Re: Real Conlangs Here, Made-to-Order!

>>Apparently only because we don't know how to tell a computer how to be
>>creative and don't have the power to let it be creative.
>
>Because we don't understand ourselves how creativity works. But whatever
>the reason, my argument still holds.
I'll not repeat what Christophe has said, but as a programmer/analyst for
20+ years, I can attest that he is indeed quite accurate with regards to
what we can and cannot program computers to do so far.

Might we do so in the future? Who knows, but I doubt we will until we fully
understand the nature of man's consciousness, inspiration and reativity.

Might this appear spontaneously in machines? No.

>>But the human input is necessary for a human to create something, too.
>
>Not always. We can discover how to create by ourselves, without human
>input.
Indeed.

With reagrds to conlangs, I have been amazed over the years, whenever I
believe I'm come up with a unique way to express something, How often I
eventually find it a natlang (thought sometimes small and obscure in some
isloated coirner of the world).

>>Just because we don't have
>>to be told absolutely everything because we come with a built-in
>>grounding doesn't mean that a computer is less capable.
>
>Yes, because a computer cannot come up with something it hasn't been told
>about.
This is true even of so-called learning programs and neural nets - they can
only "learn" and apply that learning in which they are programmed to do so.



_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Reply