[tkgally]

For an essay that hinges on the notion that “art requires making choices,” I wish the author had chosen to delve a bit more into the question of what choosing is. Do humans really make choices? If so, how free are those choices? Is there something about human choice that will never be convincingly imitated by computer? If so, what is it, and how do you know it cannot be imitated?

[dragonwriter]

> For an essay that hinges on the notion that “art requires making choices,” I wish the author had chosen to delve a bit more into the question of what choosing is.

For an essay that hinges on the notion that "art requires making choices", and attempt to apply this to AI image generation, and even specifically tries to draw a contrast between that and photography, I wish the author demonstrated even a superficial knowledge of what choices go into AI art and how it compares with photography, much less delving into the kind of deep philosophical examination of the underlying premise that you propose. But it looks like exploring the subject beyond the shallowest text-box-only UIs presented by a few big firms is too much to ask before the author does exactly what he says was naively done early on about photography.

[doph]

Exactly my thoughts. I think people who make arguments like Chiang's are unwilling to examine our own decision making process, and in particular are unwilling to entertain the idea that it is as mechanistic as an artificial neutral network.

[bookofjoe]

>Are You Living In A Computer Simulation?' (2001)

https://simulation-argument.com/simulation.pdf