Sound Research WIKINDX

Interestingly, the sensory versus communicative-level judgement processes were further distinguished by different interaction processes: the former were moderated by rates of story-telling and perceived effort (though in opposite directions), while the latter were moderated by personal positive attitudes toward AI. These interactions shed light on when and why individuals may appreciate art made by different creators, as posed in our initial research question, and also reflect how different stages of multi-processing models of aesthetics may interact with one another.

In conclusion, people tend to perceive art as reflecting a human-specific experience, though creator labels seem to mediate the ability to derive deeper evaluations from art. Thus, creative products like art may be achieved — according to human raters—by non-human AI models, but only to a limited extent that still protects a valued anthropocentrism." 

"When we perform risk/benefit analyses of language technology, we must keep in mind how the risks and benefits are distributed, because they do not accrue to the same people. On the one hand, it is well documented in the literature on environmental racism that the negative effects of climate change are reaching and impacting the world’s most marginalized communities first. Is it fair or just to ask, for example, that the residents of the Maldives (likely to be underwater by 2100) or the 800,000 people in Sudan affected by drastic floods pay the environmental price of training and deploying ever larger English LMs, when similar large-scale models aren’t being produced for Dhivehi or Sudanese Arabic? And, while some language technology is genuinely designed to benefit marginalized communities, most language technology is built to serve the needs of those who already have the most privilege in society. Consider, for example, who is likely to both have the financial resources to purchase a Google Home, Amazon Alexa or an Apple device with Siri installed and comfortably speak a variety of a language which they are prepared to handle. Furthermore, when large LMs encode and reinforce hegemonic biases, the harms that follow are most likely to fall on marginalized populations who, even in rich nations, are most likely to experience environmental racism."

"We say seemingly coherent because coherence is in fact in the eye of the beholder. Our human understanding of coherence derives from our ability to recognize interlocutors’ beliefs [30, 31] and intentions [23, 33] within context [32]. That is, human language use takes place between individuals who share common ground and are mutually aware of that sharing (and its extent), who have communicative intents which they use language to convey, and who model each others’ mental states as they communicate. As such, human communication relies on the interpretation of implicit meaning conveyed between individuals. The fact that human-human communication is a jointly constructed activity [29, 128] is most clearly true in co-situated spoken or signed communication, but we use the same facilities for producing language that is intended for audiences not co-present with us (readers, listeners, watchers at a distance in time or space) and in interpreting such language when we encounter it. It must follow that even when we don’t know the person who generated the language we are interpreting, we build a partial model of who they are and what common ground we think they share with us, and use this in interpreting their words."

"Birhane and Prabhu note, echoing Ruha Benjamin [15], “Feeding AI systems on the world’s beauty, ugliness, and cruelty, but expecting it to reflect only the beauty is a fantasy.” [p.1541]"

"Developing and shifting frames stand to be learned in incomplete ways or lost in the big-ness of data used to train large LMs — particularly if the training data isn’t continually updated. Given the compute costs alone of training large LMs, it likely isn’t feasible for even large corporations to fully retrain them frequently enough to keep up with the kind of language change discussed here. Perhaps fine-tuning approaches could be used to retrain LMs, but here again, what would be required is thoughtful curation practices to find appropriate data to capture reframings and techniques for evaluating whether such fine-tuning appropriately captures the ways in which new framings contest hegemonic representations."

"Thus at each step, from initial participation in Internet fora, to continued presence there, to the collection and finally the filtering of training data, current practice privileges the hegemonic viewpoint. In accepting large amounts of web text as ‘representative’ of ‘all’ of humanity we risk perpetuating dominant viewpoints, increasing power imbalances, and further reifying inequality."

"The Internet is a large and diverse virtual space, and accordingly, it is easy to imagine that very large datasets, such as Common Crawl (“petabytes of data collected over 8 years of web crawling”,a filtered version of which is included in the GPT-3 training data) must therefore be broadly representative of the ways in which different people view the world. However, on closer examination, we find that there are several factors which narrow Internet participation, the discussions which will be included via the crawling methodology, and finally the texts likely to be contained after the crawled data are filtered. In all cases, the voices of people most likely to hew to a hegemonic viewpoint are also more likely to be retained. In the case of US and UK English, this means that white supremacist and misogynistic, ageist, etc. views are overrepresented in the training data, not only exceeding their prevalence in the general population but also setting up models trained on these datasets to further amplify biases and harms. Starting with who is contributing to these Internet text collections, we see that Internet access itself is not evenly distributed, resulting in Internet data overrepresenting younger users and those from developed countries. However, it’s not just the Internet as a whole that is in question, but rather specific subsamples of it. For instance, GPT-2’s training data is sourced by scraping outbound links from Reddit, and Pew Internet Research’s 2016 survey reveals 67% of Reddit users in the United States are men, and 64% between ages 18 and 29. Similarly, recent surveys of Wikipedians find that only 8.8–15% are women or girls"

"I said earlier that ‘new’ has two meanings, and that ‘surprising’ has three. I didn’t say how many meanings ‘valuable’ has – and nobody could. Our aesthetic values are difficult to recognize, more difficult to put into words, and even more difficult to state really clearly. (For a computer model, of course, they have to be stated really, really clearly.)

Moreover, they change: who will proudly admit, today, to having worn a beehive hairdo or flared trousers in the 1960s? They vary across cultures. And even within a given ‘culture’, they are often disputed: different subcultures or peer groups value different types of dress, jewellery or music. And where transformational creativity is concerned, the shock of the new may be so great that even fellow artists find it difficult to see value in the novel idea.

Even in science, values are often elusive and sometimes changeable. Just what ‘simplicity’ or ‘elegance’ means, as applied to scientific theories, is something that philosophers of science have long tried – and failed – to pin down precisely. And whether a scientific finding or hypothesis is ‘interesting’ depends on the other theories current at the time, and on social questions too (might it have some medical value, for instance?).

Because creativity by definition involves not only novelty but value, and because values are highly variable, it follows that many arguments about creativity are rooted in disagreements about value. This applies to human activities no less than to computer performance. So even if we could identify and program our aesthetic values so as to enable the computer to inform and monitor its own activities accordingly there would still be disagreement about whether the computer even appeared to be creative."

Parallel to intelligece. Intelligence is also tied to several value parameters, and as Boden argues, creativity is one of them. Those who accumulate great wealth and thereby power are often viewed as intelligent, but the two need not have any correlation, for example. What constitutes value is often what is viewed as succesful, but surely that is a reduction of such a rich concept.

(p.3)

Reading and Writing Ability (RW): Captures all of the declarative knowledge and procedural skills a person uses to consume and produce written language.
• Letter-Word Ability: The ability to recognize letters and decode words.
• Reading Comprehension: The ability to understand connected discourse during reading.
• Writing Ability: The ability to write with clarity of thought, organization, and good sentence structure.
• English Usage Knowledge: Knowledge of writing in the English language with respect to capitalization, punctuation, usage, and spelling. (p.4)

"in the absence of all necessity for the intervention of human intelligence during the performance of its calculations. Its nature is, however, limited to the strictly arithmetical, and it is far from being the first or only scheme for constructing arithmetical calculating machines with more or less of success."

In this instance I would argue that the human can never not be present, because arithmetic is an entirely anthropocentric concept and includes biases of its own. 

"Those who view mathematical science, not merely as a vast body of abstract and immutable truths, whose intrinsic beauty, symmetry and logical completeness, when regarded in their connexion together as a whole, entitle them to a prominent place in the interest of all profound and logical minds, but as possessing a yet deeper interest for the human race, when it is remembered that this science constitutes the language through which alone we can adequately express the great facts of the natural world, and those unceasing changes of mutual relationship which, visibly or invisibly, consciously or unconsciously to our immediate physical perceptions, are interminably going on in the agencies of the creation we live amidst [...]"

"Supposing, for instance, that the fundamental relations of pitched sounds in the science of harmony and of musical composition were susceptible of such expression and adaptations, the engine might compose elaborate and scientific pieces of music of any degree of complexity or extent."

Stein (1953) is also quoted in detail because he offered several other ideas that are still in use and were well ahead of their time. These include his ideas that (a) creative work tends to be useful for some group, and thus that social judgment is involved; (b) a creative insight ‘‘arises from a reintegration of already existing materials or knowledge, but when it is completed it contains elements that are new’’ (p. 311); and (c) it is important to separate personal from historical creativity (cf. Boden, 1994; Runco, 1996).