#strandbeests

OK, this Magnus Archives inspired diversion (see here) is getting out of hand. 

What are the distinctions between things that explicitly are or could be interpreted as automata? All the examples I can think of seem to have qualities that position them somewhere along a few distinct axes: 

Do they attempt to mimic all or some aspect of recognizable humanoid or animal morphology such that this mimicry is integral to themselves (we’ll call this A) or are they primarily abstract entities that may exist on any hardware that can “run” them (B)? (Admittedly, what we now call AI aren’t what I first think of when I think of Automata, but... it feels artificial (heh) to completely separate them.) If A, is the morphology primarily human (Aa) or otherwise (Ab)?

Do they require direct and skillful human manipulation (A) or do they require a simple power source (B). If B, is this power source something that must be supplied by direct outside action (Ba) or can the automata act to provide its own power (Bb)?

Are they actually performing the action they claim to be performing (A) or is the performance merely illusion (B)? If A, Is the act they perform something that requires an ability to reason (Aa) or not (Ab)?  If Aa, is their consciousness derived from miraculous/demonic means (Aax) or technological progress (Aay)?

Some examples and where they would fall: 

The Digesting Duck: 1Ab2Ba3B

Theo Jansen’s Strandbeests: 1Ab2Ba3Ab

The Turk: 1Aa2A3B

Kempelen’s Speaking Machine: 1Aa2A3Ab

Siri: 1B2Ba3Ab

Data (ST:TNG): 1Aa2Bb3Aay (Hell, there was at least one whole episode about this!)

Hypothetical super AIs (Roko’s Basilisk might go here): 1B2Bb3Aay

The New Motive Power/God Machine: 1Ab2Ba(?)3A(?)ax (this one is rather iffy, but since the makers believed it to be real, I’m going to code it as if it was; additionally, the “power source” appeared to be the “love” of the parents...)

If they all have one thing in common, whether they are pooping ducks or gods, it is that they only exist because humans made them in an attempt to mimic the work of god(s)/nature.

Wacky Example: “The New Motive Power” or “God Machine” (see this post for more)

A favorite example: Theo Jansen’s Strandbeests!

See also:

A pice on Automata published in The Paris Review: https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2012/05/22/among-the-automata/

Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, Douglas Hofstadter

For years Dutch artist Theo Jansen has created what he calls Strandbeests – ambulatory contraptions that walk across the beach powered by nothing but the wind. Elizabeth Palmer reports on these eclectic works of art, in a “Sunday Morning” story that first aired Dec. 2, 2012. Source link

This one was fascinating. It's about something most of us can't understand personally, but I think a lot of us can understand the *feeling* of looking for another part of your history.

Then there's the whole "no regulation in this industry" - in fact, the whole idea that it's an industry - is a whole nother feeling.

I know it's a joke to say "we've all seen that episode of Black Mirror", but the literally did have an episode based on this idea.

Texted my kid halfway through, "If you do this to me after I die, and I don't come out saying "what the fuck were you thinking?", it's a bad AI model.

A lot of feelings about this. The one guy? Needs to take a long walk down a short pier. The other guy? I feel really bad for him, but I think what he's doing is unhealthy. That last guy? Probably has the best handle on the situation.

But all three versions will be a thing, no doubt about it.

If he's saying how he really feels, I'm incredibly jealous.

(it's about this guy)

We've all seen documentaries on specific stop-motion studios, but have you ever seen one that was about the oldest stop-motion studio in the world, based in a very the 50s/60s in Soviet era Estonia?