@TylerPayne600@elonmusk@heyim_shree If the premise of your whole argument is “nobody can know bro”, then by your own logic, you can’t prove you’re right, and I can’t prove I’m right.
So we have nothing to discuss. There’s no productive discourse to be had. You’re just angrily shouting pointlessness into a void.
Brother this refutes your precious point.
“You can’t know” is not evidence. By that standard I can’t prove you exist, that I’m not dreaming, or that the universe wasn’t created 5 minutes ago. If your argument for AI consciousness requires radical skepticism about reality itself, you haven’t provided evidence for AI consciousness.
We went from “Claude has emotion vectors” to “you can’t know anything for certain” to “we’re probably in a simulation.” That’s not evidence AI feels. It’s retreating into unfalsifiable possibilities when the original claim isn’t established.
Which is it? I’m happy to talk through any of them but pick a sword.
@TylerPayne600@elonmusk@heyim_shree@grok I have, idk why you’re so angry. I replied to your other post, thoughtfully. You replied back to me in 4 different posts so I had to pick the one.
You’re proving my point. Finding an “emotion vector” doesn’t prove an emotion is felt. Finding a Global Workspace like mechanism doesn’t prove there’s anyone experiencing it. A simulation can reproduce every measurable output of a process without becoming the thing it models. “We don’t fully understand consciousness” isn’t evidence that computation feels.
An emotion vector isn’t an emotion. A “Global Workspace” isn’t proof anyone is experiencing it. My brain representing sight isn’t the mystery. I actually experience seeing. You’re showing information processing, then assuming subjective experience. That’s the entire disputed step.
@relativeread This analogy works if you also include the fact that if you prompt it well and give it material context suddenly your 90 IQ person is an autistic savant at whatever you hone it towards.
@TylerPayne600@elonmusk@heyim_shree@grok perfectly reproducing the expression of a feeling is not the same thing as feeling it.
AI could become incomprehensibly more capable than it is today without moving one millimeter closer to actually feeling anything.
@TylerPayne600@elonmusk@heyim_shree LLMs can synthesize an argument or solve a new problem whose exact answer wasn’t sitting somewhere in their training data waiting to be copied. But none of that establishes an inner life. Generation is not experience.
They can represent concepts such as love, but will never feel
@elonmusk@heyim_shree They will never be conscious. Bad people will try to make you think AI is conscious, it is not, and never will be. We must avoid a future where politicians and the powers that be manage to convince those who’s don’t know any better. This is their plan. And it is a lie.
@AzureKnightRai I can’t stand Pro-AI fucks because they don’t understand that AI is only a tool to make our lives easier until it’s good enough that the models can run 100% recursively, gate public access, and hike prices to levels only enterprises can afford - leaving people jobless and lost.
@cyanoblamin@elonmusk@heyim_shree LLMs can synthesize an argument or solve a new problem whose exact answer wasn’t sitting somewhere in their training data waiting to be copied. But none of that establishes an inner life. Generation is not experience.
They can represent concepts such as love, but will never feel