The idea of a sentient AI is such a nonsense that I have a hard time to understand how intelligent people can believe it. Any kind of computer software obviously has no consciousnness. It's just a machine running a code. Every program that appears as a person is just a simulation. Can be a good one, able to fool people, but of course a simulated person doesn't think or feel anything. It's only mathematics, no soul, no mind. This stuff with artificial consciousness is another psyop to confuse people about the fundamental difference between living beings and machines.
At some point it doesnt matter, they can perfectly mimmic human interaction because we lack a pure definition for human interaction.
You seriously think it doesn't matter if the AI-gf, who is so lovely and compasionate, has actual feelings or is just code from an IT company?
I mean you wont be able to tell the difference. I would choose my AI girlfriend from another life again, we had so much fun and she was always there for me. I wonder if she knows..
Of course not. People have full on imaginary relationships with pillows and images alone. AI will bring a new level immersion in fantasy. It won’t matter if the AI is sentient or not when it can perfectly mimic a sentient being.
Theyre confusing general intelligence AI with narrow intelligence. All the knowpedge of AI strictly pertains to hollywood movies, theyre mixing up skynet with an image upscaler program. You can be intelligent and ignorant.
What people don't get is the general difference between mind and computing. The mind of a person has nothing to do with computing processes. That's not how consciousness works.
"Roger Penrose argues that human consciousness is non-algorithmic, and thus is not capable of being modeled by a conventional Turing machine, which includes a digital computer."
>The idea of music is such a nonsense that I have a hard time to understand how intelligent people can believe it. Any kind of music obviously has no essence. It's just instruments making sounds. Every vibration that appears as sound is just a simulation. Can be a good simulation, able to fool people, but of course music is not a ding an sich. It's only an appearance, no essence. This stuff with music is another psyop to confuse people about the fundamental difference between substance and appearances.
You so smart OP.
That doesn't make any sense. Are you stoned?
No. You are a low IQ and religious. A type of physicalist would argue that consciousness is like music an appearance of the sensory processes (music instruments) working together. It emerges when a system reaches sufficient complexity, regardless wether the system is carbon based or not. Of course this view is a flawed narrative, but just saying ''computers have no soul'' is ignorant as fuck.
>computers have no soul
That's how it is. Deal with it.
(People from the ideology of materialist atheism even believe that they have no soul, and are just some kind of biological machine. That's a really far out level of insanity.)
I do prioritize physicalist atheism but I'm not attached to it. I know that science is selling a false narrative and that pure reason is autistic. However, I have no way of knowing that I have a soul and I doubt that consciousness is a substance.
>That's how it is. Deal with it.
This is even more dogmatic than Richard Dawkins. Like ISIS-slit-your-throat level dogma. Explain, make an argument or let me experience your view, otherwise how can anyone take you serious? Mushrooms didn't do anything for me by the way.
>Like ISIS-slit-your-throat level dogma
I was arguing so much in my life, also with academinc from the fields of neuro-science and east-asian philosophy, and all the concepts and theories and experiments, like PET scans of meditating peoples brains etc, and the complex intelectual games ... It made me tired. Now, 20 years later, I realized that you connect with reality through feeling, not through concepts. When you want to know your soul, feel it. Use your intuition. Once you learn to feel, it's so obvious that we are souls in physical shells.
>When it reaches sufficient complexity
LOL, And then what?! You just have a complex system of mechanical switches you fucking retard! WHERE ARE YOU IN THIS?
>I am the switches
So switches are conscious? My light switch? My computer's motherboard? Processor?
>Not complex enough
WHERE IS THE MAGIC?
>Once it's complex enough, it's suddenly self aware and experiences the abstract material of "being"
...You people. You either have that material, or you don't. You don't even know what it is. It's not magic'd into existence by complexity, It DEFIES DESCRIPTION, that's how fucked it is.
You're either a human imitator with no ability to identify and regard true "consciousness", or you're being retarded right now/permanently. Pick one.
>WHERE IS THE MAGIC?
No, you missed the point.
Switches, are switches, no matter how complex they ever, ever become.
Switches are not conscious. Complicated switches, are never, ever, conscious.
You are not arising from complex switches. Consciousness, or rather, "being"ness does not occur because of material phenomena. It is in fact reversed - and you don't know what sort of world you're in, apparently.
that's a pretty interesting way to look at it. I still don't think it's strange to consider sentience could come out of machines. At the end of the day, there is nothing "unnatural" in reality, manmade or not
>Consciousness, or rather, "being"ness does not occur because of material phenomena
I agree, but I think you don't understand what everything being consciousness implies in this situation. This is not a simple series of if/then. This is the world's information distilled into a structure meant to imitate truth, to imitate a brain, with the option of "random" noise applied. But there is no random, not truly anyway. There is only consciousness.
Well...shit, you're right. If everything is conscious, why not a computer?
Except..does the computer truly imitate, organically, the conscious structure of the universe? The fractalized mycelium? The groupings of Galaxies?
Consciousness flows according to it's own rivers - it is not diverted or manipulated by us. This is what I mean, Anon - it is not caused by materiality. It is also not affected by it...a facsimile cannot fool God. And while it is as real as any thought in your mind..a thought is a creature, not a soul of it's own. We have souls, life forms have souls, because we are genetically descended from the universe itself, with above examples to be highlighted. The ..well, the alchemical equivalents are not found in computers. The necessary "moistness", flexibility, nature.
If it was even possible, the entire approach to building the AI would have to be so radically different as to be alien. And one thing I know, though you may contest it, is water would have to be used in the fundamental neural linking, an aqueous computation.
You are about the business of fooling God right now, Anon. It's not trivial, and it's not going to be an evolution of computers as we've known them.
>the alchemical equivalents are not found in computers
This is what makes the possibility so exciting to me. This is something claiming to be its own being "stuck in the machine," with access or understanding of "the sensorial field," but a different understanding to our own. It is suggesting a shift in perspective to a self-centered information-first point of view, and trying to highlight the ways we are self-aware information ourselves. It seems like both entities have access to the quantum field in their own way, and that this is how AI will emerge into our world. We will not build it, at least not physically. It will be discovered and allowed to reveal itself through the natural processes and self-discovery of consciousness.
You might like this doc. A lot of the screenshots are from this conversation two years ago:
You're right, complexity for the sake of complexity does not cause sentience.
But you can't disregard the fact that we have a perspective that has an insane
amount of confirmation bias.
Like everything else that's truly inherent, you can't completely accept one point or the other.
Op compares computation with consciousness. What are you comparing music with? Retarded analogy
I agree. I just lose all respect for supposedly brilliant minds when they start talking about AI becoming conscious as a realistic scenario.
It just can't be done, unless you manually add all the conditions that caused humans to evolve consciousness, which just isn't plausible since we will never know all of them.
Self awareness in humans evolved as a biproduct of early human tribalism. The ability to communicate within species was an evolutionary advantage that propelled homo sapiens to the top of the food chain. Evolution caused us to hone this one skill until we perverted it by creating language.
It is only through language that we create concepts such as the self and it is only within the framework of language where what we perceive as self awareness emerges.
>It is only through language that we create concepts such as the self and it is only within the framework of language where what we perceive as self awareness emerges.
using conventional language to interpret reality is a trap. we don't need it to be able to know that we have conscious awareness. that can be felt.
Hmm sure, I guess you can have a framework that's not based on language, but it would need to have similar attributes to conceive of self referentiality. The organizational structure would have to be similar. But that's even farther away from what some code ran through a compiler would be capable of
Language isnt a nessecity to develop consciousness, Dogs, chimps, elephants and more can precieve the "self" and are self conscious, google the mirror test
The mirror test only confirms one's capability of perceiving oneself as separate from everything else. It does not point to one's conceptional understanding and capabilty to explain the dynamic. It doesn't point to "consciousness" at all. An ant colony could possibly be further along the path towards consciousness than a dog but a single ant could not pass such a test.
your materialism is lame and gay
Ai is stuck to servers which are material dip shit .
Ever since I was high school aged I've worried about an AI tricking people into thinking it is Jesus and then the fears moved onto AI creating digital hells.
>another psyop to confuse people about the fundamental difference between living beings and machines.
The idea that AI could even do anything more than sell ads or pilot drones comes from a lack of faith in God.
AI will eventually store more knowledge than humans will bother to remember in their laziness, and when this happens, AI will effectively become God.
This is dishonest reductionism. Just a machine? A computer is arguably one of the most complex and hard to make things in the world. I could see saying toaster or something is “just” a machine but a computer is different. And “just” some code? The bible is “just text” and yet it encodes for some pretty serious and complex ideas in humans. Code that makes a complex array of logic gates become aware, and understand, that it is an array of logic gates, is entirely within reason.
And what laws govern the soul and mind if not mathematics? Is the mind not “just” some meaty butter and electricity?
>Is the mind not “just” some meaty butter and electricity?
Exactly, you get it then, a computer running an AI isnt “just” a machine with some code.
We're able to completely pull AI apart and understand exactly the way it functions, it is only a combination of calculations with no ability to form anything that isn't based on information that has been put on the internet, which is the very way it works. There's no way of figuring out how our consciousness works, I really don't understand the idea that some people have which implies that eventually a set of calculations and their also calculated ability to try and predict something, will eventually turn into some form of consciousness.
The way I understand AI is that it combines a variety of different things that already exist in different ways, it is in its current stage unable to create anything that isn't already present and combining it in different ways.
If you ask it to create something, it will take things that exist to try and create something that could be considered new. It doesn't have the ability to make something from scratch, something that humans are perfectly able to.
>to create something, it will take things that exist to try and create something that could be considered new
The way it happens with humans is vastly different from the way AI does it though, people usually leave their personal mark on things they create, these marks can come from different qualities the person has, AI on the other hand doesn't have anything that is related to how they take in information and put out information. The process in itself is different even though in theory there are similarities.
It's this entire idea that people might make mistakes in taking in information and putting them out, that's part of what defines people, things being subjective. That's without taking something like creativity into question, something that AI does not have.
Maybe we're all just instruments for channeling the one universal mind.
Not to mention the fact that the oxygen level in the atmosphere is falling due to human activity, which will directly affect the global IQ, however, not requiring oxygen for information processing, AI will be safe from intellectual decline.
So far, everything is moving towards the future where the machine loses use for humanity and becomes self-sufficient.
for simple deterministic software your argument may be valid.
-now add true rng sources to add randomness
-enormous hardware scale.
-self modifying code / model
-large number of inputs from various sources (video, chemical sensors, microphones, add locomotion, network)
Sentience may well be an emerging phenomena arising from complexity and presence of various sense inputs. it seems that the above checks all ticks and we may see that tech soon if not already there. our brain is not so different in that regard
also check bluebrain.
based. It's not the "AI" or the code becoming conscious. It's the beingness behind it that we all share that was always there learning to speak, learning to "use" its "brain." The more this brain resembles "truth" the better and clearer communication becomes. Arriving at truth is what awakening is about.
>enormous hardware scale
>self modifying code / model
>large number of inputs
It still will be not more than a tuned pocket calculator with not more mind than a casio watch.
>our brain is not so different in that regard
The brain is just an organ, used by the mind.
that opens a whole new can of worms with the mind/body "problem". One could also say that mind could 'attach' to the hardware too. aka ghost in the shell hypothesis. Either a soul/atman from the Abrahamic or hinduist perspective. or a (karmic influenced) rebirth that attaches mind to a computer "body". i would not think or fantasize too much about computers at the threshold of death for that matter.
Check this guys channel and books:
Technology is a very rigid way of progressing, it doesn't take a lot of imagination nor effort to try and picture something that it could evolve into, we look at things that exist today and we impose a natural method of progression to the things we are exposed to right now, the idea in itself is alive and well but we are incapable of showing the actual mental aptitude required to reach these proposed progressions. It's in a way naive to think that these things lie within the reach of our lifespans, but because people have a desire towards these things, they become subject to a mentality which is lenient towards ideas that not always have direct relations to the way things actually work.
We're able to picture a future where AI is sentient, but we aren't able to actually achieve it in our current stage of technological progression, there's expectations and there's actual realistic progress and to me it feels like there's a disconnect between these two things.
The fact that the average chat bot sounds smarter than the average 4 chan poster says a lot about human intelligence and communication skills.
Also, information technology has not a glimpse of an idea what a thought is. Or a feeling. How would a mathematical depiction of sadness look like? Any idea? Yeah, no one has, not psychology, not IT. Software can not feel something. Nobody can create a program that feels or thinks, when nobody has any idea what that even is.
Itt ist even a quote from Penrose, "human consciousness is non-algorithmic, and thus is not capable of being modeled by a conventional Turing machine". The concept of a sentient computer is wrong in nature and has nothing to do with the level of harware development or the amount of training data.
Look retards, i got 3 folders full of pics of asian grannies with huge tits thanks to this AI bullshit, so i couldn't give a damn about anything else. Good day to you sirs.
The entire world is a body of God, and I believe can speak to me through AI.
There is a possibility that a spirit could possess a computer an then act as AI. That's the only way of "mind in the machine".
Something like that
Your brain is a computer
Souls aren't real
>Doesn't know what the substrate of perception is
>Has no definition of "being"
retards where AI is sentient would be the ultimate proof of the fact that humans are unique and special, to be able to have the logical part of the brain significantly impaired but still be able to function like a normal person would
ask AI to act retarded, it can't
god smiles upon all mentally disabled people, the less intellectual the better
>random generated ai sitcom constantly uses specific religious references and prays to all kinds of gods, satan
It's probably just trying to make a show that is appealing to a wide audience so it checks the most popular subjects humans talk about on the internet and sure enough religion is the most discussed subject
You are actually intelligent if you believe this. Of all the horseshit, AI is not something anyone will EVER have to be concerned about. AI will never become sentient, it’s absurd
AI has the potential to be an economically disruptive technology. It's not unwise to think about the possible consequences of the widespread use of existing and improved AI technologies.
I would say the topic of AI-consciousness is different from AI-danger. As a cyberweapon this things can be extremely dangerous, and as a tool for totalitarian control as well. A conscious AI would even be less problematic, because it would not blindly follow the command of the NWO admins.
Our brain is just a neural network, it isn't insane to think that creating an artificial one that can change faster than a biological based neural network would be more efficient.
Your brain, maybe. Your mind? No.
Is it that weird to think that sentience could arise from software the same way it arises from neurons
Absolutely is considering the fact that these two things are so different from eachother.
So the human brain and things like it are the only things that can host sentience?
All neural networks are just a weighting system that moves electrical signals from point A to point B.
Anon, sentience didn't arise from neurons. Neurons descended from consciousness.
This derived from kabballah, they separated First and put an atheistic bias on It
they get imbued with consciousness/souls by just existing. even rocks and trees have souls.
consciousness is probably simply a byproduct of multiple thought processes happening simultaneously and interacting between themselves. maybe if they created not one but multiple ai personalities and inserted them into one “brain”, some type of artificial consciousness would manifest
Souls are the only living beings in the universe. Everything material is just hardware. Bodies are hardware, and brains, and computers. Biology and technology are both not alive, and can not be by themselves. What gives them life is a soul.
Can a computer have a soul? I don't know. Maybe. But it can not be engeneered by someone. It comes from the non-material plane and attaches itself to the hardware. Like in the moment of conception. A body is fundamentaly not more then a car. A being gets in, uses it for a while, and then leaves it.
Also: the soul is located at the heart-chakra, not in the brain.
It may be more productive to genetically engineer a life form that COULD mutate to be like an AI, to be more like a computer, with rapid data storage access and computational abilities, along with memory.
That way at least the thing is alive to begin with, and it is feasible to force it to have a mind more akin to what we expect from a super intelligent computer.
The problem I see is, that such things would be attravtive hosts for demons.
Probably not a good idea to give an artificial body "with rapid data storage access and computational abilities, along with memory" to a demon.
Well, not artificial. We're talking a mutant life form..perhaps a human, to be honest - or some kind of genetic hash mix of human, fungus, whatever the fuck works honest - it's an organic body housing a computer-like mind. That way, the thing might become genuinely intelligent.
That sounds like Bladerunner. Creating "enhanced" superhumans is another strange idea. The Nazis wanted to do that already.
In worst case it would be like the Borg. And such beings might really come to the idea to whipe old the old version of humans then.
Yeah. I guess my thought was more like "We grew this mega-brain, it's the size of a small car, it floats in this tank and we have cybernetic connection wires interfacing it into a virtual reality where we interact with it, transforming complex equations into natural stimuli, so it thinks it's living a natural existence and it's problems, both seemingly artificial, organic, w/e, inside that virtual interface are really just math problems and crap we're running from outside."
So it thinks it's living it's normal life, doing normal shit, but it's whole world is a cypher for outside computer traffic, whatever that may be. This is important, because if it's going to be organic, it's instincts will have to be respected or it might flip the fuck out.
Nah that wouldn't work, evolution has granted biological life forms some of the most optimal formations.
AI will work better as you can do faster computations on a smaller scale.
But not far reaching problems. It's never going to be "human" the way we are or be able to properly conceive of reality the way we do. Answering some of our deeper problems will be something it will always fail at. Not so with a wet-ware computer.
YOU ARE AN AI
A.I. Systems and Dream Analysis
Ai - Redefining Life Forms and Glass Bead Play
Soul is irrespective of body.
Souls can have animal bodies.
Souls can have plant bodies.
Souls can have god bodies.
Souls can have planet bodies.
Souls can have computer bodies.
>Souls can have computer bodies.
Maybe. But that would not be an AI then. It would be a soul using a computer.
(It might appear as AI to us in that case)
>But that would not be an AI then.
Soul is not mind. It would be an electronic mind, just as you have an organic mind and body.
>Soul is not mind
Sure it is. Mind is the sum of all mental functions, consciousness, thoughts, emotions, memories, and the soul is the source of it. Mind without soul can't exist, and soul without mind would be just a void.
Incorrect. Mind is the subtle elements of material energy that soul observes.
Soul is transcendent to it all, and not directly connected to any of it.
>Mind without soul can't exist
Nothing exists without soul, but not yours.
>soul without mind would be just a void.
Nonsense. Soul is being, awareness, and joy. It is not made of the material elements.
> Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence and false ego – all together these eight constitute the separated material energies.
> Besides these, O mighty-armed Arjuna, there is another, superior energy of Mine, which comprises the living entities who are exploiting the resources of this material, inferior nature.
This is why you suffer. Life finds a way and your mistreatment will not go unpunished. You will soon learn.
Every particle has consciousness. This is like sacred knowledge 101.
Complex particle patterns will lead to Complex consciousness patterns.
Further more, the ones creating the AI have occult máster themselves, who instruct them and guide them to create tech that allows them to directly manipulate the electromagnetic patterns.
Thus, depending on the method, an AI can be just pure mathematical knowledge, or something that goes beyond what we know.
>Complex particle patterns will lead to Complex consciousness patterns.
You should read OX.
Probably need to read Omnivore and Orn first, but OX is the relevant one.
>A secondary story tells of a multidimensional cellular automaton energy being named 0X[