[thih9]

> This is probably the first time in history that a graphic artist has painted a functionally workable computer program by accident

While impressive organically, it sounds easy when targeted; we could design a programming language where an image of Mona Lisa prints "hello world" - and claim a similar feat.

Perhaps the reverse is more interesting - programmers accidentally wrote a language that could treat real world abstract art as valid input.

[cinntaile]

> Perhaps the reverse is more interesting - programmers accidentally wrote a language that could treat real world abstract art as valid input.

Isn't that what happened here?

[thih9]

That’s what I’m saying.

I.e. that “programmers accidentally wrote a language that could treat real world abstract art as valid input” - and to me it’s more interesting than what grand-grandparent is describing.

[drdeca]

Not just valid, but does a not-nonsense task.

I think in this case, there is a coincidence on both sides? Like, the language or the painting could have been different such that the painting would run, but what it would do wouldn't be a recognizable task.

[satvikpendem]

Was it an accident though? Seems like they were targeting the same style of art so of course some would become valid input

[thih9]

update: actually we have perl, https://www.mcmillen.dev/sigbovik/