[dorgo]

>After you make a neural network the first thing that occurs to you is that it’s useless without tons of data.

What about self-learning chess engines? All they take as input are the rules of chess. And the output (the games they play) can sometimes be described as peaces of art. My point is that it should be possible for AI to create art without tons of (input) data. Even if it is not what we experience at the moment.

[slowhadoken]

Chess is a very large but finite system. It's also a game largely based on memorization. Both things are handled extremely by computers. I consider terms like "self-learning" to be disingenuous or at best an exaggeration. At the moment it is not possible for a machine to make art because it has no consciousness. By definition art can only be made by a human mostly because we have agency.