[wilimitis]

Yeah I think my point flew over your head, which is fine.

And you're incorrect - you cannot "empirically prove creativity". As a professional artist I don't think you quite understand that the type of creativity we are interested in is not just "permutation", there is clearly a human component.

I'm trying to show you that you are falling into the reverse of the AI effect by assuming that permutation is creativity.

[GaggiX]

>you're incorrect - you cannot "empirically prove creativity"

Do humans even have creativity at this point or do you require a formal proof even for that? Ahah

>As a professional artist

Now I understand where the friction against accepting that even machines show signs of creativity comes from, I imagine you're an illustrator, so the feeling of becoming obsolete is the bias against machines.

[satvikpendem]

It doesn't seem like you can even define creativity in the first place for any of us to even attempt to answer your supposed point that flew over everyone's heads.

[wilimitis]

I have defined it in your other comment, relax dude. No need to jump threads because you're emotional.