3 ms·
Again, there is a gradation and you've not answered the question. What is the intent if a human provided 1 bit of input by flipping a coin and chose all the od
by pishpash 7y ago
Again, there is a gradation and you've not answered the question.
What is the intent if a human provided 1 bit of input by flipping a coin and chose all the odd numbered melodies? What if a human provided 1 bit of input by flipping an unobservable mental coin? What about 2 bits? N bits?
What if a machine generated all the "interesting" melodies via a neural network?
- jcelerier 7y agoThese questions are why we have jurors and don't just do justice decisions following straight algorithms
- pishpash 7y agoWhat is the basis by which jury likely decides intent here? Is it any different than "arbitrarily"? The point is in a world of cheap computing, intellectual property is probably moot if its cost of production is nearly zero.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoThe point is, you should read the article. IP is not moot because you have a random number generator. IP may become less relevant if computers ever learn to select useful bit patterns out of sea of randomness, but even then, the legal system will handle it just fine (somebody will own the selection algorithms after all). > What is the basis by which jury likely decides intent here? Is it any different than "arbitrarily"? Causality. You can't determine intent from bits, which leads people to (mistakenly) believe colour doesn't exist. To determine the colour of the bits, the courts will look at the actual chain of events surrounding their creation. Because that is what matters. Not what the bits are, but how you came into possession of them, and why.
- shawnz 7y ago> What is the intent ... What is the intent? You tell us. Was the person doing it to try and capitalize on someone else's creative works?