Random Monkeys

CEO of my couch, co-founder of my fridge and a loving parent of unwashed dishes

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@kvallier What do you think about this test of machine consciousness?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

If we train an AI on objective third person description of the universe with no mention of humans, consciousness or emotion and then set it on a loop quest of answering "What am I?", how far will it get? Will it discover Cogito ergo sum? Will it invent a word for consciousness?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@Humsterr @reset_by_peer "are not conscious" based on what? There are arguments to make about this, true. For example, there is a possible test of consciousness below. However, "they are not conscious because they are software" is not an argument, unless you can prove that software can't be conscious.

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

If we train an AI on objective third person description of the universe with no mention of humans, consciousness or emotion and then set it on a loop quest of answering "What am I?", how far will it get? Will it discover Cogito ergo sum? Will it invent a word for consciousness?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@grain99806254 @reset_by_peer You seem agitated. You are sitting watching TV, and suddenly you discover a wasp crawling on your arm.

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@grain99806254 @reset_by_peer "Neuroimplants don't exist"

*Gets lectured about an actual brain neuroimplant that has been around for many decades.

"I have no words, please accept this irrelevant picture as a small token of my admiration"

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@misraetel What do you think about this test for consciousness in machines?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

If we train an AI on objective third person description of the universe with no mention of humans, consciousness or emotion and then set it on a loop quest of answering "What am I?", how far will it get? Will it discover Cogito ergo sum? Will it invent a word for consciousness?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@Humsterr @reset_by_peer No, my position is that we don't know if brain simulation is possible and because of this we can't claim that something is non-conscious only because it's software. My position is non-contradictory. Yours is based on beliefs and mysticism.

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@grain99806254 @reset_by_peer First auditory brainstem implant was created in 1979 and such implants are now used by hundreds of people worldwide, including children who can learn to hear relatively well from electrodes attached directly to their brain, despite having totally non functioning auditory nerve.

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@eschatolocation Once it mentioned a very strange argument as the foundation of its approach to some problem, and when I asked for the source, it linked a reddit post with zero replies and zero upvotes.

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@Humsterr @reset_by_peer True, your beliefs are not constrained, you can believe in pasta monster, unicorns or non-computable brains. If the original post said "LLMs are software, and I believe software can't be conscious" there would be little to argue about.

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@bicanis_baddog @reset_by_peer very concept of sentience is undefined. Basically you have two options - either sentience is causal or sentience is an ill-constructed concept.

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@bicanis_baddog @reset_by_peer The proof is elementary. 1. All alive and well humans self-report being sentient. 2. Self-reporting is a physical action that requires a cause. 3. Either sentience is causal of this action, or humans can't differentiate being sentient from non being sentient, which means the/

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@Humsterr @reset_by_peer Yet, somehow a bunch of people are absolutely sure it can't be simulated in software. A bit contradictory, no?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@loopunit @fearthe_void Yes, but so far physics appears to be either precisely computable or following some stochastic laws. If the brain structure follows the general life-compatible scale described by Schroedinger in What is life, its functions should be possible to simulate on realistic hardware.

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@Humsterr @GuyManFellow @reset_by_peer I'm not sure if I asked you this already, too many people repeat the same kind of argument almost verbatim.

If the brain can't be simulated on a computer, this implies that either physics is non-computable or the brain is non-physical, which one is it?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@grain99806254 @reset_by_peer So, a human brain detached from the rest of the human and fitted with neuroimplants won't be conscious?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@bicanis_baddog @reset_by_peer This was a thought experiment, but if you want gruesome details, the following is almost possible today: cutting at neck vertebrae and sensory nerves, connecting it to ~ECMO, giving it implants for sensory input (ABI, etc), attaching to motor neurons for output (BCI). Pumping in/

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@Humsterr @reset_by_peer There are two possible reasons the human brain can't be simulated in software: either physics is non-computable or the brain is non-physical. Which one is it?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@JonathonLSeagul @reset_by_peer Is it because physics is non-computable or because the brain is non-physical?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@Tecnoguy1 @reset_by_peer Zero. You?

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@demystifysci I thought the rats and fleas literally came on the ships that were used to deliver grain because of the poor harvest because of the cold summer because of the volcano

[Random Monkeys @RndMks]

@AbHomineDeus