If you're in the art and tech space—or the art world writ large—you've probably been at least a little transfixed by the drama, controversy, and, ultimately, financial success attached to the Christie's Augmented Art auction that ended last week.

Some decried the sale, the first ever dedicated to art made with artificial intelligence, as glorifying what they see as mass exploitation of creative work by the big AI companies. In fact, after it was announced, approximately 6,500 people signed an open letter to Christie’s with a simple cri de coeur: “We ask that, if you have any respect for human artists, you cancel the auction.”

Others have argued that the artists featured in the sale are doing exactly what we want artists to do: to experiment with new tools and ideas, break conventional boundaries, and push through to uncharted terrain.

Heightening the stakes, perhaps? The auction's success, with its $730,000 haul coming in 20 percent above estimate, was a rare bright spot in an otherwise gloomy and perturbed art market.

So let's talk about it! And let's hear the backstory from the person who organized it, Christie's Vice President of Digital Art Nicole Sales Giles. Because the work that went into the sale, both by the artists and the auction house, is actually more consequential—and more fascinating—than meets the eye.

This week, I am very pleased to talk to Nicole about how she went about assembling Augmented Art, what AI art even means, and what the artists who protested the auction got absolutely right.

Getting more First Nations teachers into schools