shakespeare

I wonder if Shakespeare scholars felt the same with the recent neural net creating Shakespeare-like content.

Nobody was born speaking perfect English, Shakespeare had to learn everything he was capable of.

It is clearly Shakespeare who popularized - if not outright invented - the term.

There are companies which do original-pronunciation Shakespeare and make a point of showing wordplay and rhymes that don't exist in modern English pronunciation.

That derivative work may be copyrighted, much like the performance of a Beethoven symphony (are the orchestra ripping off Beethoven?) or the performance of a Shakespeare play (again, are the actors, producers and directors ripping off Shakespeare?).

Modern media's exploration of Marvel's canon or the expansion of the Star Wars mythos is no different than Shakespeare rebooting Cleopatra and updating her with analogs to contemporary politics.

Given that a monkey with a typewriter could create the full works of Shakespeare with infinite time, could a monkey with a Perl interpreter create a valid Perl program that does your string processing in under 1 minute?

When I was talking about the chance of a individual monkey typing out Shakespeare was zero, I meant that, if it was impossible for any monkey to type (imagine that we are using exclusively dead monkeys) no monkey could ever type out anything, much less Shakespeare.

In the last 25 years or so, we actually got something like a pop culture, similar to what happened when television came on the scene and some of its inventors thought it would be a way of getting Shakespeare to the masses.

I'm not persuaded medieval Britain was more enlightened than modern Britain because Shakespeare was a more insightful commentator on the human condition than JK Rowling, and the same applies to not unduly revering the societies of classical antiquity because some of the works of their educated elites have survived to the present day.

If you asked Shakespeare if he was a "racist," he would not know what you meant.

"Reducing" the mind to neurobiology, therefore, does not change Shakespeare being a better explanation to human behavior than neural networks.

When it comes to the Greek debt fiasco, Shakespeare said it best 400 years ago: "Neither a borrower nor a lender be, For loan oft loses both itself and friend, And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry."

If what it is like to be human, much less a bat, turns out to be empirically situated in the dense switchboard of the brain, what happens to Shakespeare, Swift, Woolf, or Wittgenstein when it comes to explaining ourselves to ourselves?" Nothing, of course.

But they forgot that you have to be more sophisticated and have more perspective to understand Shakespeare.

You've got Sir Patrick Stewart performing the likes of Gilbert and Sullivan, Shakespeare, et cetera.

There are more things in programming language theory than are dreamt of in their philosophy (to steal a line from Shakespeare).