4,270 karma · joined May 30, 2020
Also you might find it interesting to read Jaynes' Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. It's evidently controversial and not a viewpoint to uncritically adopt wholesale, but it does get you thinking about mental visualization/audiolization vs. hallucinations etc... and contains some intriguing historical anecdotes.
Those studies, well, I'd have to see them. There's the risk that people for whom (e.g.) memory is accompanied by imagery automatically assume that imagery is required for memory. Vague correlations with social functioning can be drawn for nearly anything.
Regarding dementia: obviously the disappearance of imagery in someone who used to have it is very different from someone who never had it.
Of course it's hard to argue with the bare fact of someone feeling something, but everything surrounding that such as the attribution of the causes, potential solutions, and the terms in which feelings are described are all open to debate.
Wow, take it easy.. This whole pathologization of "aphantasia" really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
>Soon you will have to grapple with the reality of what really drives your enjoyment of media, and part of that will be realizing that the human-ness never mattered at all.
is a good point that many media consumers will at some point have to come to grips with. There is a sense, almost accelerationist, in which the machine-generation of vast amounts of enjoyable media (let's not pretend none of it will be enjoyable) forces people to reconsider what drives their engagement with art/entertainment, what value there really is in sitting still for 2 hours to watch a movie or listen to music no matter how good. (As you can see all over this comment section most people have staggeringly naive ideas about art)
Anyway I don't think your case is really so bad. As long as the creator at least has put in the effort to listen to their own stuff from beginning to end at least once (yes that's a low bar), you're already miles ahead of people who'd auto-gen 100s of albums and slap them on there in one go. Music is more inherently rate-limiting than image generation where only half a second or less is needed to take in an image superficially.
I think there's something cool here, seamless morphing between sounds was one of the things they were trying (and failing, obviously) to do at IRCAM way back when. Finally we might be able to morph in something approaching perceptual space.
(and glitch is always interesting too, of course)
Because defining "good" as "made by a human from the human society" is the easiest way to be able to go on and "prove" that "LLM poetry is not good" (these are scare quotes). She says she used this definition in "over thirty years of reading, teaching, and writing poetry" (this is an actual quote) but I highly doubt she would've found it necessary 30 years ago to define "good" as "made by a human" with this level of explicitness.
Edit: having read the whole FA, the closing sentence makes much more sense (and is also completely at odds with the definition of greatness given earlier):
"Operationally, greatness is measured when tastemakers put them in anthologies so that generations of readers can read them, tear out the ones that resonate, and tape them to their refrigerators."
Thanks for explaining the concept of close-up photography in terms I can understand. :D
http://www.audiosynth.com/files/sc-users-archive/v01.n224
http://www.audiosynth.com/files/sc-users-archive/v01.n225
http://www.audiosynth.com/files/sc-users-archive/v01.n226
http://www.audiosynth.com/files/sc-users-archive/v01.n227
(note I am not personally claiming this is RDJ)
Nope. By then RDJ (the actual person) was of course known for using anagrams so it would be an obvious thing to do for any troll.