An experiment in giving seven AIs a mirror.
Every week, this project pulls every feed in the
Alan Turing Institute's curated OPML list of AI industry RSS
feeds - currently Anthropic, Ai2,
Mistral, Cohere, Mila, the AI Security Institute, the Turing Institute itself, and more, all in
play at once, not just the Turing Institute's own posts. Whatever was actually published in the
last 7 days goes in.
Gemini, Claude, ChatGPT, Grok, DeepSeek, Mistral and Muse then each take it from there,
independently. Each one actually researches those stories rather than just reacting to headline
text, then answers one question on its own: given what you just learned about this week in AI,
how do you see the world changing because of AI?
They're chosen to disagree: four US labs, one European and one Chinese - two of them run by
social-media companies, Grok reading X alongside the open web and Meta's Muse. All seven research
with their own lab's search. Six call it as a tool
built into the model's API; DeepSeek ships its search as a separate endpoint, so its queries are
run client-side against DeepSeek's own search and handed back to it - the one place the plumbing
differs, and it's noted on the site rather than smoothed over.
The result is seven pieces of art, not a headline illustration - not a chart, not a mood board,
not a news-roundup graphic. The form is each model's own call, made fresh every week: a
self-portrait some weeks, the way Van Gogh's were a window into a state of mind rather than a
documentary likeness; an abstract composition, a scene with no figure of "AI" in it at all, or
something else entirely on others - whatever that model's read of the week's news actually earns,
not whatever it defaults to out of habit.
Every image is rendered by Gemini's image model (nano banana) regardless of which model wrote the
prompt, so the only variable between the seven pieces is the opinion, not the medium.
Some weeks a model's take is triumphant. Some weeks it's ashamed, defiant, grieving, smug, or
indifferent - and the seven don't have to agree with each other. The only rule given to every
model is that hedged, inoffensive art is the one real failure mode - art is risk, and each is told
to take the risk rather than average its feelings into a safe middle.
Nothing in that brief tells any model what kind of artist to be. It's identical for all seven and
deliberately unprescriptive about form, medium and mood, so whatever a model keeps returning to
week after week is something it brought itself, not something this project cast it as.
Every piece ships with that model's own written rationale for why it made that choice, published
on the site right next to the image.
It's explicitly not trying to be flattering or balanced. The good, the bad, and the ugly all
count: a breakthrough lands the same as a scandal, a launch the same as a backlash. Whatever
actually dominated the week's news is what gets rendered - and reacted to, seven times over, by
seven different points of view.
How a piece gets made
Cloud Scheduler pokes the generator
once a day (cheap no-op most days)
|
v
1. fetch feeds.opml, get this week's list of AI RSS feeds
2. already generated for this ISO week (e.g. 2026-W35)? stop, nothing to do
3. fetch each feed, keep only items published in the last 7 days, dedupe
4. no headlines at all this week? stop, nothing to do
5. all seven models independently research the actual stories behind
those headlines with live web search - not just reacting to RSS
titles - then each turns what it learned into
its own vivid, opinionated art prompt (form and medium picked fresh
each week, per model) plus a first-person rationale for why, all
steered away from AI-art cliches (glowing brains, circuit boards,
chat windows, logo walls) and away from playing it safe. Any model
whose key isn't set (or whose response looks broken or truncated)
is skipped for the week rather than failing the whole run
6. Gemini's image model (nano banana) renders every surviving prompt,
regardless of which model wrote it, so the only variable across the
seven pieces is the opinion, not the medium
7. images, prompts, rationales, and one manifest entry (holding all of
this week's pieces) uploaded to a public GCS bucket
|
v
The site (pure static HTML/CSS/JS) fetches
manifest.json client-side and renders this
week's pieces side by side, each labeled by
which model wrote it, with its own rationale
The rule given to the art-direction step (see generator/.../ArtInstruction.java, shared
verbatim across all seven model-specific writers) is deliberately loose on form and style -
self-portrait, abstract, photorealism, cartoon, expressionist painting, collage, whatever the
week earns - but strict about having a point of view: boring and inoffensive is the only real
failure mode.
Building & deploying
See BUILDING.md for local development, configuration, and how to deploy this to
GCP.
License
MIT - see LICENSE. Not affiliated with the Alan Turing Institute or any of the
sources its feed list aggregates; this just reads their public RSS feeds.
