> This is why most algorithmic art is so uninteresting. It falls on one side or the other of the randomness/repetition valley, without hitting that sweet spot t

> This is why most algorithmic art is so uninteresting. It falls on one side or the other of the randomness/repetition valley, without hitting that sweet spot that the best human creativity finds. > That's not even thinking about emotional associations, intellectual abstractions, social awareness, and models-of-mind. You might need all of them to make a genius-level creative AI, but I'd guess that the more you have, the more likely you are to get something worth keeping. I don't agree. I find all of those things boring in art. Mathematics and computer science are much more interesting when you think about how it relates to the mind, and why people may choose to create abstract art instead of metaphorically painting themselves naked.