Theories on Artificial Expression (2013)

max.io

23 pointsbinarymax3 comments

Hi All. This is a repost as granted by the HN mods (thanks mods!). I wrote it in 2013, but thought it was appropriate given some of the comments in this post here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10993919

I think it's a nice article.

> While I have no formal proof, I postulate that the problem of Artificial Expression is NP-Complete (again, not possible to solve using existing techniques).

But this detracts from it, is it is not what NP-Complete means.

Also:

> Be aesthetically pleasing

> Be purely original

I think a good deal of human art does not fit these specifications.

First of all, thanks for reading! I'm glad you enjoyed it.

I agree this is not a definition of NP-Complete, but I was writing this with a less technical audience in mind and wrestled with the description.

>I think a good deal of human art does not fit these specifications.

Absolutely true! When I wrote the article I spent a good deal of time thinking on these cases, and while art definitely covers much more than this, it fits well as a good litmus test.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com