Hacker News Reader

Comment by handrous | Hacker News Reader

Do you feel this way because the behavior's largely imitative, or because it's happening on a computer? Is designing and building a replica of a Boeing 747 with LEGO also not creative? Or making some kind of Rube Goldberg machine with LEGO Technic parts and junk from around your house? I would expect not, under this framework for what is and is not creative. Where's the line, though?

View on HN

It's not because it's happening on a computer. It's because the behavior is largely imitative or following a script.

The initial folks who figured out how to build a computer a minecraft were very creative.

Rube Goldberg machines I think do involve a fair amount of creativity. it's not because they are physical per-se, but because the physical environment tends to force individual and creative thinking to solve the problems unique to that environment. Physical environments tend to be less homogenized and predictable than digital ones.

Designing and building a replica of a Boeing 747 is less creative than a rube goldberg machine, but depending on how many decisions you made yourself while building it makes it more or less creative.

Got it, that makes sense, thanks for the clarification.

I disagree and think that learning through imitation is itself a creative process. It opens up possibilities that didn't exist for the imitator beforehand. It shows how things work and creates new conceptual models in their minds. At the same time, I do think that creating from first principles is the most creative.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com