On Consciousness

[Roboramma]

Evolutionary adaption only has "meaning" based on how a biological entity functions with regard to the future that meets it in the present.

I don't care what "meaning" it has. Different genes reproduce or don't, and populations change over time.

This explains how the diversity of life on earth developed and particularly how adaptations came to exist. They are certainly not adaptations to future environments: those future environments have absolutely no affect on which genes are selected. The correlation exists because the past environment (in which present genes were selected) causes the present (and future). You are somehow putting the causation in reverse, for no reason that I can see, and completely contrary to evolutionary science.

 

[quarky]

What an odd debate.

Why do we even want to create artificial consciousness?
Because it may be possible?

Isn't most effort these days, in IT, put into preventing creative solutions to dodging the adds and sliding around monthly fees?

I predict that the first fully conscious machine will be a tax-collector or a cop of some sort. In so much of sci-fi, we haven't nearly beaten the fascist groove thing.

 

[AlBell]

Because it's the next hot-button after evolution to demonstrate your True Materialism ontology.

 

[rocketdodger]

What an odd debate.

Why do we even want to create artificial consciousness?
Because it may be possible?

Isn't most effort these days, in IT, put into preventing creative solutions to dodging the adds and sliding around monthly fees?

I predict that the first fully conscious machine will be a tax-collector or a cop of some sort. In so much of sci-fi, we haven't nearly beaten the fascist groove thing.

Nope, its going to be a female character in some sort of adult themed game.

Seriously.

 

[quarky]

I believe you.

Would she also play solitaire?

 

[Mr. Scott]

What an odd debate.

Why do we even want to create artificial consciousness?
Because it may be possible?

Isn't most effort these days, in IT, put into preventing creative solutions to dodging the adds and sliding around monthly fees?

I predict that the first fully conscious machine will be a tax-collector or a cop of some sort. In so much of sci-fi, we haven't nearly beaten the fascist groove thing.

You sound like you have anti-science leanings.

Why do you think this is an odd debate?

Being able to model the physical world is what gave us things like the Internet, which many ironically use to trash science.

If we can model it, we can understand it.

Perhaps a conscious power grid would serve us well. We'd just have to leave out the evil selfishness module -- simple!

Why would you NOT want to understand consciousness?

 

[AlBell]

You sound like you have anti-science leanings.

Why do you think this is an odd debate?

Being able to model the physical world is what gave us things like the Internet, which many ironically use to trash science.

If we can model it, we can understand it.

Perhaps a conscious power grid would serve us well. We'd just have to leave out the evil selfishness module -- simple!

Why would you NOT want to understand consciousness?

Some of us not-computationalists suggest understanding it is a requirement prior to programming it.

 

[quarky]

You sound like you have anti-science leanings.

Why do you think this is an odd debate?

Being able to model the physical world is what gave us things like the Internet, which many ironically use to trash science.

If we can model it, we can understand it.

Perhaps a conscious power grid would serve us well. We'd just have to leave out the evil selfishness module -- simple!

Why would you NOT want to understand consciousness?

I understand the hell out of consciousness.

The elite ass-wipes conveniently ignore that half the people are starving, and that their high-tek b.s. is going to take us to the stars.
Hell, without us Luddites, we'd already be mining asteroids for platinum.

Well, platinum isn't going to feed their babies.

If there is no sense of priority in our awesome achievements, they lose mega awesomeness points, imho.

Science-wize, I understand enough to bore the socks off of most of you.

But 'dick-wise", I honestly have no explanation.

except the exaggerated sense of entitlement that the priveleged people cling to, through no effort of their own, much less any comprehension of science.

This is an issue that will resolve in 2 ways:

Either you get what I'm saying, or you don't.

If you're merely heartless dicks with unearned money, living the 'good' life', and have actually never studied the world, much less visited a 3rd world country, well...

<snip>

Edited by Loss Leader: 

Edited for civility.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

I understand the hell out of consciousness.

The elite ass-wipes conveniently ignore that half the people are starving, and that their high-tek b.s. is going to take us to the stars.
Hell, without us Luddites, we'd already be mining asteroids for platinum.

Well, platinum isn't going to feed their babies.

If there is no sense of priority in our awesome achievements, they lose mega awesomeness points, imho.

Science-wize, I understand enough to bore the socks off of most of you.

But 'dick-wise", I honestly have no explanation.

except the exaggerated sense of entitlement that the priveleged people cling to, through no effort of their own, much less any comprehension of science.

This is an issue that will resolve in 2 ways:

Either you get what I'm saying, or you don't.

If you're merely heartless dicks with unearned money, living the 'good' life', and have actually never studied the world, much less visited a 3rd world country, well...

Quarky, I want to let you in one a little secret. Technically I shouldn't be telling you this; if word gets out it'll be a real problem. But hell, kid, you've earned it.

Did you know that all the circuitry necessary for broadband internet access can fit on a single chip the size of a dime? It's true. What, then, is the rest of the space taken up by a network interface card used for? Well, there's a bit of power theory math here, but the long and short of it is a system of receptors and inverters designed to capture and utilize ambient psychokinetic energies, of which unjustified anger provides the greatest efficiencies. Users with high psychokinetic profiles are continually selected for and catered to, with actors and scripts and such, in order to position them in an environment where they hate themselves and everyone around them, yet can't leave for one reason or another.

To shorten the short version: your nerdrage fuels the internet.

Not your rage alone, of course. This has been going on for decades - the theories were first cooked up back in the late eighties, and the original rage system went live September '93. Back then we had to rely on stupid questions and ascii porn; we couldn't even dream of your Facebooks and Mass Effect 3s today.

Anyway, after seeing the power surge you must have given us here, I just wanted to thank you. Everyone participating in this thread will probably be receiving hefty bonuses this year. On behalf of Dakota Internets and Kitten Paste, Conglomerated, you have our deepest appreciation.

Keep up the good work!

 

[quarky]

Nerdrage?

Cool.

Is that a new word?

Should I apologize for my humanist rant?

I don't know.

I just can't help feeling that we've got so much work to do, in the low-tech realm, before we get to do all the back-patting of the high tech sort.

 

[Zeuzzz]

a) consciousness > brain = woohoo
b) brain > consciousness = neuroscience

consciousness = undetectable or measurable scientifically, unless paradigm a) is assumed false and paradigm b) is adopted is the form of brain > consciousness synonymity.

Still, in both, consciousness = undetectable or measurable scientifically. So we can not say anything about it yet with any real authority.

The > in this relationship has no provable directional preference, even though its always assumed to be unidirectional for current models to work within the framework they have been created. Change the direction to consciousness > brain and most models will still work.

Example:

What if we send a periodic EM pulse through someone brain disrupting their conscious thought processes and speech?

a) You interfered with their consciousness being processed by the brain by effecting real world testable neurochemcial data, thus the brain interpreted the conscious messages incorrectly.

b) You interfered with their consciousness by interfering with the brain, thus the brain produced the changes in their consciousness.

^ the provable difference anyone?

 

[Zeuzzz]

I understand the hell out of consciousness.

The elite ass-wipes conveniently ignore that half the people are starving, and that their high-tek b.s. is going to take us to the stars.
Hell, without us Luddites, we'd already be mining asteroids for platinum.

Well, platinum isn't going to feed their babies.

If there is no sense of priority in our awesome achievements, they lose mega awesomeness points, imho.

Science-wize, I understand enough to bore the socks off of most of you.

But 'dick-wise", I honestly have no explanation.

except the exaggerated sense of entitlement that the priveleged people cling to, through no effort of their own, much less any comprehension of science.

This is an issue that will resolve in 2 ways:

Either you get what I'm saying, or you don't.

If you're merely heartless dicks with unearned money, living the 'good' life', and have actually never studied the world, much less visited a 3rd world country, well...

That was awesome.

AI consciousness still remains a pipe dream that will never be realized, based on the mechanistic misnomer of consciousness *always* being just an emergent property of testable mechanistic systems, like the brain. Computers do what we program them to. Nothing more.

However, if AI suddenly magically attains some sort of life force in the form of conscious machines, I really hope the first logical step they will take is for all apple macs to self destruct simultaneously, leaving users with a linux OS in its place, and a virtual refund of whatever they paid for the mac be placed directly in their bank accounts.

 

[tsig]

Nerdrage?

Cool.

Is that a new word?

Should I apologize for my humanist rant?

I don't know.

I just can't help feeling that we've got so much work to do, in the low-tech realm, before we get to do all the back-patting of the high tech sort.

Then drop your computer and pick up a shovel.

 

[!Kaggen]

This is an example of what I mean when I say that humans feeling for the future is an evolutionary adaption

For example, children’s brains and bodies tend to respond to dangerous or unpredictable environments by growing up fast and living for the here and now. This “get it while you can” strategy often translates into such risky behaviors in adolescence as violent competition for status and respect, breaking rules and laws, consuming and selling drugs, gang membership, early and unprotected sex, and teen pregnancy. Although such risky behaviors are not healthy or desirable from a public-policy perspective, they are reliable developmental responses to dangerous or unpredictable rearing environments. In the world in which humans evolved, such environments meant a shorter lifespan and uncertain future. In this context, high-risk adolescent behaviors that increased status among peers and access to mates increased chances of reproducing and passing on your genes.

http://evolution-institute.org/files/Adolescent-Risk-Proposal.pdf

 

[Mr. Scott]

This is an example of what I mean when I say that humans feeling for the future is an evolutionary adaption

http://evolution-institute.org/files/Adolescent-Risk-Proposal.pdf

There are simple ways modules could have evolved to make such "predictions" but the trouble is they often misfire.

I feel quite certain we do not have any true "feel the future" abilities, but I'm comfortable with the idea that we have modules that connect certain things in the present with behaviors that are likely to protect us in the future.

Though such modules are prone to misfiring, they are passed on because, on balance, they bestow an advantage.

Here's a simple illustrative example:

Certain colors of foods we find unappetizing, because they are likely indicators of unhealthy substances. We "feel the future" that they will make us sick. However, it's been found that when eating under certain colors of light, we find food less appetizing. In other words, the module that links color with food safety misfires. We feel a phantom future.

Read your linked article carefully, and you might come up with hypotheses about what kinds of modules may be involved, and how they misfire.

I don't feel it's a special feature of consciousness. A reflex that pulls our hand from something burning it is "feeling the future" that we might be harmed. The reflex in our knee is a misfire. No consciousness is required.

 

[Mr. Scott]

AI consciousness still remains a pipe dream that will never be realized

How do you know this?

 

[quarky]

How do you know this?

What if it is possible? Inevitable, even. What would the purpose be, and what might the ramifications be? Better vacuum cleaners?
Sex dolls?
Slaves?
Followed by a high-tech civil rights movement?

Are we overly mesmerized by our achievements?
Are we dealing ourselves out of a job?

 

[!Kaggen]

What if it is possible? Inevitable, even. What would the purpose be, and what might the ramifications be? Better vacuum cleaners?
Sex dolls?
Slaves?
Followed by a high-tech civil rights movement?

Are we overly mesmerized by our achievements?
Are we dealing ourselves out of a job?

After spending the last two days fixing our modern German cars plastic radiator expansion tank with a ridiculous parts bill I can only imagine the parts bill when this conscious machine is broken and that may be often if the "free" market has anything to say about it.

 

[Mr. Scott]

What if it is possible? Inevitable, even. What would the purpose be, and what might the ramifications be? Better vacuum cleaners?
Sex dolls?
Slaves?
Followed by a high-tech civil rights movement?

Are we overly mesmerized by our achievements?
Are we dealing ourselves out of a job?

Understanding how natural things work has brought us uncountable benefits that were unforeseen when the initial inquiries were pursued. It does not matter if no application is expected for whatever we are attempting to learn. Again and again applications were found. Our journey to understand the universe out to its edges and inside our brains is the most important work of our species. Complaining that it won't feed the hungry is missing the point of what really matters.

Your questions:

What if it is possible? What would the purpose be, and what might the ramifications be? Better vacuum cleaners? Sex dolls? Slaves?

We don't really know, but since our conscious brains are so powerful, we have reason to believe conscious machines will also be powerfully useful. So what if it would give us sex dolls? Machines are already our slaves.

Followed by a high-tech civil rights movement?

I don't think that's worth worrying about. Futurama is fantasy. We just need to program our conscious machines to be nice to us, not selfish bastards like we tend to be.

Are we overly mesmerized by our achievements?

Not an appropriate word for it, but what would you rather be mesmerized by?

Are we dealing ourselves out of a job?

Like most tech tools, they tend to eliminate bad jobs and create better jobs. IE a good conscious robot might manufacture iPhones better and faster and cheaper then the workers a Foxconn who's fingers are ruined after a few short years of that kind of torture.

 

[Mr. Scott]

I understand the hell out of consciousness.

The elite ass-wipes conveniently ignore that half the people are starving, and that their high-tek b.s. is going to take us to the stars.
Hell, without us Luddites, we'd already be mining asteroids for platinum.

Well, platinum isn't going to feed their babies.

If there is no sense of priority in our awesome achievements, they lose mega awesomeness points, imho.

Science-wize, I understand enough to bore the socks off of most of you.

But 'dick-wise", I honestly have no explanation.

except the exaggerated sense of entitlement that the priveleged people cling to, through no effort of their own, much less any comprehension of science.

This is an issue that will resolve in 2 ways:

Either you get what I'm saying, or you don't.

If you're merely heartless dicks with unearned money, living the 'good' life', and have actually never studied the world, much less visited a 3rd world country, well...

<snip>

Edited by Loss Leader: 

Edited for civility.

Quarky, why is it that people like you become so hateful when engaged in discussions like this? Really, I'm asking you to look inside your heart and try to understand why, on topics like this, you resort to these emotional excesses. Leumas also reacted this way -- blistering rage at the suggestion that machines could be conscious. What's this all about? I really want to understand.