| |||
 
| |||
|
0031 - Spoilers - 2018.05.07 |
||
|
| |||
|
Comment: True story - the first time I heard house music, I honestly believed it was entirely computer-generated, with no human input. Of course, loading in a few thousand beats and sound effects and then teaching an algorithm what keys and scales and bpm are would be relatively easy. Even if it wasn't true at the time, there are plenty of computer programs now that do create endless randomized electronic music, in various genres. It is also fun and fashionable, as of this writing, to whip up a "neural network" to generate forms of written art - recipes, or the names of paint colours, or Seinfeld scripts. The output from these are usually Markov-chain gobbledegook, largely because the networks in question may understand what nouns and verbs are, but not (yet) what they signify. Procedurally-generated levels in video games are common, with varying levels of sophistication and varying levels of success. I guess what I'm getting at is that usually, in post-labour futures, Art is presented as one of humanity's few remaining pastimes. (I, as an artist, certainly prefer to pretend that this will be the case.) It is not impossible, though, that AI will inevitably surpass us in creative pursuits as they will in manual labour and customer service - in certain artforms and genres, if not in all of them - and I doubt that audiences will insist on only watching human-created art if AI-created art is a) cheaper, b) more plentiful, and c) engineered to be more pleasurable to consume. |
||
|
Transcript: --------------------------------------------------------------- |
||