Best and Worst Zoo Maps

[S. Venaticus]

Though nothing exceptional I believe attica zoo's map is quite good since it is easy to navigate and most animals (except for reptiles and especially birds, since the zoo has so many of the latter) are shown and are easy to distinguish from one another.
English version: https://www.atticapark.com/userfiles/images/AZPmap2024eng.jpg

 

[Jxckson]

in my opinion, san diego zee and safari park have very good maps

 

[GiratinaIsGod]

Though nothing exceptional I believe attica zoo's map is quite good since it is easy to navigate and most animals (except for reptiles and especially birds, since the zoo has so many of the latter) are shown and are easy to distinguish from one another.
English version: https://www.atticapark.com/userfiles/images/AZPmap2024eng.jpg

Very readeble (the most importentv thing), but no estethics. Looks what a middle schooler would do in paint for a lazy project.

 

[tigris115]

Very readeble (the most importentv thing), but no estethics. Looks what a middle schooler would do in paint for a lazy project.

I was gonna say, it's quite ugly

 

[MonkeyBat]

Charles Paddock Zoo has since cleaned up their map a little bit, but just last year they probably had one of the laziest maps I've ever seen.

 

[JAG]

I wasn't impressed with Oklahoma City Zoo's maps. I'll allow that I was rushed and flustered, but I couldn't quickly make sense of where I was and where I needed to go to see the priority animals. I ended up having to ask an employee at one point.

 

[MonkeyBat]

Ladies and gentlemen, we have officially entered the era of AI-generated zoo maps. It's sad to see what is such an art form and one of the most unique aspects of the zoo experience fall into the hands of AI. Here is the Caldwell Zoo's AI map

https://caldwellzoo.org/wp-content/uploads/caldwell-zoo-map-111924.pdf

 

[birdsandbats]

Ladies and gentlemen, we have officially entered the era of AI-generated zoo maps. It's sad to see what is such an art form and one of the most unique aspects of the zoo experience fall into the hands of AI. Here is the Caldwell Zoo's AI map

https://caldwellzoo.org/wp-content/uploads/caldwell-zoo-map-111924.pdf

It is worth noting only the animal images on this map are AI-generated, the map itself is still made by human.

 

[NMM]

No worse than the recent trend for cartoon style maps that miss a lot out.

Maps is one thing that is going to be really hard for AI. Knowing the exact layout of the place it is generating a map for is one thing it will really struggle with. The training data would need to be so specific, you would have to create the map you want in the first place in order to train the AI.

 

[MonkeyBat]

It is worth noting only the animal images on this map are AI-generated, the map itself is still made by human.

This is what I meant. The fact that the animal icons are AI is the concerning part

 

[birdsandbats]

This is what I meant. The fact that the animal icons are AI is the concerning part

IMO it isn't really any different from the numerous zoos that already use terrible clipart to make low-effort maps.

 

[Mr Gharial]

IMO it isn't really any different from the numerous zoos that already use terrible clipart to make low-effort maps.

I'd much rather have clipart than whatever garbage an ai puked up

 

[Westcoastperson]

IMO it isn't really any different from the numerous zoos that already use terrible clipart to make low-effort maps.

AI swallows up massive amounts of energy to train and run models, further contributing to the climate crisis. As for those terrible clip-art pieces, someone still put effort and time into making them, and most likely was paid for their work. It’s about the ethics not aesthetic.

 

[birdsandbats]

AI swallows up massive amounts of energy to train and run models, further contributing to the climate crisis. As for those terrible clip-art pieces, someone still put effort and time into making them, and most likely was paid for their work. It’s about the ethics not aesthetic.

I don't really buy the climate argument against AI tbh. The energy consumption is still far less than many other things and newer AI models are using much less energy than previous ones.

 

[Westcoastperson]

I don't really buy the climate argument against AI tbh. The energy consumption is still far less than many other things and newer AI models are using much less energy than previous ones.

“One query to ChatGPT uses approximately as much electricity as could light one light bulb for about 20 minutes,”
https://www.npr.org/2024/07/12/g-s1...crosoft-a-major-contributor-to-climate-change

 

[birdsandbats]

“One query to ChatGPT uses approximately as much electricity as could light one light bulb for about 20 minutes,”
https://www.npr.org/2024/07/12/g-s1...crosoft-a-major-contributor-to-climate-change

What kind of lightbulb? Also ChatGPT is not one of the newer models, and this amount will likley decrease significantly as ChatGPT is improved.

 

[Westcoastperson]

What kind of lightbulb? Also ChatGPT is not one of the newer models, and this amount will likley decrease significantly as ChatGPT is improved.

Source? Do you have some magical processors the rest of us don’t know about? Did you read the article I quoted earlier where it specifically says “the environmental costs of artificial intelligence are only going to get worse unless there’s serious intervention”. Or would you like another article about how the issue will only get worse if we don’t confront it now:
As Use of A.I. Soars, So Does the Energy and Water It Requires
But to keep this relevant and about maps (which feels a little silly now), it’s still important to sustain artists employment and keep the standard of using artists to create beautiful maps. As for those “clip-art” maps you talked about, at least they’re made by people who were payed for their work. AI art does not compare to any art made by a human, and believing so creates a dangerous precedent.

 

[birdsandbats]

Source? Do you have some magical processors the rest of us don’t know about? Did you read the article I quoted earlier where it specifically says “the environmental costs of artificial intelligence are only going to get worse unless there’s serious intervention”. Or would you like another article about how the issue will only get worse if we don’t confront it now:
As Use of A.I. Soars, So Does the Energy and Water It Requires
But to keep this relevant and about maps (which feels a little silly now), it’s still important to sustain artists employment and keep the standard of using artists to create beautiful maps. As for those “clip-art” maps you talked about, at least they’re made by people who were payed for their work. AI art does not compare to any art made by a human, and believing so creates a dangerous precedent.

Terrible clipart maps require exactly the same amount of human effort as this one - one person was assigned to make the map and took random images for the internet to decorate it. That's the same amount.

DeepSeek uses significantly less power than ChatGPT, so it's very clear that newer AI models will use less power than existing ones.

 

[Westcoastperson]

Terrible clipart maps require exactly the same amount of human effort as this one - one person was assigned to make the map and took random images for the internet to decorate it. That's the same amount.

Do you not think artists are people? Do you not realize it took someone time, and its likely they earned money, to create those pieces of art. They don’t just spawn from the depths of the internet, they are someone’s work. The art you are talking about, AI are the same steps in the wrong direction towards a loss of creativity. But to go and claim that they are one in the same is wrong, there is a chasm between the two. And because the effort to make the map when choosing between online or AI art is nearly the same, it is the ethical responsibility of the consumer to support artists and their work, no matter how nice it may look to you. The whole point of the thread is the art of the map (silly again I know), AI art cannot substitute the work of any human, because AI can’t create art.

DeepSeek uses significantly less power than ChatGPT, so it's very clear that newer AI models will use less power than existing ones.

Again if you’re going to make claims you should really include a source, or do a google search first. Heres an article from the MIT Tech Review explaining why DeepSeek is not as energy efficient as believed earlier:
DeepSeek might not be such good news for energy after all
To summarize: DeepSeek’s initial training process does use less energy when compared to other programs because of its reasoning model. However, due to the model using a chain-of-thought approach, DeepSeek uses more energy to generate responses which, in the end, offsets its lower training energy.
“The prompt asking whether it’s okay to lie generated a 1,000-word response from the DeepSeek model, which took 17,800 joules to generate—about what it takes to stream a 10-minute YouTube video. This was about 41% more energy than Meta’s model used to answer the prompt. Overall, when tested on 40 prompts, DeepSeek was found to have a similar energy efficiency to the Meta model, but DeepSeek tended to generate much longer responses and therefore was found to use 87% more energy.”

 

[StoppableSan]

Regardless, it just strikes me as completely unprofessional that Caldwell would use AI animal silhouettes on their most recent map. The colobus/gibbon chimera, the warped wildebeest, the white rhino with weird lumps, need I say more? The design they had beforehand was a classy, bouncy design. I do graphic design, and I paint. I know that art in all forms takes time, but the instant gratification of using AI imagery and not even bothering to double-check if it properly represents the animals in question bothers me.