[LAU] Google Magenta project's first composition

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Sun Jun 5 07:19:26 UTC 2016

On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 22:12:24 -0700, Erik Steffl wrote:
>great emotional impact on audience does not require great emotional 
>investment of performer/author.

To decide to make music, because you like this kind of art is emotional.
Why don't we play soccer, run amok, plant a tree at the time we decide
to make music? We decide to make music, experienced a sunset, by love,
by hate, because we are living. As Robin already pointed out, does a
computer enjoy listening to music? If not, why does it compose music?
Some humans make "music" just to make money and even those have an
impetus, a machine doesn't have. I even couldn't stand to read the
full original website of the Magenta project. Actually they don't know
what they are doing and they hope it will be a tool for artists. For
what purpose? They try to make a tool without a real concept and
hope somebody could find it useful. That's a damage. It even wouldn't be
a tool for "process music" assumed it automatically composes, while the
impetus was a composer turning on the machine. They try to find out
what the impetus of human artists is and to make it part of the
software, of what they guess AI is. Impetus isn't part of intelligence,
it's part of living beings independent of intelligence. I've got the
impression they are living in a madhouse and/or are 2 years old.

Joseph Weizenbaum (8 January 1923 – 5 March 2008) was and still is one
of my idols and one of the few with knowledge about AI, since he's one
of the fathers of AI and at the same time he was a critics, a sceptic
for good reasons.

While there is something we call AI, we are able to fake human
intelligence even without using AI at all. I'm an atheist, humans are
some kind of machine, too, but we are alive. To make art being alive
is a basic requirement.

On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 22:16:53 -0700, Erik Steffl wrote:
>On 06/04/2016 01:52 PM, Robin Gareus wrote:
>> Call me again once the google-cluster takes a break from indexing and
>> processing in order to attend a concert and listen to some music for
>> pure enjoyment.
>> Also only a matter of time?
>> Seen any long haired bit go byte-banging and bus-diving lately?! :)  
> matter of complexity. One can say matter of time as a shorthand for 
>"matter of complexity and complexity will increase with time".

Joy is a matter of simplicity, not complexity. Actually it would
require "artificial" live, not just a simulation of artificial live,
let alone a simulation of human intelligence, is in any way useful to
understand joy, impetus, emotions.

On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 01:33:43 -0400, jonetsu at teksavvy.com wrote:
>Even though humans are indeed machines in many aspects, as buttons can
>be pressed to make them react in certain ways, emotionally, there is
>still a chance that an emotional painting-by-numbers piece will not
>fare so good, once the initial impact has passed.
>As for the sunsets and such, there is more to the picture than meets
>the eye.

That's the problem with those Google folks. They believe in biased
philosophy, biased neuroscience and started to program. It's even not
a well-wrought experiment.

On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 01:40:12 -0400, jonetsu at teksavvy.com wrote:
>It will depend how much 'freedom' the machine has.  Yes, persons built
>it, but aren't those persons making their utmost effort to develop a
>machine that can come up with decisions taken on its own, independent
>from the creators ?  Isn't that the premise of artificial
>intelligence ?

There are different approaches for what AI is used for and what AI

>If not, we are also made, somehow.  Biological machines. But we think
>we are free.

Apart from what ever neuroscience claims, our free will at least is
limited by our abilities, e.g. the acoustic range, by our life
experience. However, we have individual meanings of life, at least an
attitude regarding a meaning of life. A computer has got no reason to
compose, the machine needs patterns, an acoustic range, a definition
of what music is, rules of existing music styles. The coders are
the composers, this is nothing new and has nothing to do with
intelligence at all. Another target is to give the computer life, make
it alive, give it the impetus for self-preservation etc.. This requires
a biological computer. Introducing new music styles, new "rules" and
even using existing ones for joy, by passion, requires to be alive.
Music is about life, it is about emotions, even if a composer has a
thought about not transporting emotions, this aspect still is part of a


More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list