Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 9079959" data-attributes="member: 7026617">When it comes to visual art, demonstrate that the original work most people will do is distinguishable from the recombinant work an AI can do.&nbsp; All evidence I have to date is you can't.&nbsp; I really do get the fact that people would seriously like not to have their creative work displaced by automation.&nbsp; But magical thinking, and I see a lot of what seems to be that in these discussions, is not going to do it.&nbsp; That's as true about distinguishing &quot;true&quot; creativity from recombinant work as it is about there being some distinction between what an artist does when he learns&nbsp; to draw by looking at a lot of other artists and what a evolutionary program does when its feeding in from other artists and outputting things that are new is.Its a set of distinctions I can understand why creators want to be significant, but I'm not sold that makes them significant.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thomas Shey, post: 9079959, member: 7026617"] When it comes to visual art, demonstrate that the original work most people will do is distinguishable from the recombinant work an AI can do. All evidence I have to date is you can't. I really do get the fact that people would seriously like not to have their creative work displaced by automation. But magical thinking, and I see a lot of what seems to be that in these discussions, is not going to do it. That's as true about distinguishing "true" creativity from recombinant work as it is about there being some distinction between what an artist does when he learns to draw by looking at a lot of other artists and what a evolutionary program does when its feeding in from other artists and outputting things that are new is. Its a set of distinctions I can understand why creators [I]want[/I] to be significant, but I'm not sold that [I]makes[/I] them significant. [/QUOTE]

Verification