Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Such a definition of creativity can make you feel good, but it's of little practical use. Say you're shown a newly invented piece of tech, but not told who or what invented it - you're saying there's no way to decide if it's truly innovative (as innovation is applied creativity).


Of course it was innovative as the person behind the creation had to innovate to make it, as I understand the position.


I think the argument is: you don't know if the tech was made by a person -- it might have been made by an AI. Do you wait to learn if a person was involved before declaring it innovative (or creative)?


But the original argument was that it could only have been made by a human, either the human who made it themselves or the human who prompted the AI.


It makes me feel good, indeed. I like to have an opinion on things. In this case "is ChatGPT creative?".

> you're saying there's no way to decide if it's truly innovative (as innovation is applied creativity).

I am not saying such thing.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: