NihilCredo comments on Rationality Quotes: July 2010 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: komponisto 01 July 2010 09:24PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (216)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: NihilCredo 02 July 2010 02:05:24PM 2 points [-]

I can't find the quote's context either, but consider this - why would someone ask Picasso about computers?

If the quote is correct, I wouldn't be surprised if it was in response to something like "Do you believe that computers can [be made to] create art [on their own]?". In which case the quote becomes much less categoric.

Comment author: SilasBarta 02 July 2010 02:56:03PM *  1 point [-]

Well, in that case, it still sounds to me like View 2: "Only humans will be able discriminate against art upon learning a computer / monkey / child / prankster made it, pendejo!"

Comment author: NihilCredo 02 July 2010 05:43:36PM 1 point [-]

But that discussion was about science. Nonhuman science is the same thing as human science, so discriminating is irrational. Nonhuman art is (will) not be (necessarily) the same as human art, and it is quite possible that it will not be at all enjoyable by humans.

Comment author: SilasBarta 02 July 2010 05:46:27PM *  2 points [-]

But it will (likely) be the case that people's opinions about particular artwork will dive sharply downward upon learning it was mostly the work of a computer, even as the pre-revelation opinion is higher than average.

Comment author: soreff 05 July 2010 03:00:44AM 1 point [-]

Nonhuman science is the same thing as human science

And the experimental evidence for this is what?

More substantially - it is perfectly possible to have a great deal of difference in the emphasis placed on various subfields in the sciences. If we'd gone directly from vacuum tubes to Drexler/Merkle nanotechnology, do you think semiconductor device physics would have been studied as deeply as it has been?

Comment author: fortyeridania 24 December 2010 03:35:03PM 0 points [-]

He was no computer scientist, but he presumably knew a lot about specific non-computer things. The more important those things are, the less important computers are likely to be (relative to computers, that is). So I don't think Picasso had to have known much about computers to denigrate them rationally.

But I am assuming that Picasso knew some pretty important non-computer things. And it does help to remember when he stopped being able to learn more about computers.