3 ms·
Theories on Artificial Expression (2013)
- binarymax 11y agoHi All. This is a repost as granted by the HN mods (thanks mods!). I wrote it in 2013, but thought it was appropriate given some of the comments in this post here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10993919 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10993919
- radarsat1 11y agoI think it's a nice article. > While I have no formal proof, I postulate that the problem of Artificial Expression is NP-Complete (again, not possible to solve using existing techniques). But this detracts from it, is it is not what NP-Complete means. Also: > Be aesthetically pleasing > Be purely original I think a good deal of human art does not fit these specifications.
- binarymax 11y agoFirst of all, thanks for reading! I'm glad you enjoyed it. I agree this is not a definition of NP-Complete, but I was writing this with a less technical audience in mind and wrestled with the description. >I think a good deal of human art does not fit these specifications. Absolutely true! When I wrote the article I spent a good deal of time thinking on these cases, and while art definitely covers much more than this, it fits well as a good litmus test.