Well, once again, also warm, welcome,
on my be have to this first sharing and carry in conference,
outside of Denmark. And I think it's we will get
us sometime to get into the right digital mindset,
standing in the room like this. And actually,
now I town how, we have a room like this is well,
a several rooms like this,
the historism is there very much and shape it we have one that's called the Phoenix room.
And the Phoenix room commamerates, the fact that the old,
town how was burnt down in the great fire in
the 1840s and this room commemorates phoenix rising from the ashes again and there's one in inscription
on the wall thing that from the assues the new arrises
so that these we can sit somewhere and point at this dings
and with this is what we going to talk about this is the disruption,
the slacks here so we are make up for this hopefully in the speeches to come.
You put the topic on your agenda that I think is very important if you want to addressen that only,
how museums media at culture in the future,
but also how we address the why the issues of social communication and of interaction and how societies in the future.
And that is the importance of digital technologies in every day life. And this,
of course, leads also directly to the consequences for dear reification and of the universal,
availability of cultural products and social information sharing and caring you,
put over this conference, those are surprising the good positive emotions,
that you rightly want to see in the same context and we hope that these emotions other ones that we dominate the conference as well.
And not the ones of fear of doom and gloom and all these things,
there we also 10 to discuss sime times,
when we talk about digitization, the least in Germany,
for 100s of years,
we thought their progress was possible and now the most of the things that we are doing is that we are trying to valuate the consequences of technology,
maybe we should get back to the idea of their progress is a good thing in the first place and then do the other stuff later,
we actually have a committee in the German
bundestag that is calls committee for evaluating the consequences of technology,
but we don't have a committee that is supposed to evalue
at progress, maybe visual change that.
But we see, the Museum of Kunst und Gewerbe,
our Arts and Crafts Museum in Hamburg,
erleast is a very good venue for this debate.
This one of the trail blazers with comes to the topic of
digitization and the digital mediation of cultural assets and collections.
And we already heard about this firm professor Schulze. The first digital
collection catalogue of any of hamburgs Museums was colated here,
back in 1995 and part of the fotographic collection was than published on a cD rum.
I don't know anyone of you the remembers what the city
rum wars look at up, if you don't.
Was the thing that was coming right after the caset.
The speed of technological change is dizzying and continually threatens to
overwhelm us also socially. And that's why I always come
back to those three catchy rules that Douglas Adams ones road down,
when he was thinking about the consequences of our reactions to technologies.
I think that someone the room now them,
but I'm a true of anybody does.
So I've a court them to you. It's first rule
was that anything that is in the world,
when you are born is normal and ordinary and is just
a natural part of the way the
world works
Second rule is, anything that is invented between when you
are 15 and 35 is new, and exciting,
and revolutionary, and you can probably get a career in it.
In the third rule is, anything invented,
after your 35 is against the natural order of things.
So I hope that everyone in this room has resolved to
never excited the mental age of 35 and we can still
go on with his conference. But even if we are
determined to see digitalization as an opportunity and not as a
shaking the foundation of the traditional order, we are still
no closer to answering, how we want to see
this opportunity
After all digitalisation is more than just a technical simplification of our every day work.
It's radically changes the rules of the game and of our expectations.
Consequently it make sense that from all the 10 years
and then all of hamburgs museum foundations,
we have been systematically recording works of arts and data basis,
scanning them and adding scaloty information about them.
This effort has broad together as huge wealth of data
and great the simplified and museum work with the collections.
But the real changes now,
the the real challenge now is making this enormous welf,
available to the public and using the digital opportunities to envide
the public to engage in a discourse about art and culture
That is the core concerned of our e-culture agenda 2020,
that hamburgs ministry of culture drew up back in 2020.
It's central tenant is creating digital access to culture.
Working together with the various cultural institutions our aim is
to experiment with ways of making cultural topics,
cultural and historical arteffects and scotterly and educational insights available digitally.
This concentrated work on the digital transformation of the mediation of
culture is important. And it's ignificant significance cannot be rated
to highly
Because when every we talk about digitization suna or later the
discussion and overally used the term as well, turns to disruption.
And the term usually tens to be used mediafarically to the
notate profound change. And we leave it like this,
but if you look a little deeper into the literature that
is dealing with innovation and with the digitization,
you find a book call the innovators dilemma by the harvard
economist clayton kristens and who coint the term disruption and to framed it in the theuretical
way and what he was discribing,
was the very strange fact that usually companies that out the most successful at present times,
are the ones most likely to fail in the future,
because they are the ones that do not recognized that the market conditions change.
And this is what the exclement by disruption,
the market changes so dramatically,
but you are still sust successful in your old business model that
you tent not to see it and that others who immerge
within the changing market conditions just pass you a long side and two are three years down the world,
they are there, where you needed to be,
but since you did not move, they are the ones,
now taking up your business.
And this is something that of course, on the one hand,
is relevant for companies, but not only it.
Actually it's relevant for all institutions that we have in the society
that need to make that need to find there way through
changing circumstancies and that need to deal with effect that the art that we the ways that we are offering,
but we are doing need to change as well in order to be relevant also in the future.
And so this is something very important and giving the innovative line
amüson of the digitization field, bus is the danger face,
but all stablished institutions.
It is often the case, then in these in diesen developments.
Das potentielle Visitors customers are further down the road and
the providers of the service or of the good.
They rightly demand open access to public or publicly funded data. That's why in Hamburg,
we have been trying to meet this need with a transparency portal setup in 2014,
where we try to make publicly available most if not all of government data that is basically produced,
but the government,
if not the government has a reason not to publish it,
so we basically changed the idea of public and private of public and are cane in the government sector.
The foundation for this is a transparency act that we drafte,
together with civil rights, and civil society groups like
transparency international at all the chaos computer club.
It goes without saying that the cultural speare is not immuned
to such considerations and developments. We all know that in practice,
there are basic questions that cultural institutions have to address in this development.
They have to do with how immuseum sees its relationship to
the digitization of the artworks it holes.
And this is where in the moment and professor should to arbeite hintered at this conflict,
to very fund the mental standpoints often collide,
not only in the world of museums, but there is well.
Standpoints, that characterized the conflict that museum stuff and politicians dealing with culture experience.
Stanpoint number one, the museum has sovereignty over its data.
According to this notion, the museum decides, which a digital data,
it will make available to the public and a what far.
Digital access to the data is via of the website of
the cultural institutions concerned or though the institutions can share access to the data via other website.
The museum regulates, how they can be reused by means
of various leistungsmodels in contransfer, it's rights to third parties.
Digital repreductions of works in the collections,
may only be published, if they are a companyed
by academically
indoorsed metadata
Museums monitor of the context, in which repreductions of the
works curated by them appear and cultural institutions can also set up
models for usualizing data with the aim of generating income.
Stampoint Number two, the museum is a data and knowledge service provider.
In this case, deliberate loss of controllers on the agenda
and that is always a difficult think to do.
The public must begiven,
according to the standpoint unlimited access to all data collected in
digitity documented by publicly funded institutions and by academics and other
staff financed from public funds.
No fees are
charged for the use
Institutionen for go any usered trights.
As fire as possible, creative commons licenses are issued.
Text fund the technical infrastructure is provided for accessing the data.
Needer the museum, now the state outhorises, exocized,
and the authorities exocized any influence on how data is reused.
And there is no monitoring of who reuses the data and im which context.
The music seasons in the museum seases itself as in
that ministrator of public property and not as it's bowner.
Goes stand points and I'm sure you going to discustom
in the conference link head of you have the proced cons
There is almost impossible to would eater into practice in its pure fonds.
There's probably always going to be a mix of both.
But a women back no secret of the fact that I have a
good deal of simplesy for a substantial opening up of access,
and part because as suspect,
that many aspects of the first stand point will be antennable,
at least in the case of state on cultural institutions.
Of course, we have to settle questions of ownership and
the rights to it in the digital context to. Im particular,
we need clearly defined copyright applicable to the digitors fear,
otherwise cultural production would run dry,
a basic understanding of the justified needs of the cultural increative
industry along demands this
Yet for publicly funded, cultural institutions, they are new
possibilities over and the both of these market oriented expectations.
And how things should be organized,
possibilities, who scouted we cannot yet properly god.
If we embrace the risk of consciously relinquishing control inserverty,
we will gain the freedom to take a step into open space.
One that we would scassly have dared content plate before now.
It gives us the chance to awaken the interest of people,
who up to know have not been familiar with museums.
They will suddenly find themselves confronted in the every day
digital reality with outworks that this previously never considered.
And I mean, to the sure, there are many people now societies.
So don't think that the idea of going on the set today
or as hunday in 5 meters high rooms starring at paintings at white or yellow of bluewars,
is anything that the thing is neilly plosable to anyway of recreation and ideas.
So how to get them into contact with these offerings in the first place,
looked them up with there,
how and make it accessible to where they are at the moment and then see,
where there are not you can convince them,
that the orror of the outwork itself in its mear physical context
is the next experience that the year more to encounter to you made the first contact in the digital world.
So usings, should have the coverage to risk this experiment in breaking down barriers.
This path that leads us to this point is by no means trivial.
Needhere in this conceptional, now and its technological terms.
It demands both cultural reflection and sophisticated information technology.
And that is why the interdisciplinary approach of this conferences so important,
in I think that the cooperation between academic discourse and practical
museum work out to be of mutual benefit.
The intellectual grownwork has been done long time a go.
And the technologic, technology is available
is well
Now way have to bring them both together. There's are theory in
the digital humanities field that argue that culture is constituted,
only by reflecting about art and by human engagement with it,
has not a new insight,
but one that becomes newly gangs new relevants in digital context.
And I think that the sharing is carring initiative collect as a laboratory, if
you will to test exactly this premise. And so it
isn't our own, and you own best interest to use
how hardedly the possibilities that digital communication offers us.
Stimulated by creative projects, based on the huse,
huse wealth of digitized outworks we hold
And actually we do not need any debates on ideological principles,
with a initiierted by one camp or the other.
We should believe in the possibility of progress.
And it is action that creates the future. Or to
quote doctors Adams again. We are stuck with technology,
when what we will really want, is just stuff that works.
So thank you for listening and I hope that
the conference with the inspiring and imviting