Are you really trying to say that our standards for evidence are the same as they were then? Does the phrase "scientific method" mean something to you? Behavioural neuroscience and neuropsychiatry?

An open mind means you shift your currently-accepted viewpoint in accordance with newly-discovered evidence, not that you withhold judgement in the face of a body of evidence. Besides, do you even have criteria for judging when another entity has existential angst?

~J

I don't see how we can detract from the awesomeness of pumping so much electricity into a corpse that it breaks out into a 1950s style song and dance routine.

<Note: The following is merely an attempt, however poorly written, to clarify my pervious statement. It is not meant to be a personal attack in anyway. To wit: I got nothin' but luv 4 ya Kage!>

You know the scientific method came about during the Enlightenment right?

I'm not saying that I ignore the evidence. I'm not even saying that it isn’t possible. I'm also not saying that it isn't probable. What am I saying is that the past or even the present is not an absolute indicator for the future.

I don't think that history is this causal progression moving ever forward to some greater accomplishment and higher understanding. There may be little chains scattered about but they aren't all connected. Humanity can go backwards. <Note: Hell look at the G. W. Bush era in the US.>

I could go on and on citing historical examples of how reasonable people thought the future would be based on the evidence of their epoch and show you that they were all wrong. So you'll have to forgive me if I suspend judgment on the future until it actually gets here.

And yes I think being open-minded is a good thing; however I also think you need to be cautious and skeptical in making judgments especially if we're talking about absolutes and universals.

As far as having a criteria for judging angst well there are other philosophers who have better arguments then I do and I would just be deferring to them anyway. As far as what makes a human human... I'm still looking for that answer. If there is one. Hell maybe that's the answer right there! Nah, that would be too easy.

By god if I wasn't so stuck in 1999 I would sig this line just for its sheer awesomeness.

Well, if you aren't going to, I will.

Interesting comment..
..But only if you parallel that with why do people make music ??


By definition, an AI is sentient..
..So it's music would depend on it's sources [and I think, it's programmed 'personality']


If it's a Military AI, maybe it'd like Marching Bands or Rock/Metal.
If it's a socially interacting AI, maybe it'd like soothing jazz or classical sounds.

If it can make music at all [not just throw random sounds together], it'd probably be able to copy or create anything you can imagine.

In one of the Gibson books, a partly functional AI creates pieces of art that are considered beautiful and are highly sought after - but the machine has no understanding of what it's doing.

The artistic element is what we attribute to it.


And considering the scope and breadth of what people consider music, I'm sure a machine could come up with something we'd appreciate.


Just my thruppence..

Freezepop FTW!!

If you don't know Freezepop, you should. They are amazing happy synthpop with hilarious sexual connotations and random songs galore.

Not all the stuff from over a decade ago. Just the good stuff which was neglected afterwards because it was... well, afterwards. A good song is a good song, but once it's been popular, it needs a break where everyone can stop listening to it. I'd say fourteen - fifteen years is about right for re-releases, etc., because that's how long it takes for a group of people to grow up that it will be new to. Remember that when you're talking about popularity in record label terms, you're talking about sales. That is most definitely not the same thing as what people are listening to. The thing is, that once I have a large collection of dance music, I don't need to go out and buy it again and again. So other genres start going up the sales chart, which people are thinking is "popularity." Obviously the two are tied, but there's a huge number of people out there still listening to eighties music (poor things) or even listening to it in clubs. Sales is not the same as popular.

All that said, I think there's an underlying blindspot in most of the posts here, which is that it's focused on the music of Western Europe and the USA. If you go to Russia, Eastern Europe or lots of the Middle East, you'll often find a real vogue for US or British music. It's part of the image of the rich, hollywood star filled land that people dream of. By 2070, the USA is a fragmented, humiliated mess. First edition Shadowun had Japan as the culturally dominant power in North America, so it makes sense to me that a lot of the youth would be listening to Japanese import music of whatever genre it was exporting. Meanwhile the older UCAS citizens would be bemoaning the abandonment of their own culture by their youth, just as was happening in much of the muslim world (though a couple of US invasions and financing of a certain country's military have made the export of US culture less popular than they would have been).