(no subject)

[realexplodingcat]

What gift has the internet brought me today?

http://eigenradio.media.mit.edu/

Sounds rather like you're sitting in space, maybe far out there on Pluto, and trying to make sense of all the radio frequency noise blasting off the planet Earth. I'll let the site explain itself. What a wacky and fascinating idea.

Comments

[alierakieron.livejournal.com]

Dude. That is wild and wacky.

More cowbell

[terrapingardens.livejournal.com]

As I told the missus when I sent her the link, it needs more bass... and more cowbell, of course.

[daq42.livejournal.com]

Damn. There are some awsome things tripping through that stream. You can hear all sorts of great sycopation on a lot of the drums. It takes a few minutes for it to get going. My only issue is that it's not really structured. Too much of it is defined by arbitrary and random samplings. It has removed the "creative" from the creation.

But I will use it to capture some wacked muffled samples....

[explodingcat.livejournal.com]

Yeah, computers have a hard time being "creative." However, that may depend upon your definition of what it means to be creative. The human mind, as another kind of complex machine, could be said to work within a set of rules (music theory for example) to produce something that others find aesthetically pleasing because of humanity's shared participation in this set of rules, this structure, as the context in which creations are created. If that mumbo jumbo makes any sense...

And this computer is playing by its own set of rules regarding what kind of structure and choices are pleasing to it. Its music theory believes that sounds that are statistically more different in a moment of time are more pleasing to its ear than other sounds. It makes a qualitative choice regarding which sounds to use (in our view it's quantitative, but the computer doesn't know any difference...so quantity = quality in its limited perception).

The computer's idea of structure is surely different than our own. It doesn't compose with a beginning, middle, end in mind...but why do we do that? I've always been fascinated by musical and narrative structures and why they have evolved to their current state. I believe it has something to do with the organism (humans) that create that causes specific kinds of structure. Perhaps something to do with natural biological rhythms. Consequently, if the computer could be considered its own creative entity, as a different type of creature, it will likely have a different sense of appropriate creative structure for its art.

So, in short, I think it depends upon your frame of reference, regarding whether you believe the computer is being creative or not.

Holy shit. I didn't intend to write that much. Oh well...I hope my academic ramblings weren't too boring. And, in the end, yeah...it's a computer doing it's job. Not truly creative in the usual human sense.

[98.livejournal.com]

I am reminded of "IRTNOG".

[explodingcat.livejournal.com]

What is that?

[98.livejournal.com]

Title of a short story. People were getting too busy to keep up with reading all that was being published, even using the various digests. So digests-of-digests followed and so on to the logical(?) extreme conclusion. Each day the government would use arcane formulae to distill the day's printed output into a six letter word and distribute that to the public. Read just one word and feel informed. The first such day's word was "IRTNOG".

[explodingcat.livejournal.com]

Interesting idea. Who wrote it?

Shame we don't have that problem. Faced with too much reading, most people these days just give up reading altogether.

[98.livejournal.com]

Not certain who wrote it but I want to say Thurber. I think I will. Thurber! Thurber! Thurber!

oh yeah? i think it was....

[krasota.livejournal.com]

Bradbury! Bradbury! Bradbury!

[jmkelly.livejournal.com]

I think with maybe a lot more bass it would be good enough party music. There's often a beat. Often several.

John Cage would have loved this.

[explodingcat.livejournal.com]

It certainly has potential.

I ought to expose myself to more John Cage music. I only ever hear variations on his "4:33" during the rare quiet moments in my day.