The Computational Artist elicits affects with Information

This thought emerged while returning from the gym: Information is fundamentally anything that exhibits pattern—anything we can interpret. The binary system of 1s and 0s, outside our interpretative frameworks, signifies nothing. Yet we imbue these patterns with meaning, encoding knowledge into their structure.

You can perceive information in anything that registers as 'order' to you (and what if chaos itself operates under its own order?). Like a philosopher, the computational artist strips away the conceptual façade of data, returning it to raw (but not pure!) information awaiting constant re-interpretation.

The computer lets us model virtuality in Deleuzean terms: Whatever algorithm, AI model, software, etc., a plurality of possible outcomes are already contained on them (virtual → actual), not just mere imitation of the "possible" (possible → real), like traditional painting or drawing. I'm not at all saying one is superior over the other, just trying to understand their ontologies.

Computational art pushes creative modes of perceiving information itself. Even with AI tools, the technique, meaning possibly the programming language used, is what actualizes the "end-result".