michael_nielsen

Models/architectures are equally important as the dataset used for training. Many of the most innovative works in the AIArt field are based on architectures and data built by artists/scientists.

Creativity in ai-art is also about imagining and building a new collection of examples for training the AI model.

Not sure if this has already been done but it might be interesting to recursively train the AI with AI art. Would you end up with something truly original, or just stuff no one would consider art?

There is nothing truly original. Whether you pipe information through a human brain or a neural network, the output is always a transformation of the input based on what the model has learned. An yes, some of us are recursively training models on the output of other models.

To think is to put together random bits of private experience in an orderly fashion. We can learn to do it better.

There is one thing of which I'm certain: the expression "nothing is original", i find really tired and unoriginal (and uninspiring!)

The secret is that if you repeat the mantra "nothing is original" often enough the self-reinforcing nature of this expression will open up a gateway to #Hyperoriginality

I think of the "nothing is original" phrase as similar to the P vs NP problem: after the fact, it's often easy to see why an idea worked. But before the fact it's not. People who don't create regularly have little experience with this, & confuse it with lack of originality.