<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">Now Jason, I do not pretend to have a good answer to what is creative, but just being different doesn't seem to me to be sufficient.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">An AI can gather what has been done, perhaps even weighted by how we humans rate the things (Leonardo is superior to a chimp), and put together something that combines what has been done but in a new way. An infinity of art could be created this way. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">My personal definition of great art - I like it. Same for food, music, colors, animals, etc. Why should I say something is great or even good if I don't like it? I cannot impose my standards on anyone else. They get to define greatness for themselves.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">If enough people think something is great, it will last far longer than the artists' lives. Homer, anyone?</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">("You like it? That's the best you can do?" Yes.)</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">bill w</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 9:27 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 8:41 AM William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Big art prize in Britain went to a person who turned the lights off and then back on in a museum. This is art? ;You can do anything to a canvas or wood or stone and someone will find value in it and some will call it art.</div><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)">I think we cannot conclude anything from that except that calling something art could include the whole universe with God the Creator. </div><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)">So as a matter of calling something creative I think we have to have some standards. Really, really bad art is still art but the level of creativity is in question. An AI winning an art contest is in the same category as those prizes won by chimps and elephants. Let's define creativity a bit more strictly, shall we? bill w</div></div><br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Do you find anything on this webpage creative?</div><div><br></div><div><a href="https://www.midjourney.com/showcase/recent/" target="_blank">https://www.midjourney.com/showcase/recent/</a></div><div><br></div><div>Would you say none of them were creative if all of them were created by human artists?</div><div><br></div><div>Jason</div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 3:08 PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Feb 24, 2023, 11:22 AM William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)">We don't understand creativity and thus cannot program it into our computers. But that is what gives humans the flexibility the computers lack. A computer has to go with probability - humans don't (and anyway are not very good at it at all). So wayout solutions, the vast majority of which don't work or backfire, do happen, improbably. We want instant answers from computers, while humans find solutions that took many decades or centuries to discover, and perhaps were always counterintuitive (aka crazy).</div><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)">bill w.</div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I would argue that is no longer the case, given the advances I describe here:</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><a href="https://alwaysasking.com/when-will-ai-take-over/#Creative_abilities_of_AI" target="_blank">https://alwaysasking.com/when-will-ai-take-over/#Creative_abilities_of_AI</a><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This article is a few years out of date, modern AI is vastly superior at creating art now compared to the examples available at the time of my writing. One AI generated art image won a competition (competing against human artists).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I would say creativity is just permutation plus a value selector. In this sense, we have had creative algorithms for decades (e.g., genetic programming / genetic algorithms).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Jason </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 10:07 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
On 23/02/2023 23:50, bill w wrote:<br>
<br>
> another question: why do we, or they, or somebody, think that
an AI has to be conscious to solve the problems we have? Our
unconscious mind solves most of our problems now, doesn't it? I
think it does. bill w<br>
<br>
<br>
That's a good question.<br>
<br>
(If our unconscious solves most of our problems now, it's not doing
a very good job, judging by the state of the world!)<br>
<br>
Short answer: We don't yet know if consciousness is necessary for
solving certain problems. Or even any problems.<br>
<br>
Longer answer: I suspect it is necessary for some things, but have
no proof, other than the circumstantial evidence of evolution.<br>
<br>
Consciousness evolved, and we know that evolution rapidly eliminates
features that don't contribute to reproductive fitness, especially
if they have a cost. Consciousness almost certainly has quite a big
cost. This suggests that it's necessary for solving at least some of
the problems that we've met over the last 300 000 years (or at least
for <i>something</i> that's useful), or we wouldn't have developed
it in the first place. Or if it happened by accident, and wasn't
good for survival, we'd have lost it. So we can conclude at the very
least that consciousness has been good for our survival, even if we
don't know how.<br>
<br>
It strikes me as noteworthy that the kinds of things that our
computers can do well, we do poorly (playing chess, mathematics,
statistical reasoning, etc.), and some things that we have evolved
to do well, our computers do poorly, or can't do at all (hunting and
gathering, making canoes, avoiding hungry lions, making sharp
sticks, etc.). Perhaps consciousness is the (or a) missing
ingredient for being able to do those things. Yes, arms and legs are
an obvious advantage, but many other animals with arms and legs
never developed like we did.<br>
As the former things tend to be abstract mental things, and the
latter tend to be highly-co-ordinated, complex physical things,
maybe consciousness has a lot to do with embodiment, and
manipulating the external world in complex ways successfully. Maybe
Big Dog is closer to consciousness than ChatGPT (or, more likely,
needs it more).<br>
<br>
If Big Dog (or whatever the latest iteration of it is called) had
ChatGPT in its head, as well as all the other stuff it already has,
would it be able to build a canoe and use it to escape from a forest
fire, decide where it was safe to stop, and built a hut? That would
be an interesting experiment.<br>
<br>
Ben<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div>