Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #183388
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.comp.os.windows-10 |
| Subject | Re: Scary AI |
| Date | 2025-04-08 17:16 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <vt43ma$337e2$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <vt3f7u$2eh7c$3@dont-email.me> <vt3jee$2krgp$1@dont-email.me> <vt3oli$2omc2$1@dont-email.me> <vt3qqt$2rfml$1@dont-email.me> <vt42j1$326a7$1@dont-email.me> |
On 4/8/2025 4:57 PM, Chris wrote:
>>
>> So, no, AI is not conscious. The more intriguing question
>> for me is whether it's possible for humans to be conscious. :)
>
> You can't argue than an AI is not conscious while at the same time asking
> whether humans are conscious.
>
Why not? AI is not conscious. It's responsive software.
Human consciousness is another issue. I'm partially being
provocative, but I put it that way because I don't think
we're nearly so conscious as we believe. We're mostly on
automatic. So how dependable is the judgement of people
whose thoughts and values are mostly knee-jerk reactions?
How capable are we to recognize consciousness?
That gets into more complicated questions, though.
If you believe in scientific materialism then you might
believe that consciousness is an emergent quality, arising
from chemical reactions in the brain. In that case it's
not out of the question to posit that machines might have
the capacity for consciousness in the same way that
humans do. In that case, AI might be highly conscious while
a magic 8 ball would be slightly cocnscious (since it responds
with unpredictable answers to queries).
I'm not a scientific materialist. I regard it as a thoroughly
untenable way to look at the nature of experience. Science
can't accept mind or even life as such, because those things
can't be measured empirically. But if you accept mind as
a something not arising from matter, then it's sensible to
posit that mind is primary and could never be generated by
hardware, or by biological processes.
That may seem odd at first, but look at what science posits:
Lots of atoms, over billions of years, accidentally ended up
as amino acids, then DNA, then complex, communal systems
of cells, which spend all of their energy on maintaining their
own integrity as distinct entities, which implies will. Yet it all
happened willy nilly. And the incredibly complicated balance that
maintains these living systems is also happening by accident.
Further, if that's the case then we're
simply accidental bio-robots and thus have no capacity to
reflect on these things in the first place. The theory negates
our capacity to have a theory. Our seeming consciousness and
thoughts could only be chemical reactions in that view.
Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10 | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Scary AI Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> - 2025-04-08 16:26 +0100
Re: Scary AI "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-04-08 11:45 -0400
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-08 12:39 -0400
Re: Scary AI Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> - 2025-04-08 19:07 +0100
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-08 14:45 -0400
Re: Scary AI Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> - 2025-04-08 20:35 +0100
Re: Scary AI jetjock <jetjock@unkown.com> - 2025-04-09 14:01 -0500
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-08 20:57 +0000
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-08 17:16 -0400
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-09 19:53 +0000
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-09 16:47 -0400
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-11 12:23 +0000
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-11 13:31 -0400
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-13 02:30 +0000
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-13 07:49 -0400
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-13 13:08 +0000
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-13 02:38 +0000
Re: Scary AI Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2025-04-18 01:40 +0300
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-17 20:22 -0400
Re: Scary AI Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-18 02:12 +0000
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-18 06:44 +0000
Re: Scary AI Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-04-18 14:34 +0300
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-08 20:46 +0000
Re: Scary AI Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> - 2025-04-08 22:48 +0100
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-09 09:50 +0000
Re: Scary AI occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2025-04-18 16:45 +0200
Re: Scary AI Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-04-09 05:29 +0200
Re: Scary AI Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2025-04-18 01:02 +0300
csiph-web