The A computer cannot draw section is pretty interesting to me, because it offers a very confident ontology of drawings. The distinction that an image can be composed of parts, whereas a drawing necessitates comprehension by a viewer (and is thus never complete) is something I hadn’t thought to apply to drawings before. There are many edge cases that muddle this distinction, and I’m sure that this quality could be intentionally defied by making “drawings” that are merely a means of computer to computer communication, but nonetheless we would hope to call real drawings. Ultimately I’m not as confident in this non-property as Lostritto. However, it is funny how the noun drawing has an ‘ing’ in it; maybe a drawing has always implicitly been a process, not an object.