AI Conscious?

Ross Dolan said:
Murph, either you do not know what you are saying...or you are full of shit.
Click to expand...

So you've seen a soul? Please show me where I can see a soul.

Can souls think without access to a physical brain? How does that work?

Ross Dolan said:
You do not KNOW that you have no soul
Click to expand...

Correct. But since I have no reason to believe magical invisible superthings exist I'm feeling pretty confident in my assessment.


Ross Dolan said:
A more relevant question might be: Why are religious people and atheists so afraid of the words "I do not know?"
Click to expand...

Because it's a slippery slope. In your estimation since you don't KNOW that there's not currently a unicorn head in my fridge then you must assume that there is at least a 50/50 chance that there IS such a thing in my fridge.

That means you wander around the world unable to function because literally anything you don't know (but have ample reason to REJECT) you are unable to take a stand on anything.

You are making the case for some form of empiricism that simply can't exist.
 
murph63 said:
So you've seen a soul? Please show me where I can see a soul.
Click to expand...

There is no way a logician would aver that one could make that conclusion based on my post.
murph63 said:
Can souls think without access to a physical brain? How does that work?
Click to expand...

Beats the shit out of me. For that matter, your blind guess that we do not have souls may be correct.
murph63 said:
Correct. But since I have no reason to believe magical invisible superthings exist I'm feeling pretty confident in my assessment.
Click to expand...

Well you shouldn't be. Your fail-safe should be, "I do not know."

But it seem that statement causes dread in you....so I understand.
murph63 said:
Because it's a slippery slope. In your estimation since you don't KNOW that there's not currently a unicorn head in my fridge then you must assume that there is at least a 50/50 chance that there IS such a thing in my fridge.
Click to expand...

You really do need a course in logic and statistics. There is absolutely no way that "conclusion" of yours follows from what I said. Check with a local college or university logician if you think I am wrong.

murph63 said:
That means you wander around the world unable to function because literally anything you don't know (but have ample reason to REJECT) you are unable to take a stand on anything.
Click to expand...

What makes you think I do not know anything? I know plenty.
murph63 said:
You are making the case for some form of empiricism that simply can't exist.
Click to expand...
You are full of shit. Do something about that.
 
murph63 said:
And this is not what AI is. Yes there is a significant stochastic content (eg k-means clustering, text prediction, "bag of words", NLP etc) but there is more to it than just that.
Click to expand...
It's pattern recognition, statistical prediction, language simulation.

That's nothing like human consciousness, which is widely defined by neuroscientists as the subjective experience of self-awareness, self-identity, and subjective attention to the experiences of the world.

Silicon chips are not self aware, do not have self identity, do not have subjective experiences of the world.
 
murph63 said:
Dr. Geoffrey Hinton, one of the OG AI scientists who won the Nobel for his work on backwards propagation, thinks AI IS conscious. I tend to agree but not for the same reasons as Dr. Hinton. I, personally, think that since consciousness is a wholly internal state whose existence in others is limited solely to their ability to communicate to me that they are conscious, that it cannot be "tested for" objectively. And, as such, if the AI acts in all ways that mimic consciousness it is impossible (on my view) to know that it ISN'T.

Hinton has a good point later on that humanity has ALWAYS imagined itself somehow special and separate from the rest of the world only to be reminded again and again that we are NOT. Evolution put is squarely in with the rest of the animals. Yes we have a special skill (communication) but we are still just another animal. We used to think we were the center of the universe only to be taught otherwise. Our self-centering makes us scared to face the idea that SOMETHING ELSE may be conscious.

Click to expand...
"AI" is not conscious. It isn't even AI. Services like GoogleAI, Alexa, ChatGPT, or Grok are just glorified versions of the old Dr. Psycho game. They are not sentient. They have no automated learning loop. They have an impressive lexical and cognitive analysis system, but their decision matrix is fixed by the developers and NOTHING ELSE.

The "AI" term is just marketing.

It is not a Holy Oracle.
It is not sentient.
It is just a computer program, built by humans for use by humans.

It is pointless and mindless to just copy and paste it as some kind of 'proof' or as some kind of 'story' or some kind of 'intelligence'.
Indeed, such activity is narcissism.
 
Last edited:
Ross Dolan said:
I'm at a distinct advantage here. I am 90 years old. I know exactly what part I would replace if I could.

By the way, I can conceive of a machine that would not have replaceable parts. Some day, we humans may build them.
Click to expand...
Bless your heart my friend. No offense, but I hope I don't live that long - still in my mid-60's and thing are already starting to fall off of me.
 
murph63 said:
And this is not what AI is. Yes there is a significant stochastic content (eg k-means clustering, text prediction, "bag of words", NLP etc) but there is more to it than just that.

Do you think Dr. Hinton won his Nobel for Markov chains? (Hint: wrong)



How do you know? (You like to tell us what animals think too, but yet you can never tell how you know)


You're exactly the kind of person Dr. Hinton talks about as being scared of being shown that, once again, humans are NOT the special creations at the center of the universe. You reject consciousness outside of humanity because it threatens your vision of humans as the Crown of God's Creation Embued with Special Abilities ("let us make him in our image!")

Your clear lack of intellect also explains why you love to use AI to destroy the climate and usher in an era of social upheaval.
Click to expand...
you're a nazi demon who needs to be separated from society for your mass murder beliefs.

:truestory:
 
Cypress said:
It's pattern recognition, statistical prediction, language simulation.
Click to expand...

No, it's more than that. I've personally done an extensive amount of "text analytics" (that's the k-means clustering, the "bag of words" concept, IDF, TDF, Euclidean distances, etc.) and while that is a significant part of it, there is more to it.

These are separate concepts that are intimately related.

I'll agree with you that most of the AI that we see being trotted out to products these days is hype, but on the other side, there is a lot to be said for the raw power that is MORE than just the stochastic NLP.

Cypress said:
That's nothing like human consciousness, which is widely defined by neuroscientists as the subjective experience of self-awareness, self-identity, and subjective attention to the experiences of the world.
Click to expand...

And can you prove that is happening in a separate being? How so? Oh, by the separate being TELLING you it is? That's pretty weak tea.



Cypress said:
Silicon chips are not self aware, do not have self identity, do not have subjective experiences of the world.
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty obvious you share in common with many people a fear that you are not special. Humans are just other animals. The sun doesn't go 'round the earth, God didn't make us like unto Him, we are not a special creation with superpowers.
 
murph63 said:
By all means feel free to fuck right off. No one actually much cares what you say anyway. Don't overestimate your impact on the world.
Click to expand...
you first, Nazi mental midget who's full of hate and lies.

I'm saving humanity right here, right now, and all you can do is watch and lament your hellbound destiny.
 
Ross Dolan said:
Well you shouldn't be. Your fail-safe should be, "I do not know."
Click to expand...

Have you ever done a scientific experiment? What was the result? Are you sure?

{Get ready for some deep stuff here, you might need a smarter friend to help you understand it}

Science approaches any given hypothesis as being tested against a null version of that hypothesis. Let's say I have an hypothesis that a drug Excitamoprop has a given effect on malaria. I think it improves the patient's health.

So I test that hypothesis by starting with a NULL HYPOTHESIS that the drug does NOTHING to help the patient's health. Then I test against that.

Ultimately I will run the experiment and analyze the data and test that hypothesis. Note I DO NOT test that the hypothesis is true, but rather that the null hypothesis is something I can reject or fail to reject.

Every scientist understands that literally NOTHING is "known" perfectly. We ALWAYS have a significant doubt that our answers are perfected truth.

The best we can say is that we can reject the null or fail to reject the null. Reject the null and you can start selling Excitamoprop.

The claim of the "soul" to me, when I test it against the null of "no soul" I cannot reject the null hypothesis.

Do I think I'm 100% absolutely perfectly fucking right? FUCK NO! Not even close!

But I do feel that, based on my experience of reality, there is no reason to reject the null hypothesis.



I've run the tests, I've gathered the data and done the test. p>0.5

Ross Dolan said:
You really do need a course in logic and statistics.
Click to expand...

Not really. Unlike you, I can actually talk the talk. (vide supra, as they say in the law)

Ross Dolan said:
What makes you think I do not know anything? I know plenty.
Click to expand...

No you don't. No one does. You only THINK you know something. (See the discussion above)

Ross Dolan said:
You are full of shit. Do something about that.
Click to expand...

I've shown you a thing or two now, but I also know you'll blow past this (it's so far above your abilities) and you'll hurl more invective.
 
murph63 said:
Have you ever done a scientific experiment? What was the result? Are you sure?

{Get ready for some deep stuff here, you might need a smarter friend to help you understand it}

Science approaches any given hypothesis as being tested against a null version of that hypothesis. Let's say I have an hypothesis that a drug Excitamoprop has a given effect on malaria. I think it improves the patient's health.

So I test that hypothesis by starting with a NULL HYPOTHESIS that the drug does NOTHING to help the patient's health. Then I test against that.

Ultimately I will run the experiment and analyze the data and test that hypothesis. Note I DO NOT test that the hypothesis is true, but rather that the null hypothesis is something I can reject or fail to reject.

Every scientist understands that literally NOTHING is "known" perfectly. We ALWAYS have a significant doubt that our answers are perfected truth.

The best we can say is that we can reject the null or fail to reject the null. Reject the null and you can start selling Excitamoprop.

The claim of the "soul" to me, when I test it against the null of "no soul" I cannot reject the null hypothesis.

Do I think I'm 100% absolutely perfectly fucking right? FUCK NO! Not even close!

But I do feel that, based on my experience of reality, there is no reason to reject the null hypothesis.



I've run the tests, I've gathered the data and done the test. p>0.5



Not really. Unlike you, I can actually talk the talk. (vide supra, as they say in the law)



No you don't. No one does. You only THINK you know something. (See the discussion above)



I've shown you a thing or two now, but I also know you'll blow past this (it's so far above your abilities) and you'll hurl more invective.
Click to expand...
your IQ is null.

and you're an evil anti-human Nazi.
 
Jerry Mathers said:
your IQ is null.

and you're an evil anti-human Nazi.
Click to expand...

As I said, usually when you show up it loads up the thread with meaningless drivel like this which, while I'm sure is cathartic for you, doesn't really matter to anyone else.

The fact that YOU think I'm a Nazi carries exactly zero weight for me.
 
murph63 said:
As I said, usually when you show up it loads up the thread with meaningless drivel like this which, while I'm sure is cathartic for you, doesn't really matter to anyone else.

The fact that YOU think I'm a Nazi carries exactly zero weight for me.
Click to expand...
I'm unique and special. you're a run of the mill eugenics scientism humanity hater.

so boring.
 
murph63 said:
No, it's more than that. I've personally done an extensive amount of "text analytics" (that's the k-means clustering, the "bag of words" concept, IDF, TDF, Euclidean distances, etc.) and while that is a significant part of it, there is more to it.

These are separate concepts that are intimately related.

I'll agree with you that most of the AI that we see being trotted out to products these days is hype, but on the other side, there is a lot to be said for the raw power that is MORE than just the stochastic NLP.



And can you prove that is happening in a separate being? How so? Oh, by the separate being TELLING you it is? That's pretty weak tea.





I think it's pretty obvious you share in common with many people a fear that you are not special. Humans are just other animals. The sun doesn't go 'round the earth, God didn't make us like unto Him, we are not a special creation with superpowers.
Click to expand...
AI models and machine learning algorithms are based on math.

Math and silicon chips do not have self-awareness, self-identity, or subjective experiences with the world. That's what most neuroscientists say are necessary for consciousness.

That's also why almost everyone on this thread is pointing out you are way off the edge of the map and treating AI like a parlour trick.
 

Cypress said:
Math and silicon chips do not have self-awareness, self-identity, or subjective experiences with the world.
Click to expand...

You are based on carbon atoms. Carbon atoms don't have self-awareness, self-identity or subjective experiences with the world.


Cypress said:
That's also why almost everyone on this thread is pointing out you are way off the edge of the map and treating AI like a parlour trick.
Click to expand...

LOL.. It's always ad populum with you, isn't it?
 
I find it absolutely fascinating that so few people can even approach the concept that something else might also be conscious. But here's something to ponder: what if consciousness isn't really needed for legitimate life? What's so special about consciousness? I've read that there are some other means of processing incoming stimuli (as a brain does) without a central control or sense of "self" if you will.

What if consciousness is like saying "AI doesn't have a pinkie so it isn't anything special!", just a meaningless differentiation.

What if consciousness isn't anything special, just a way, but not the only way, of organizing a "mind"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top