Artist automata

Some time ago, we published a post in which we asked the question whether AI can generate art. Our conclusion was that, so far, AI is just a tool that may be used to create art. The essence of that art residing in the communication between the artist and the observer, the creator and the consumer. In that sense AI plays the role of a studio apprentice in the old school.

The question we want to explore now is when we would consider an automata to be an artist. What are the criteria that make the product of that automata actually art? When would we consider that we are in front of an automatic artist?

We would be happy to say that the work is a piece of art if:

• it is unprompted

• the work is original either in the form of the content

• it is intentional, it aims to produce certain emotional change in the consumer, observer, spectator.

• it aims to communicate a particular view of the world which is unique to the creator or

• it aims to inform us about its own particular way of being in the world, its feelings, sensations, feers, desires. Anything that depicts its individuality

These conditions do not aim to be exhaustive of necessary. Other sets may also work.

If this happens, however, we will probably consider the automata to be also fully conscious.

How far are we from this point? Is this possible at all? What do you think?

Fly with us to Tantú to find out the answer.