Tl;dr: Using computers to produce creative artefacts is a form of computational creativity. Using creative techniques computationally is creative computing. Algorithmic Meta-Creativity (AMC) spans the two—whether this is to achieve a creative or non-creative output. Creativity in humans needs to be interpreted differently to machines. Humans and machines differ in many ways, we have different ‘brains/memory’, ‘thinking processes/software’ and ‘bodies/hardware’. Often creative output by machines is judged in human terms. Computers which are truly artificially intelligent might be capable of true artificial creativity. Until then, they are (philosophical) zombie robots: machines that behave like humans but aren’t conscious. The only alternative is to see any computer creativity as a direct or indirect expression of human creativity using digital means and evaluate it as such. AMC is neither machine creativity nor human creativity—it is both. By acknowledging the undeniable link between computer creativity and its human influence (the machine is just a tool for the human) we enter a new realm of thought. How is AMC defined and evaluated? This thesis addresses this issue. First AMC is embodied in an artefact (a pataphysical search tool: pata.physics.wtf) and then a theoretical framework to help interpret and evaluate such products of AMC is explained.
- PhD