On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Mike Tintner <[email protected]>wrote:
> Logan: > Look at these beautiful renditions > tree with clouds plants and pond > ..All computer generated, and made with math > > This is the umpteenth time this point has been made – and it’s wrong – > and provides yet more evidence of why many AGI-ers are so confused about > the powers of maths ( Another classic misconception is that drawing > programs (which are maths based) can draw!). > > These drawings are made by a human mind applying and arranging the > maths/fractals. But maths/fractals do NOT generate visuals of realistic > trees/clouds/plants by themselves. > Er yes they do.. did you even look at the images? they are quite realistic. And DNA creates the body out of fractals. > Fractals can only, at best,generate v. stylised versions by themselves. > And they certainly do not generate a vast and endless range of individual, > and different trees/clouds/plants/landscapes etc as the human artist and > nature can. . > Humans are far inferior to computer generators, that's why realism fell by the wayside, nowadays art is all "modern" splotches and splatters and oversimplifications,. > > Similarly standard chords by themselves > do not generate a musical improvisation, even if they are contained > therein. Human musicians apply and arrange those chords > > Maths can help with PARTS of the creative product, but it does not > produce the creative WHOLE.. > > > All you’re doing is *avoiding* the real problem – which is how does a > human AGI mind APPLY maths and any other parts to produce those creative > wholes? > Well clearly you don't know, cause you've possibly never applied math in your life. I'm surprised you're literate. > How does it apply standard chords to improvise? > just stick in a random number generator and viola! improvisation. easy peasy, refine to any level. Chuck programming language for generating music. > How does it produce an endless range of visuals of ever new natural > objects? > Fractals duh, it's how nature does it. Besides it's not "ever new" computers can create way more novel things than found in nature. As nature is limited by evolving whats available. > – when maths and every program can only produce an extremely limited range > of objects – can only be the equivalent of a “Lego builder” as distinct > from an “all materials” builder like the human mind?. > there are only a hundred or so materials, and most humans aren't even aware of what they are all called. a computer can much more easily remember all of them, their properties and how best to apply them to a particular situation. > How can a mathematician for that matter generate many new formulae and not > just one? > that's like asking. how can a programmer write more than one line of code? Or how can a person write more than one sentence? > This is the unsolved problem of AGI – and pointing to the same old maths > and the same old programs (like many before you) is not the solution.. > > Nope. AGI isn't a problem, it's a solution. you're not offering any solutions, that's why you're not actually contributing. Learn to program man, like seriously. . > > > > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/5037279-a88c7a6d> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
