mrl24 raises the
question of whether robots can create art. Here are my thoughts on the matter.
If the principles of what we call artistic expression can be codified and expressed in machine-executable form, can machines product artworks that resemble those produced by humans?
I believe they can, see
this post for an example of an entryway into that domain.
When Corinna and I went to Basel for the visionary conference, we dropped in on the
Art Machines Machine Art exhibition at the Museum Tinguely. Amazing stuff, I'll post pictures soon. But it raised the question of the artist moving creative agency further and further away from the original human artist. It's an interesting question.
Whether we call it "art" or not is a cultural consideration, IMHO. But whether it's creative, emotive, a creation of a conscious being, that's the real question, isn't it?
So let's go a step further. Can the processes and mechanisms of thought, emotion, and consciousness be codified and expressed in machine-executable form? Again I say yes.
xtingu identifies the shortcoming of today's symphony conducting robot, which falls short of expressing emotion, creating art, because the robot only does as it's programmed and that programming is limited. It is not programmed to be creative. It has a minimal model of the world and no capability for emergent behavior.
But I believe tomorrow's robot will display such creative behaviors. It will embody a synthetic consciousness that appropriately models what is going on in our heads. It will run process similar to the sensing, integrative, generative, and emotional processes of own organic machines. That kind of robot will create new works -- and those works will eventually be recognized by a future culture as art.