3 ms·

GANs and computers are mirrors of the engineer's mind. You can only get out some combination of the trained data set and user input. Huamns can produce novel a

GANs and computers are mirrors of the engineer's mind. You can only get out some combination of the trained data set and user input. Huamns can produce novel artworks that a computer cannot, usually with more control over the intagibles like creativity and the fundamentals like drawing and perceiving the world.

Geminidog 6y ago
Yes, in some point in the future though the amount of output data from GANs trained on Human Data will surpass the amount of output data from humans directly. When that happens people will start training GANs with GAN data. It will become a self feeding loop with humans only curating data. Of course even the curating of the data is ripe for automation via ML.
CuriouslyC 6y ago
You talk as if a combination of the training space and user input can't be novel. There are a finite number of colors and textures, so if your data set has good coverage (and your model splits hue and luminosity) you could conceivably cover nearly the entire space. That would leave the shape as the differentiator of novelty.
klmadfejno 6y ago
> You can only get out some combination of the trained data set and user input. The same could be said of humans. A lot of humans would say a random piece of quality GAN-generated art is a creative work. They may not say so if they first looked at every piece of training data that went into it. But then, they might not do the same if they looked at every piece of art produced and viewed by a given human artist previously. As a thought experiment, if the line in the sand is whether a computer can generate a piece of art that people think is creative, even with full knowledge of every piece of training data- I think that's not at all difficult to overcome long term. Possibly even with current models.

3 ms·

GANs and computers are mirrors of the engineer's mind. You can only get out some combination of the trained data set and user input. Huamns can produce novel a

by friendlybus 6y ago

Geminidog 6y ago
Yes, in some point in the future though the amount of output data from GANs trained on Human Data will surpass the amount of output data from humans directly. When that happens people will start training GANs with GAN data. It will become a self feeding loop with humans only curating data. Of course even the curating of the data is ripe for automation via ML.
CuriouslyC 6y ago
You talk as if a combination of the training space and user input can't be novel. There are a finite number of colors and textures, so if your data set has good coverage (and your model splits hue and luminosity) you could conceivably cover nearly the entire space. That would leave the shape as the differentiator of novelty.
klmadfejno 6y ago
> You can only get out some combination of the trained data set and user input. The same could be said of humans. A lot of humans would say a random piece of quality GAN-generated art is a creative work. They may not say so if they first looked at every piece of training data that went into it. But then, they might not do the same if they looked at every piece of art produced and viewed by a given human artist previously. As a thought experiment, if the line in the sand is whether a computer can generate a piece of art that people think is creative, even with full knowledge of every piece of training data- I think that's not at all difficult to overcome long term. Possibly even with current models.