[stanfordkid]

Agreed, The "data" being used to generate real human music is the human condition ... so anything trained on a featurized low dimensional representation of that will ultimately be derivative.

Image and sound are ultimately related to feeling ... and it is those feelings that give us humanity -- not the ability to think and manipulate symbols (though that was not apparent to me until this current AI revolution)

[ctoth]

So it sounds like the old goalpost problem of AI. Once you realize an AI can do something then this something is no longer what it means to be human?

[stanfordkid]

I think we will soon find that what really makes us "human" is the shared chemo-biological composition of our selves with the rest of the ecosystem and evolutionary hierarchy.

When you cuddle a puppy you can actually smell the infant hormones on them... why... because we share evolutionary biology. How do you teach a computer to do that?

You can think of the body as "data" and the brain as nothing more than a database that let's you query it. AI might give a better database... but until it gets the same chemo-informatic data... well good luck.

[visarga]

Good point about the necessity of embodiment. I would go one step further and consider the environment, which is the source of evolution and knowledge, a simple environment like Atari games can't even begin to compare with the human society and world we experience. What makes us human has a lot to do with the dynamics of interacting with the other humans, an AI would need to be part of society to experience that.