I think that creativity in a robot should be defined by its ability to come up with an unprecedented idea to solve a problem, whether it be a simple task, or creating an artistic masterpiece inspired by a certain subject. I don't think today's Large Language Models have that ability.

Defining creativity in robots involves their ability to autonomously generate novel and valuable ideas or behaviors. While current AI technologies can mimic creativity, debates persist on whether it mirrors human creativity. If robots become genuinely creative, benefits could include innovation and problem-solving, but risks include job displacement and ethical concerns. The balance between benefits and risks depends on societal choices regarding AI regulation and use.

I think using the example of music is flawed.

Music can be analyzed very specifically with mathmatical formulas. The relationship between notes, rhythms, intervals, chord progressions, and forms that are perceived as "pleasing" can be mathmatically programmed and replicated by a computer program.

I think a better example would be to look at language or visual arts, which are generally less structured and more open-ended.

Works of art created by robots are based on human works. I think that robots cannot be called creative, as long as their work completely depends on a person. Yes, robots can draw pictures or create music, but people help them create suitable images or melodies. Perhaps in the future machines will be able to create what we will consider beautiful, but now most of the "works of art" look or sound ridiculous. However, machines learn quickly and if in the future they will be able to create something of their own, then the attitude towards art in general will change. Great musicians and artists will not be so outstanding in the eyes of other people.

in response to Asad SIKANDAR Show comment

Mommy😍

in response to Vanessa Cano Show comment

eowrnqio3hq587quibehyarvs

Creativity would be difficult to understand in a robot.

I think creativity can be define by how it proccess the task that we gave it.Like if we gave it multiple words to draw it like “clown santa” and it just draw them separetly then it not creative.But if the AI mix it and make something that we didnt expect then it can be considerd as creative.Creativiy is depends on humans to that what can we consider as creative.Soo in over all i dont think that AI is bad in this way because its only depends on us that what we consider as creative.

Robots creativity, in any sense, are still based on human creativity. In some sort I kinda dislike the idea of "AI creativity". It's a topic that is talked about a lot, and It's sort of close to me, the AI art. AI arts are been pretty famous for a while now, and at first it wasn't that bad, but nowadays, real artists had enough. They feel like these AIs are just stealing their credits, and I'm totally with them. While these machines just using some codes they got programmed to do, real artists have a lot time and money in those arts. But in my opinion, AIs could never stole all the credits from are real artists. They're just too good. In other domains, I have no thoughts for those.

I can't define creativity in a robot because I don't think that a Robot can be Creative, for me Creativity is a human aspect that becomes from the feelings and experiencies that a person have in his life and all this memories create something new, unique.

The robots can be a tools to make faster some process but I don't believe that robots can create something unique by theyrself, In first place, because robots was programated by humans.

I thinks that robots will help us in many ways, but also, I think that maybe robots can increase social inequality becuase some kind of works going to dessapear and so many people going to loose their works.