xor99

As an activity art implements ideas that have been formulated conceptually previously ("conceptual" here could be a drunk artist taking a pic of their butt and isn't philosophical + more related to surprisal). The immediately exciting thing about art is the experience of the product but that experience gives way to a more conceptual excitement (its interesting because they are exploring this idea!). When an idea is repeated x amount of times as an artistic expression it gets boring. Generative art is boring on these terms, to me, right now, even if many technical advancements relating to the speed or complexity of the generative system are made.

H/w this is just a fun argument about art which is basically impossible to concretely describe anyway and i'm prob wrong (e.g. some kid is going to make something incredible with a new idea about generative art x AI).

I think these basic arguments are valuable and musicians should be focussed on whether a better understanding of music theory actually produces music with desirable qualities such as surprisal (e.g. that moment when Dj Screw slowed the record or groups of monks decided to chant together etc).

IMO the answer is a big nope. One reason is that music theory is always explicated in retrospect and contributes little to the invention of new music or enjoyment. It's useful (not devaluing it wholesale) if you want to do x in the style of y (e.g. I want this to sound like Miles Davis!). H/w an accurate picture of musical performance and general cultural activity surrounding would never reduce it all to just that.

Oh you have me there! Things that are boring (to me) are not fun (to me). If you find it fun then great :) This area of art has stagnated horrifically and because it is art as well as programming it should be critiqued via that other angle as well.

Why? Shouldn't you think about whether this style is over in terms of its contribution to art? Sure all the cool AI companies drop "generative" in their press stuff but is it interesting anymore? The main advances were made in the 50s and 60s (e.g. the very idea of generative and systems art was invented). Now we can see generative systems taken to their literal extreme in DALL-E.

But if generative art is just an idea about art then what else is there?

Anyway some early generative art pioneers (I take a European mid 20th century angle because mid 2000s MIT grads did not invent this field):

https://monoskop.org/Max_Bense (his idea of information aesthetics is what we are in now and has becoming more or less boring as an idea about art imo) https://monoskop.org/Frieder_Nake Many nice examples here http://dada.compart-bremen.de/

True hacking by some Australian innovators "in this space" (AMAZING SELF-SERVE KIOSK HACK THAT SCORES YOU FREE MACCAS):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7ttj41Fdig

Lol, I agree with you 100% I just think github has a a few drawbacks versus self hosted blogs (etc,etc).

Excellent shed! V happy for you :)

Yes true, wow really really true... I should publish everything all the time... oh wait a sec.. this is a marketing campaign for CoPilot! Splat

Just totally irrelevant, managed decline. Unfortunately English people appear to lap this kind of thing up in droves

This is just trad vulgarity. There is no simple distinction between some abstract concept of "beauty" and different historical trends in design and architecture. Sure contemporary architecture can be terrible but the depth of engagement is atrocious on this subject. What are you talking about? Gothic influences? Roman? Greek? Does the author reference any modern architecture firms such as OMA or other less accessible ones? Midwit critique.

Open source the designs and drop the aggressive ad business / develop privacy preserving technologies

Hmmm... the offending compound was lead acetate which was also used as a general sweetener, sugar substitute, and to preserve fruit/veg. So I think the scope for the influence of lead poisoning is a bit higher than suggested in the article. It's still a huge stretch to blame it for the entire downfall though ofc!

Should have read this first for starters: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/

Ye with a little auto-generation too: "The power of controlling objects with mind has captivated a popular fascination to human beings".

I would recommend looking at David Johnston's book "Random Number Generators, Principles and Practices" to get a handle on how complicated evaluating RNGs properly is. Radioactive sources combined with conventional circuits/electronics are too slow for practical applications afaik (e.g. incredibly time consuming to prove the performance but not bad in principle). However, I love the banana idea for its inventiveness.

Yes, its essentially nonsense and seems to come from some quarters of the academic community as well as a marketing/differentiation technique. In reality there are:

PRNGs - pseudo /deterministic, CSPRNGs - crypto secure pseudo /deterministic, HRNGs - hardware based (this can refer to anything from roulette tables to zener diode noise), QRNGs - where the entropy source is quantum mechnical in nature.

Seems .. referring to the assertion that maybe something is the case

Quiet .. theres insufficient wind here (aerial not at ground level or behind lederhosen) in southern Germany.. maybe we shouldn't invest millions into it

Data .. lack of wind in southern Germany on website dedicated to tracking wind in Europe

Default measurements in link are taken at 100m above sea level - turbines are currently built at around 80m, some 90m, and 100m in development.

Seems a bit quiet https://map.neweuropeanwindatlas.eu/ + others

Where do they plan to put them...NW? They give out about Bavaria and south but most estimates I've seen only support northern sites as being actually worthwhile. The biggest wind related fallacy apart from farting in public is putting windmills where theres not enough bluster. Could be wasteful and a little late from the German greens imo given recent events.

Even more important than the aesthetic issues... read Naomi Wu (from a previous thread on this):

https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/150912514143903334...

cyberclunk

Check out other sbcs. Good starter review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcvMxC81r_g

Yeah, no denying other factors but repairing that electron microscope is no walk in the park and it prob enables others to do it even cheaper given the walkthrough style tutorial. I'm just replying to a pretty flippant characterisation (see top comment) and not ignorant about other issues relating to circumstances and location like you mention.

"One of Zeloof’s best finds was a broken electron microscope that cost $250,000 in the early ’90s; he bought it for $1,000 and repaired it."

His videos are an excellent educational resource that everyone can access easily. He's following that style (e.g. Applied Science) that is valuable for others wanting to learning how to build technologies without all of the fake complexity and grandstanding/secrecy that can sometimes accompany it. Nothing wrong with that!

*any articles

If things on ieee are going to get philosophical then its wise to start with philosophy! David Chalmers is great at showing the complexity of these kinds of qs: https://philpapers.org/rec/CHAOIA https://philpapers.org/rec/CHATVO-8

Metamaterials are real virtuality while the metaverse is virtual reality.

Imagine where this meta was as big as facebook and solving problems through chemical, material, and biological products ...

This reminds me of the chemist who's beard was so long and dirty it led to his experiments crystallising with high frequency due to the amount of matter falling off the hairs into solution.