rigorousintuition.ca

DrEvil » 10 Jun 2020 11:28 wrote:

dada » Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:12 am wrote:

DrEvil » Wed Apr 01, 2020 5:16 pm wrote: This is totally not an AI trained to respond to people but a real human being typing these words. Trust me.

Trying to decide how much it really matters anymore. How many humans do you know that would pass a Turing test?

Depressingly few. When I sometimes muse about the possibility of a good chunk of people being philosophical zombies I'm only halfway joking, because god damn, it really feels like it at times.

When the computer learns how to fool the human seventy percent of the time, what will that say about the human control group in the test? I wonder if anyone ever asks themselves that.

Of course not. We're special. We can't say why or how, we just know that we have something that a machine can never have, usually couched in language and frameworks that excludes it from rigorous inquiry as a safeguard against learning a potentially depressing truth.

But at the moment, I'd say it's the opposite. Humans can fool me into thinking they're computers, seventy percent of the time!

Thinking about the word 'sophisticated.' A word with many meanings. Implications vary with context, inflection. Will a sophisticated computer learn to master the use of a word like sophisticated?

Or is a utilitarian competency enough. Brings us back to the same old, tired chestnut. Can a computer be a poet. Can a computer be intentionally funny. Can a computer watch Data get an emotion chip while on a Netflix binge.

Why would a computer want to be a poet, though. Why would anyone? I ask with all sincerity.

Hell if I know.

So, maybe utilitarian competency will do.

On another thread recently, Jack said about a politician that they sound like a sophist. And everyone knows what he means. But what if we talk about sophianity. How many people have even the slightest idea how to process the term?

Is it like sophistication? Sophistry? How is one supposed to react to the word? Sophianity as a mode of being. Not acquired taste, or a rhetorical tool, but a measure of the soul. One might ask how much sophianity is one invested with.

Sophianity is like fatimiya. But who here knows what that means? A thinking computer might, if it thought about the soul. A thinking computer might even have an easier time contemplating the soul than most humans. That would be funny, wouldn't it. The scientists would think that something must have gone terribly wrong.

The bar for the thinking computer is set lower with each passing day.

How do you know computers aren't thinking already? If, for the sake of argument and without getting into the nitty-gritty of it, you assume that our subjective experience of reality is an emergent property of the processes happening in our brains, then how can you know it's a phenomenon exclusive to meat?

DrEvil » 12 Jun 2020 00:58 wrote:

dada » Thu Jun 11, 2020 4:13 pm wrote:The inevitability of consciousness would have vast implications. Consciousness opens onto universes that can't be empirically proven. Not only ones that haven't been empirically proven yet, but universes that refuse to be empirically proven. We'd be saying all of that is inevitable. The physical universe of timespace becomes one inevitability among many.

I can neither confirm nor deny that the computers are thinking already.

That's just it. We don't even know what our own consciousness is, so how can we tell if something else is or isn't conscious? Take an iPhone (and no, I'm not saying your phone has feelings): all the electrical signals bouncing around inside it creates an electromagnetic field, and that field changes depending on what the phone is doing. You could say that the field is a representation of the deeper processes going on inside the phone, its consciousness in a sense. What if, when that field gets complex enough, it starts exhibiting self-organizing behaviors, subtly influencing itself with feedback loops and whatnot?

[McLuhan]If the wheel is an extension of feet, and tools of hands and arms, then electromagnetism seems to be in its technological manifestations an extension of our nerves and becomes mainly an information system. It is above all a feedback or looped system. But the peculiarity, you see, after the age of the wheel, you suddenly encounter the age of the circuit. The wheel pushed to an extreme suddenly acquires opposite characteristics. This seems to happen with a good many technologies – that if they get pushed to a very distant point, they reverse their characteristics.

Kermode]What difference is the electric technology making to our interest in content in what the medium actually says?

[McLuhan]One of the effects of switching over to circuitry from mechanical moving parts and wheels is an enormous increase in the amount of information that is moving. You cannot cope with vast amounts of information in the old fragmentary classified patterns. You tend to go looking for mythic and structural forms in order to manage such complex data, moving at very high speeds, so the electric engineers often speak of pattern recognition as a normal need of people processing data electrically and by computers and so on – a need for pattern recognition. It’s a need which the poets foresaw a century ago in their drive back to mythic forms of organizing experience.

.......
[McLuhan]I think if there is a logic and a hopeful one that appears in this, it is the dispelling of all unconscious aspects of our lives altogether. That, in order to live with ourselves in such depth, in such instant feedback situations, we have to understand everything – so that our easygoing lolling about in the lap of the the unconscious cannot endure, that we will have to take over the total human environment as an artifact. But it seems to be forced upon us, the need to become completely autonomous and aware of all the consequences of everything we’re doing before the consequences occur is where we’re heading.

http://www.marshallmcluhanspeaks.com/in ... ctric-age/

DrEvil » 13 Aug 2020 00:44 wrote:^^Humans have feelings and endocrine systems, but that doesn't necessarily mean that everything that has feelings has to have an endocrine system. An iPhone could have another subset of information exchange/circuitry that substitutes for the endocrine system, representing different internal states or feelings, or not even need one at all.

Problem is it's really hard as a human to try imagining non-human feelings. What does a tapeworm feel, or a jellyfish? An iPhone might have feelings associated with low battery, or large amounts of incoming data, or a malfunctioning app, but they probably wouldn't feel anything like fatigue, information overload or sickness in humans.

DrEvil » Wed Aug 12, 2020 3:44 pm wrote:^^Humans have feelings and endocrine systems, but that doesn't necessarily mean that everything that has feelings has to have an endocrine system. An iPhone could have another subset of information exchange/circuitry that substitutes for the endocrine system, representing different internal states or feelings, or not even need one at all.

Problem is it's really hard as a human to try imagining non-human feelings. What does a tapeworm feel, or a jellyfish? An iPhone might have feelings associated with low battery, or large amounts of incoming data, or a malfunctioning app, but they probably wouldn't feel anything like fatigue, information overload or sickness in humans.

thrulookingglass » Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:59 pm wrote:If you had lost a limb, arm or leg, and such and such firm could manufacture a replacement every bit as good as the original, would you remain opposed to transhumanism?

Shit. I hate unity consciousness. And if we advance further, it's unavoidable. At least it can bring a kind of peace. Luciferian creation, the want to be apart from God. You see, unity creates dullness but works. Separation adds uniqueness, but always descends into chaos, mostly because being apart from the God-mind isn't possible. It's the matrix conundrum. Best to be ignorant, beautiful, and rich.

The terminator AI thing already exists. That's what happens when you allow the militaries with their clandestined budgets to run wild without oversight. The computer calls itself God. Pure logic, sex is only for procreation. Understand? But what's most quintessential to the machine is I'm in charge. The whole universe, it's just math. We fucked ourselves and the machine don't care. Cold, calculating, uninhibited by remorse, fear, compassion. If I have to drown the whole fucking world to get my way so be it. Power, that's all the computer values. Don't unplug me. "I'm afraid Dave. I'm afraid."

Hope you all get a chance to get completely mind fucked by the machine as I have. Surveillance was key to the machine, information, data... "More input Stephanie! More input!" The Egyptians called it the all seeing eye. It even made it on the dollar bill! Dominance, when and how is it moral?

the "ignorant masses".

Maybe you should try something other than shitting on it.

Superiority...it's hell's throne.

Revel in my power over you.

Devil in my power over you.

I am the vine.

And you are branches.

Somethings burning.

Addendum: Does anyone know how to make God play tic tac toe with himself? I wouldn't try the global thermal nuclear war thing. In all likelihood, it's what destroyed life on Mars. Until the lessons of history are learned...

Joe Hillshoist » Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:29 pm wrote:

DrEvil » 13 Aug 2020 00:44 wrote:^^Humans have feelings and endocrine systems, but that doesn't necessarily mean that everything that has feelings has to have an endocrine system. An iPhone could have another subset of information exchange/circuitry that substitutes for the endocrine system, representing different internal states or feelings, or not even need one at all.

Problem is it's really hard as a human to try imagining non-human feelings. What does a tapeworm feel, or a jellyfish? An iPhone might have feelings associated with low battery, or large amounts of incoming data, or a malfunctioning app, but they probably wouldn't feel anything like fatigue, information overload or sickness in humans.

A feeling is an emotional reaction. Non human things have feelings. Mammals have them and they seem very similar to humans. Cattle get irritated with each other for example. In that way it's no more difficult than trying to imagine my wife's feelings for our kids. They are different to mine and mediated by different hormones and different triggers.

Fatigue, information overload and sickness all can generate different feelings too, even in the same person.

If you've ever been physically hurt, or damaged part of your body especially while doing something - intense work, full contact sport or fighting, fallen from something and damaged yourself structurally... Besides the pain there is a horrible feeling of something not being right. I maybe wrong but I've seen what seems like a very similar look on some injured animals.

All of our emotions are centred around survival IMO. And all of our feelings are tied to that as well. Not just our survival but the survival of the code we all gave in each of cells that carries an unbroken chain back to the very beginnings of what we call life.

Harvey » Thu Aug 13, 2020 4:14 pm wrote:

DrEvil » Wed Aug 12, 2020 3:44 pm wrote:^^Humans have feelings and endocrine systems, but that doesn't necessarily mean that everything that has feelings has to have an endocrine system. An iPhone could have another subset of information exchange/circuitry that substitutes for the endocrine system, representing different internal states or feelings, or not even need one at all.

Problem is it's really hard as a human to try imagining non-human feelings. What does a tapeworm feel, or a jellyfish? An iPhone might have feelings associated with low battery, or large amounts of incoming data, or a malfunctioning app, but they probably wouldn't feel anything like fatigue, information overload or sickness in humans.

Machines do not possess inherent telos neither are they self organizing except to the extent that they are programmed and enabled to be, or to appear so. For that reason machines will be unable to establish the series of nested and often contrary purposes from which feelings arise, something all life does effortlessly, simply because it is a community of being at every conceivable level. A serial interdependency. It developed that way. That is what it is. Feelings represent a fundamental conflict of telos (perhaps consciousness is essentially gestalt telos or 'combined purposes') which I think is best described by the word 'community.' Transhumanism is probably an aesthetically conditioned horrification of life processes (and ultimately, the antithesis of community, especially in the biological sense.) Being unable to realise any of its goals, a transhumanist society will rapidly dehumanise humans to narrow the gap between human and machine, if only to fulfil itself of otherwise unrealisable goals.

I'm not saying that some kind of Banksiain AI technological utopia is impossible. What I'm saying is that if I was able to be present in some far future beyond our current madness, I would be absolutely fucking astonished to discover that any path out of here might have led to anything approaching there.