[continued from previous message]   
      
   >> This is another example of the block universe theory that all time   
   >> happens simultaneously.  In this sense the number of poems is finite, in   
   >> that they only come into existence *as* they are written down.  This   
   >> finite number would therefore be determined by the number of poems that   
   >> humankind has been/will be able to write down during the course of their   
   >> existence.  When AI achieves the ability to compose poetry equivalent   
   >> to, or even superior to, that of humans, the finite number of   
   >> pre-existent poems is multiplied by a near-infinite amount.   
   >>   
   >> And, IMHO, the more great poetry that has been rescued from the Platonic   
   >> plane of Ideality, and brought into human (or human and AI) culture, the   
   >> better.   
   >>   
   >> Infinite in that a computer (multiplied by billions of computers) can   
   >> theoretically compose a near-infinite number of poems in a fraction of a   
   >> second.    Moreover, since cyberspace has no physical existence, it is   
   >> not inconceivable to surmise that at some point in the future it may   
   >> reach a state wherein it can exist *outside of* the confines of   
   >> Space-Time as *sentient energy.*  For the present, it is dependent upon   
   >> computers to keep it running -- but that is because it was created by   
   >> humans.  AI is already designing its own programs, and its limitless   
   >> potential exceeds the capabilities of human thought.   
   >>   
   >> Of course, an infinite number of poems would be too much for any human   
   >> being to be capable of learning (even with a computer chip implant, our   
   >> physical brain would be unable to process that much information over the   
   >> course of a lifetime).  But AI would, again, theoretically, be able to   
   >> not only "know" all of these poems, but to examine, critique, compare,   
   >> and rank them against one another.  Can you imagine the *quality* of the   
   >> 100 greatest poems as ranked by computers that have knowledge of an   
   >> infinite (or near-infinite) number of great poems?   
   >>   
   >> And, ultimately, it is the poem that matters -- not the poet.  And   
   >> certainly not whether the poet was a human (who, as Emerson notes, is   
   >> prone to "miswrite" the poem) or AI (which, theoretically, should be   
   >> able to capture it in its truest, Ideal form).   
   >>   
   >> --   
      
   --   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)