Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Luka โ†’{protocell:labs}โ† ๐ŸŽฉ pfp
Luka โ†’{protocell:labs}โ† ๐ŸŽฉ
@luka
โ€œAlgorithmic art is created by an autonomous system executing an algorithm, where the artist carefully designs the boundaries of its computational space and optionally defines the influence of randomness.โ€
3 replies
0 recast
15 reactions

frederative ๐ŸŽฉ๐ŸŽญ pfp
frederative ๐ŸŽฉ๐ŸŽญ
@frederative
There are academic papers that explicitly define the term, however there are so many different people interested that there are multiple papers that say similar things with slightly different terms. Thing is once you add in an extra mechanic the root term loses meaning...if it were rules-based instead of algorithmic then the original term doesn't apply (which could be good or bad I suppose). I do like your definition though!
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions

Luka โ†’{protocell:labs}โ† ๐ŸŽฉ pfp
Luka โ†’{protocell:labs}โ† ๐ŸŽฉ
@luka
I once did a reference search among architecture related papers and found that there was no consensus on the term "generative" in that field. It was by far the most ambiguous term of the few I examined (parametric, algorithmic, computational...) This was even before the term GenAI became established!
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

frederative ๐ŸŽฉ๐ŸŽญ pfp
frederative ๐ŸŽฉ๐ŸŽญ
@frederative
Yea it's crazy, in my irl job (CS faculty) I've never come across such an ambiguous field ๐Ÿ˜‚
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Luka โ†’{protocell:labs}โ† ๐ŸŽฉ pfp
Luka โ†’{protocell:labs}โ† ๐ŸŽฉ
@luka
It is exactly as you said, people redefining the term over and over, with no consensus. And this is just within one field. We might never pinpoint it ๐Ÿ˜†
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction