www.fastcompany.com: The European Patent Office recently turned down an application for a patent that described a food container. This was not because the invention was not novel or useful, but because it was created by artificial intelligence. By law, inventors need to be actual people. This isn’t the first invention by AI–machines have produced innovations ranging from scientific papers and books to new materials and music.
7 comments:
The concept of AI being creative is actually really interesting, because for one, it makes us analyze what we actually define as creativity, and then once defined, it dives into the ways that creativity that is produced by artificial intelligence is rooted in the creativity of coding and scientific creation that a human brain developed. When reading about the process that a machine uses to come up with generative methods of innovation, on the surface level I read about an analytical way of thinking about creativity. When I think about it a layer deeper, I think of the creativity behind creating a machine that is able to generate and discriminate and process information in this capacity. I don’t know if I think there will ever be a true time that artificial intelligence will be able to capture the beauty of raw creativity by someone, but there is a beauty behind this analytical data process that is able to create something to this scale.
Artificial Intelligence is actually closer to being able to produce creative innovations than I thought it did. I always thought that AIs could never play a significant role in the arts as designers and makers because of its limited capacity with informational boundaries. But this article opened eyes to how AIs can actually bypass these boundaries now, that they can process any information fed with them and generate new solutions to the problem evident in the data. I found it very interesting that the article brought up the only hole that AIs wouldn’t understand from data is that creative innovations often don’t solve a necessary problem in human life. Many of them are solutions to our wants rather than our needs. I did occur to me though, the existence of AIs is an excellent example of human creativity, using coding and science to make something that could create for us and with us.
This is a really interesting concept, but I will admit that the idea of a computer with artificial intelligence being creative is kind of scary to me. I don’t think that Artificial intelligence is capable of creating art that is comparable to human art. I know that humans in general are skeptical of artificial intelligence and are scared of it so I don’t think this is something that will be acceptable anytime soon, but it is interesting. I would be curious to see something that an Artificial intelligence computer designed. It is interesting that the patent people won’t accept patents from Artificial Intelligence because it is not a human being. I didn’t know that there was a law that patents could not be given to someone who is not human. I am curious to see what will happen next with this issue. I wonder if the makers of the AI will try to fight the patent law or not. I don’t really understand why you would want to create an AI that is creative when there’s plenty of human beings that are incredibly talented but I guess they just want to see what will happen.
Artificial Intelligence, or perhaps more accurately for now, machine learning, is already having a profound impact on our lives. From targeted ad tracking to fabricated video to more advanced manufacturing robots to self driving cars, the world is changing as learning algorithms become more pervasive. It seems only a matter of time before computers can perform other more creative tasks better than we can, especially with predictions that general artificial intelligence might arise within the century. Sure, we certainly have the edge for now, and we tend to prefer human work even when machine work is just as good (or better), but it does seem somewhat inevitable that nearly any task will be possible to automate in the relatively near future. I think the question then is (assuming we don’t accidentally build Skynet, or run into some other unrelated catastrophe, how will we work in an age when we don’t have to?
Artificial Intelligence, or perhaps more accurately for now, machine learning, is already having a profound impact on our lives. From targeted ad tracking to fabricated video to more advanced manufacturing robots to self driving cars, the world is changing as learning algorithms become more pervasive. It seems only a matter of time before computers can perform other more creative tasks better than we can, especially with predictions that general artificial intelligence might arise within the century. Sure, we certainly have the edge for now, and we tend to prefer human work even when machine work is just as good (or better), but it does seem somewhat inevitable that nearly any task will be possible to automate in the relatively near future. I think the question then is (assuming we don’t accidentally build Skynet, or run into some other unrelated catastrophe, how will we work in an age when we don’t have to?
My first thought when reading this headline was ‘yes, but only in some ways’’. It made me think of a few things I’ve seen online that are the products of neural networks; one was a collection of photos linked to an online tool where a neural network analyzes the art style of one photo and recreates a second image in the first style (https://tinyurl.com/vgg6ke7) and the other was a series of posts in which a neural network was ‘fed’ thousands of some kind of data, such as paint colors, and then told to create its own. Some of them were realistic, while others were crazy and clearly would not be usable. But the list was created for the purposes of entertainment, not for the purposes of actually naming paint colors, and the ‘bad’ names were arguably more entertaining than the good ones, and while not beyond the realm of what a human could come up with, were startling in their randomness. I think the article makes a good point - that AI is better at quantity and randomness than human creativity, but with less purpose.
It’s a pretty weird thought to imagine that computers / artificial intelligence could hold a candle to human creativity. I think we tend to think of creativity as thinking out of the box and thing that are out of the ordinary; so AI, which is a programmed thing, being able to reach beyond its coding by itself seems crazy. There are definitely artificially generated artworks and music, which could perhaps count as some sort of creativity. But creativity isn’t just arts, it is also being able to come up with solutions or ideas that no one’s ever thought of before, and things like that which are AI generated tend to seem more like random nonsense rather than useful ideas. But with how fast technology is developing and the kinds of breakthroughs we’ve been able to make, I wouldn’t be surprised if some point later on in the future AI really could be at the level of human creativity.
Post a Comment