In a message dated 4/4/09 6:01:00 PM, [email protected] writes:
> Separating things that are aesthetically pleasing from those that are > not, > only works for one or a group of same ones. So, i believe. > mando > You're right on target, Mando. > > On Apr 4, 2009, at 2:47 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/4/09 3:25:14 PM, [email protected] > > writes: > > > > > >> Here's a remarkable statement: > >> > >> "A laboratory robot called Adam has been hailed as the first machine > >> in history to have discovered new scientific knowledge independently > >> of its human creators." > >> > >> Story at: > >> > >> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f2b97d9a-1f96-11de-a7a5-00144feabdc0.html > >> > >> Imagine what this portends for such things as aesthetic judgment, > >> perceptions and taste. > >> > >> Not much, say I. Notice the piece was in the Financial Times, not > >> Nature or > > a > > philosophical journal. > > > > Consider: Computers have have generated prime numbers far bigger > > than any > > human ever did. Would we cry with shock and awe, "My God, the > > machine is > > DISCOVERING things a man never could. > > > > I's a sure thing the Robot in the FT story came up with lots of > > data that was > > already known -- and the Robot, because it had received incomplete > > input, > > would never "know" the difference. It just mechanically ground out > > mechanical > > implications. > > > > The nearest comparison is chess-playing computers. My chess-experts > > friends > > tell me they have damn near ruined the game. But the computer is > > programmed > > with a decision-procedure for "recognizing" when a game is over, > > won. I do not > > believe anyone will write a program that will distinguish future, > > unprecedented > > arrangements -- of words, paint, musical notes, dance moves -- > > into those > > that are aesthetically pleasing and those that aren't. That last > > phrase of > > mine > > may well draw a rapid orison of fire from listers -- which I think > > only > > supports my point. > > > > > > > > > > ************** > > Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a > > recession. > > (http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries? > > ncid=emlcntuscare00000003 > > ) > > > ************** Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a recession. (http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare00000003 )
