Skip to main content
  • 487 Accesses

Abstract

A hundred — or a thousand — years from now, future historians might mark the day of January 25, 2005, as a watershed moment in Earth’s history. That’s the day machines crossed the Rubicon and became creative agents in their own right. Huh? Machines are creative? Well, consider the criterion. On that day in early 2005, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) awarded the first ever patent to a non-human designer — a software program, to be more precise. Recall that the USPTO defines an innovation as something that is a novel, useful, and non-obvious extension of an existing idea. The non-obvious part of the definition means that the machine didn’t just solve a logical problem by making a forced move. It was, by established convention, demonstrably creative. Clerks at the USPTO didn’t know that they were looking at the invention of a thing by a thing so you could say that artificial intelligence passed a sly version of a Turing test — a game computer scientists play to see if a computer can hold up one end of a conversation with a human without being spotted as a machine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Recommended readings

  • Brooks, R. A. (2002). Flesh and machines. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • David Cope: Samples of Emmy: http://artsites.ucsc.edu/faculty/cope/mp3page.htm.

  • Dennett, D. C. (1995). Darwin’s’ dangerous idea. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crush, R., & Churchland, P. S. (1995). Gaps in Penrose’s toilings. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2, 10–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, D. R. (1979). Godei, Escher, Bach. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, R. (1989). The emperor’s new mind. London: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, R., & Gemeinboeck, P. (2013). Creative machine performance: Computational creativity and robotic art. In M. L. Maher, T. Veale, R. Saunders, & O. Bown (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Computational Creativity (pp. 205–209).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 2015 Arne Dietrich

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dietrich, A. (2015). In Search of the Artificer. In: How Creativity Happens in the Brain. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137501806_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics