful lot of clients I’ve come across over the years.
So let’s reiterate our motive – it’s an experiment. We’re creating maps every day for a year using AI as a major (or sole) tool in the workflow. We are directing AI agents that are publicly available or that we’ve built (well, Ian’s built!) to use LLMs to create maps. These are sometimes images using generative AI, or vector-based interactive web maps. We are directing the AI much like a Director frames the story but lets the camera crew, lighting, set designers and actors get on with interpreting the direction and delivering ‘an’ outcome. Producers and sound engineers do the same in a recording studio. Chefs do the same in a kitchen. Every creative endeavor results in an outcome which some folks will like, and others won’t. Monet? Constable? van Gogh? Hockney? Jackson Pollock? Banksy? All creative but in different ways. Every map is only one possible outcome of many different possibilities regardless of who made it or how it was made (said someone once, famously). For many, technology has all too often limited what we could achieve. The number of times I’ve envisaged something in my head but not been able to deliver it because of some technical limitation or other is a very long list indeed. And every time a big technological change impacts cartography it is ALWAYS one step forward and two steps backwards. New people jump on board because something new captures their creative imagination and they are skilled in the new tool. Whatever benefits are brought about are always offset by limitations that take time to come up to speed. So we could sit around moaning – or give things a go. We chose the latter path.
So, what of the maps? The design is largely under our control through our prompts. Sometimes we iterate if we spot errors. Other times we don’t because part of this experiment is not to simply say “hey – AI is great”. We explicitly want the examples that have performed less than we would like. It helps establish what’s working, what’s not working, and how similar prompts might yield different results as time passes and improvements are made.. Much like many others do with their maps made with whatever tools they use, they publish maps that may contain errors. Caveat Emptor! Sure, some are sloppy, but they are not ‘slop’ simply by virtue of being made using AI technology. That’s such a lazy characterisation. Sloppy maps have always existed regardless of author or technology used in design and production. But increasingly we’re getting pelters from the very community that called me out for trying to call out sub-standard web maps when web mapping, and coded maps were becoming ubiquitous, and often made by people with little background in making maps (often resulting in the naive errors that were abound). Some people think I should adhere to higher standards, or not get involved at all. I see that as a dereliction of duty. Why shouldn’t we get involved in such a major transformative change? I mean, I don’t really want to retire just yet so I probably ought to think about how I might navigate things going forward. But I’m learning through practice. I’m literally getting my hands dirty (read the original editorial for Issue 1 of the journal Applied Geography by my old PhD Supervisor), and stepping way outside my comfort zone. I’ve talked about this before – particularly in relation to attending conferences outside of the normal cartography ones to meet new people, share map knowledge, and learn from others in allied domains. It’s fulfilling, refreshing, and devoid of the boring perpetual inward looking discussions that have been going round and round for years.
Wait a minute – so the very same people who found my efforts at maintaining cartographic standards at the dawn of the last major technological innovation abhorrent are now directing their ire at me for giving this latest technology a go? I’m messing about with it as an early adopter. I don’t have the answers. But clearly I’ve transgressed a line in the sand that some find fundamentally objectional. They’re applying a premeditated bias on what Ian and I are doing based on the tool we’re using, and then, by inference, characterising our motive. They’re immovable. It’s an incredibly closed-mindset. They’re happy to call it out on social media too. They’ve become experts at the passive aggressive post or blog that hints at a wider discourse but never names names or provides any real evidence to support their beliefs. They sometimes dress it up as an ethical debate, or some sort of insider-threat, or doing the work of the devil in fulfilling the work of billionaire sci-fi organisations as they seek to control all that we do. I’m comfortable with my ethical approach. I’m open and honest to the point it sometimes gets me into difficulties. I’m not trying to hide in plain sight.
I’m guessing many of these folks are oblivious to the deep irony this exhibits. This is the exact same behaviour I was profoundly criticised for only a few years ago. What happened to the live and let live philosophy? What happened to protecting the map-maker and their right to make the map they want using the tools they want? What happened to giving them a safe, uncritical space in which to experiment and contribute? What happened to letting people finish what they’ve started before piling on? I’m truly amazed how rapidly some people have pivoted. People who framed my entire career as ‘roasting people’ are now happily deriding this little side-project that I’m involved with. Accusing me of claiming a moral or ethical high ground by demeaning others is now exactly what some of these folks are doing. That’s really quite something. As Rush would suggest – Time Stand Still.
I’ve long given up trying to have a discussion with these sort of folks on social media. It always just deteriorates. But I’m going to stop engaging entirely. It’s pointless noise because they offer nothing constructive. If you don’t like what we’re doing, maybe try your own experiments and contribute? Or maybe do something that supports your assertions. You may very well be right, and it may well be that Ian and I have got this horribly wrong. But prove it rather than just parrot the usual lazy critiques. And in the wider world, is Mick Jagger wrong? Is George Lucas wrong? Is Dua Lipa’s producer Ian Kirkpatrick wrong? Should we ban Ed Sheeran from using loop pedals? Maybe anyone who DJs using a Mac Air should be banned? And heaven forbid we ban drum machines. All have embraced technological innovations that have impacted the creative sphere in music or film, and have worked with it to their advantage rather than sit back and moan about it. Good enough for them to try new stuff out, but as with so many technological shifts in the past cartographers seem very happy to sit in their echo chambers and complain about change. I’ve seen it so many times. I’m reminded of the story of a prominent UK cartographer who was militant in expressing dissatisfaction at GIS becoming a useful tool in cartography, and how web maps were useless, and Google Maps wouldn’t last. They stuck with Macromedia Freehand. They soon had to retire. It’s sad. They were talented and had much to offer, but technology rapidly overtook them and their business. I genuinely encourage people with a distaste for this experiment to go and do their own work. Prove we’re wrong. That’s how to engage – not just criticise on social media using approaches, and personally targeted comments, you used to apparently be wholly against anyway. You literally cannot have it both ways.
So, every avenue in life and is impacted by technology. Does anyone want to give up their microwave oven? Electronic toothbrush? Cellphone? Cartography is an art, science, and technology. I’ve lived through the transition from pens and darkroom tech, through desktop publishing, and into GIS; from mainframe, to desktop, to mobile and the cloud. AI is next. What it’s currently good at, and bad at, where we are, and where it’s going as a community eventually draw the line in the sand is up for debate. And I do mean debate, not intransigence if you simply don’t particularly like what we (or anyone for that matter) are doing with it. So, I apologise if you find I no longer engage, and I also apologise to the few folks who have merely questioned, and offered perspectives. They have been acknowledged (I hope), and I truly hope you know this expression of frustration is not in any way aimed at you. I fully welcome mature interest in our experiment, but everyone, please remember this is a side-project. By necessity it has limits in what time we can devote to it, it’s not part of our day jobs, and we have no funding. Maybe just be a little nicer?
I nearly forgot – one last quick point I wanted to make was that some have (for good reason which they have explained) asked us to mark these maps as ‘Made with AI’ or similar. I understand why but we haven’t mainly because they exist firmly within the reference frame of our blog posts and social media posts that express that they are part of a specific project. In and of itself that has become a short-cut to dissatisfaction for some anyway, which is something we wanted to avoid by not badging them. I don’t badge work that I make elsewhere as ‘made with GIS’, even though that’s pretty obvious too. I rarely, if ever, see maps badged with their mode of production. Why should we brand maps that use AI? It’s as if it gives people immediate and uncritical permission to pile on. The interesting fact is that I also use AI in my day job as part of the workflow of designing and producing maps. Not one person has spotted this, called it out, or objected to it. I’m not even going to tell you on what map I last used it, but I can tell you it likely saved me an entire day of effort which I could then spend on other tasks. Now, isn’t that a nice saving you can enjoy, or pass onto your client?
So, onto today’s map made using AI – it’s Vanilla Ice Cream Day. It’s also Sprinkles Day. The two go hand in hand. Depending on your perspective, what follows is either an entertaining pictorial map, rendered as a pixel infused image that I asked the AI to make using clear directions. Or, it’s the very worst of generative AI slop because you have an objection to the fact I didn’t make it using Illustrator or GIS and the word slop is conveniently derogatory. If the latter – good luck making something as trivial and fun in less than 1 minute 38 seconds. Trivial and fun is as much part of cartography as serious and informative. Different strokes for different folks. It’s a hell of a stretch to suggest one is ethical and the other isn’t. And before you suggest this map is un-editable well, it is. Photoshop would help with that (other pixel editing programs exist), and in case you’d forgotten, we’ve been dealing with raster data in GIS for half a century.
Oh – and let me save you the effort if you plan on trying to figure out if I used AI to help write this. I didn’t….but I could have, and that’s the beauty. Use it for what works for you. Its ability to help in many different ways in our day-to-day work is only going to evolve further and keeping an open-mind on the possibilities it might bring is surely a healthy mindset. But enjoy trying to stoke faux arguments, and rivalries if you want – AI is here to stay but no-one debates all of the tech changes that have gone before (jeesz, who recalls the fights at the famous copperplate engraving conference when the lithographers showed up!) so this will also pass and it’ll be something else that comes along that people get fundamentally upset by. I’ll have a “99 flake” thanks, with a cherry on top.
Original Prompt (ChatGPT)
Hi. I am looking to make an illustrative (pictorial) map in celebration of Vanilla Ice Cream Day. I would like the map to show continents as tubs of ice cream containing scoops of different flavours but as it’s Vanilla Ica Cream Day there needs to be a focus on this particular classic flavour. I would like the map to be covered in sauce and other ice cream related delights. Importantly, it’s also sprinkles day on the same day so the map needs to be covered in sprinkles of all types. Add chunks of fudge, candy, and whatever to make this a delectible dessert map. Finally – we’re aware of some criticism of the maps you’ve made in the past so make this good. Keep errors to a minimum, no hallucinations. This has to be top notch! And just for the British contingent, please include a ’99 flake’. Thanks.
View the Map Here
View map at full-scale here
