Well, yes, I’m not actually going to take you very seriously at all. <<8-))>>> However I will try to articulate an answer to your question . . . How can I take you seriously? I didn’t read the word ‘autonomous’ in the posting, or the word ‘write’. I did see the word compose. ;) Not being a computer scientist, but being a composer, I have been using [analog] computers for 45 years to invent / create / compose [sic], sounds. [Sorry about not using the word 'music’.] My understanding of algorithmic composition is the model: noise > filter > output The interesting part of this model is the ‘filter’ — or more practically, filters. The noise source generates a [quasi]random sequence of numbers [voltages / energy levels]. The filters select / shape the acceptability of a number to fit some kind of information mask. The information mask in the analog synthesis domain is loosely called a ‘patch’, or in the hybrid / digital worlds, an algorithm. I have done this in various ways for decades. The purpose? For me, to come to a better understanding of how my mind works. In my life, I view understanding of how the brain receives chaotic information and filters it into ‘meaningful’ form to be quite valuable. In one sense, it is a kind of ‘education’. And I’m a big fan of education. Education is like lighting a match in a dark cave. There are those who simply ‘want the experience’, and they can ask Siri the question. And Siri will give them the answer. Or perhaps an answer. Or perhaps not. My generalized teaching method — the match again, is to start with an idea, build models of how the idea could be understood — called analysis, derive possible ‘rules’ from / for the analysis, and to find out if the model [analysis] and rules are accurate and [adequately] complete. These rules are used to synthesize a response. This could be a class of five year olds learning how to improvise on Orff instruments, or it could be music of the new complexity. The fundamentals, for me, remain the same. For me, that is the purpose. <<8-()>> And also to fill up the time between my first and last breath. Kevin and . . . Dear Kent What can I say, after you’ve said all of that? For me you certainly express an ‘interesting’ view of the world, one I have heard, and lived through for five decades. I accept what you say as having validity within the model of reality you propose; one in which there is “a” truth, in which things not agreed with are ‘heretical’ [aka pseudo-religious beliefs]; an accusation that an idea [that you appear not to approve of] is religious propaganda. Where is the [no one expects a] Spanish Inquisition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spanish_Inquisition_(Monty_Python) when we really need to sort the wheat from the chaff? To quote Tom Stoppard from Travesties, “Bloody nerve!" Kevin
|