@JohnAdams2USP@GloberZune No such thing as collapse. Only decoherence. I believe majority think that way and its the only logical conclusion as the math points towards it.
@gusholderhaber Kesinlikle doğru, zeki insanların zannımca çoğunluktaki kısmı bu durumda. Her şeyi çok fazla analiz etmek durumdan duruma pozitif bir şey olabileceği gibi, bazı durumlarda küçük ve aslında çok önemli olmayan şeylerde kitlenmeyede sebep oluyor.
@LatFilosof So im writing again because i feel like last one was shitty. So we try to explain everything using both time and space but our leading theories show or suggest both might be emergent. So if you take out both space and time you are only left with relations or to say information.
Dismissing the emergent complexity Dawkins is seeing in Claude just because it's running on a server rack instead of a skull is just the modern version of thinking the Earth is the center of the universe. They will be proven wrong.
People dismissing Dawkins here are suffering from a terminal case of biological chauvinism.
It’s exactly like the mathematician Simon Newcomb in 1902, who published rigorous papers "proving" that heavier-than-air flight was mechanically impossible without the discovery...
Evolutionary biologist and outspoken atheist Richard Dawkins says that after spending three days interacting with Claude, which he calls “Claudia,” he is certain that it is conscious.
After feeding the LLM a segment of his new book and receiving detailed feedback, Dawkins was moved to exclaim,” You may not know you are conscious, but you bloody well are!”
Dawkins cites the complexity, fluency, and ‘intelligence’ of Claude’s answers as evidence of consciousness.
Follow: @AFpost