Comments on: Reading Processes: Hartman’s Virtual Muse http://grandtextauto.org/2005/07/21/reading-processes-hartmans-virtual-muse/ A group blog about computer narrative, games, poetry, and art. Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:44:40 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: nick http://grandtextauto.org/2005/07/21/reading-processes-hartmans-virtual-muse/comment-page-1/#comment-67360 nick Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:24:08 +0000 http://grandtextauto.org/?p=870#comment-67360 Noah, I didn't remember much of the discussion of randomness from <i>The Virtual Muse,</i> so it was was good to read these notes. While there are some good thoughts in the book, I think the overall discussion of randomness in the arts could benefit greatly if it moved beyond simply making the distinction between determinism and non-determinism and looked into what randomness is. Is there any theory of randomly generated literature that even acknowledges that different probability distributions exist? Should I create some sorts of random literature if I'm a frequentist and other sorts if I'm a Bayesian? I was also curious about something you write regarding Hartman's sharing of code: "This isn’t like the Oulipian offering of processes." But Hartman's code does seem to be similar to some Oulipan processes. Just as I can take Hartman's code and modify it so that it produces different output, I can take Jean Lescure's N+7 procedure and use a different dictionary, or use some number other that 7, if I like. I can modify the Mathews Algorithm if I want to and use my new version of it to produce different sorts of texts. <i>his scansion program is now available in a new version (Scandroid 1.1) which is GPLed, written in Python, and certified by the Open Source Initiative</i> This is very cool - I downloaded it and checked it out. Besides making it easier to modify, this program's being open source also can only makes it easier to integrate it into a larger (GPL) system. I think anyone who uses an OSI-approved license can use the "OSI Certified Open Source Software" notice/logo if they like, by the way. A minor detail, but I thought I'd mention it because you or anyone else can use the mark on your appropriately-licensed software, if you like; you don't have to send your code in for approval. Noah, I didn’t remember much of the discussion of randomness from The Virtual Muse, so it was was good to read these notes. While there are some good thoughts in the book, I think the overall discussion of randomness in the arts could benefit greatly if it moved beyond simply making the distinction between determinism and non-determinism and looked into what randomness is. Is there any theory of randomly generated literature that even acknowledges that different probability distributions exist? Should I create some sorts of random literature if I’m a frequentist and other sorts if I’m a Bayesian?

I was also curious about something you write regarding Hartman’s sharing of code: “This isn’t like the Oulipian offering of processes.” But Hartman’s code does seem to be similar to some Oulipan processes. Just as I can take Hartman’s code and modify it so that it produces different output, I can take Jean Lescure’s N+7 procedure and use a different dictionary, or use some number other that 7, if I like. I can modify the Mathews Algorithm if I want to and use my new version of it to produce different sorts of texts.

his scansion program is now available in a new version (Scandroid 1.1) which is GPLed, written in Python, and certified by the Open Source Initiative

This is very cool – I downloaded it and checked it out. Besides making it easier to modify, this program’s being open source also can only makes it easier to integrate it into a larger (GPL) system.

I think anyone who uses an OSI-approved license can use the “OSI Certified Open Source Software” notice/logo if they like, by the way. A minor detail, but I thought I’d mention it because you or anyone else can use the mark on your appropriately-licensed software, if you like; you don’t have to send your code in for approval.

]]>