3 ms·
I'm not convinced that most, or any, humans are ever engaging in truly original thought. This idea that AI cannot be creative but humans can is something that
by dleslie 3y ago
I'm not convinced that most, or any, humans are ever engaging in truly original thought.
This idea that AI cannot be creative but humans can is something that begs for a test; and that test needs to be applied against humans, as well. If AI can pass it at least as often as humans can, then AI is at least as creative as humans; within the bounds of that test.
As it happens, an AI has recently passed such a test[0].
0: https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/09/14/1079465/ai-just-beat-a-human-test-for-creativity-what-does-that-even-mean/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/09/14/1079465/ai-just-...
- babypuncher 3y agoone possible test would be if a model trained solely on naturalist and earlier paintings could eventually start producing expressionist and abstract works, without carefully engineered prompts.
- dleslie 3y agoEven for humans there was a transition period, and not a sudden explosion of new expression. Naturalist gave way to impressionism, which gave rise to expressionism, and eventually then came abstract works. There's a clear, gradual change in style between them all. I don't see why you couldn't have an AI do the same, by training it towards a particular aberration in output until that became something it understood well.