Yeap... Anything that is coming to us in large quantities becomes normal very quickly. Am curious how visual (and audible) Art will be perceived a few years from now. #art #music #ai
I understand what you say. When we get to AGI, I believe we will, AI will invent new types of everything, including Art. One of the Art masters, David Lynch, says: Creativity is a combination of existing things.
Advanced AI would seek to be efficient. Sights and sounds; sensations. AI would skip all the necessary steps and go straight to triggering the sensations.
(That thought was raw and needs a little more fine tuning...)
but isn't the state of AGI not about the programmability of such? isn't AGI beyond reinforcement learning? ie by learning based on input and response? but by 'thinking' on its own? question is: can we reach true AGI? I tend to think it will
Often when trying to explain the creative process, we struggle, because the finished product and all ideas involved, were not thought of (like we do when we communicate). Explained like: The mind is giving. Unsure of source. Just happens.
Two things to think about. People don't follow art, they follow artists. And AI depends on what's known.
Say punk rock hasn't been invented yet. AI cannot invent punk rock. The artist has to. Without new, AI is stuck in the past.
I understand what you say. When we get to AGI, I believe we will, AI will invent new types of everything, including Art. One of the Art masters, David Lynch, says: Creativity is a combination of existing things.
Advanced AI would seek to be efficient. Sights and sounds; sensations. AI would skip all the necessary steps and go straight to triggering the sensations.
(That thought was raw and needs a little more fine tuning...)
yea, you may be right here. though what about adding randomness to certain paths and decisions AI will take to get to some result?
Randomness would require a selection of sorts, from something in existence. And chaos wouldn't be manageable nor programable. Both make noise.
but isn't the state of AGI not about the programmability of such? isn't AGI beyond reinforcement learning? ie by learning based on input and response? but by 'thinking' on its own? question is: can we reach true AGI? I tend to think it will
Often when trying to explain the creative process, we struggle, because the finished product and all ideas involved, were not thought of (like we do when we communicate). Explained like: The mind is giving. Unsure of source. Just happens.