3 ms·
Cool concept as art, but is basically a patent version of infinite monkeys on typewriters hoping to write Shakespeare. That said, with a bit of guideance such
by graeham 10y ago
Cool concept as art, but is basically a patent version of infinite monkeys on typewriters hoping to write Shakespeare.
That said, with a bit of guideance such as learning/ feedback and/or being routed around an initial framework (perhaps TRIZ or similar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ), there could be a much higher signal-to-noise ratio. I've seen other attempts at invention through AI or algorithm - as dmritard says, the key to useful invention isn't generation, its filtering the noise.
Although as others have said, I doubt this would be admissable in court. Randomly generated 'claims' remain random: one could say in an infinite, random universe, surely every invention has already been created simply by matter composing itself in the approprieate way.
- gregmac 10y ago> I've seen other attempts at invention through AI or algorithm - as dmritard says, the key to useful invention isn't generation, its filtering the noise. That's exactly my thought on it after reading a couple. Consider the case of chemistry: One could write an application that goes through known chemical compounds[1] and then generates a combination of all of them, and for each combination, adds a ".. for use as a food additive", ".. for treatment of <medical condition>" ".. for general purpose cleaner" ".. for use in a battery" etc. Without doubt, within that crazy-huge list, there would be some absolutely correct claims, just as one of the infinite monkeys did in fact write Shakespeare: but which one? This site really isn't any different. [1] For example, harvest everything on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Chemistry-related_lists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Chemistry-related_lis...