The singularity is approaching. But computers still arenât very good at recognizing beauty.
Is it just me or does that chair (it IS a chair, no?) looked really tippy?
Sounds like a job for a genetic algorithm.
Design parameters as fitness function.
My thoughts exactly. Why do an ugly bruteforce when we already have numerous genetic algorithms such as ant-colony optimization and simulated annealing. They already come up with great optimizations nobody thought to try, and I would expect theyâre much cheaper to run than all-out bruteforce.
Only problem is designing the fitness function to give you something that you want, and being sure to cull off the absurdities.
If I remember correctly, genetic algorithms are wonderful at finding both local and global minima and maxima in systems that arenât obvious from the humanâs perspective.
âan optimization system finds the best designs, returns them to the starting point, and refines them repeatedlyâ
Sounds like they are doing, effectively, a genetic algorithm and just not calling it that.
And theyâre only automating the uninteresting parts of design, leaving designers more time to do more important things 
. And maybe if it makes good design cheaper, weâll see more of it? crosses fingers
Reminds me of the stuff at the bottom of the (nuclear bomb produced) caves in the short story, Taklamakan by Bruce Sterling. (text) Only instead of happening inside the computer these genetic algorithms were actual physical things, âAutonomous self-assembly proteinaceous biotech. Strictly forbidden by the Nonproliferation Protocols of the Manila Accords of 2037â. This chair, and a thousand slightly different variations tested for fitness, is definitely something the creatures/tech in the story would have produced. And then they would have crawled out of there and eaten you right up!
While its certainly an interesting idea, itâs probably more useful for giving the designer unusual or counter-intuitive ideas on how to solve the design problem, rather than offering useful designs as a final product. Especially if the item in the photo is a representative sample of a âgoodâ or human-selected outcome. Design for manufactureability seems to be limited to things you can produce with a 3D printer, rather than more traditional production methods. Which isnât necessarily a problem for some design fields, but I would want a design you can weld or bolt together for, say bridges, until someone invents a very large, steel-output mobile 3D printer (and by god, that would be something to see!)
Hell, I hope it gets invented just so I can see what happens when it gets a jam
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
