This is bias reinforcing, just an observation. This is why designing features quickly devolves into a free will debate. Is Will free… to make his own decisions:)
Discussion
Free will doesn’t exist. Read Sam Harris. We are deterministic machines. Consciousness is an emergent property of neuronal computation, but is not substrate dependent.
Agreed but I’m more of a robert sapolsky fan on the subject. Sam’s silly idea of maximizing well-being to solve for morality is very low level. I would go as far to say the consciousness is emergent as a result of our brain grappling with language which separates the body that acts in the world out of instinct and the individual in the mind that is constantly questioning things.
Could AGI be conscious despite not having human language? They operate with high dimensional embeddings - likely in the same way humans do (under the hood) - the end result of which being the resulting human language.
So is it language itself, of the _computation_ of a “language?”
I think consciousness is the contradiction between individual short-term goals and what a species is, which is individual self sacrifice for collective long-term survival. Like how they say, the betas outsmarted the alphas to domesticate the species and that was beneficial for women. I guess what do you mean by conscious? Like conscious in the sense that it is a selfish agent? Cause the future of AGI is definitely agent interplay as I’m sure you agree
No. That we want a conscious AI I think is a very silly idea. Humans are conscious and collectively were fucking useless. There’s only a handful of us that actually make useful discoveries and my guess is that’s because it’s hard to motivate people with a capitalistic status game as a reward for innovation or evolution. I want a stable society for my great great grandbabies so I don’t give a shit about money.
Well I’m not sure about the “wanting” a conscious AI - I’m just wondering why humans find themselves in a place that we experience what it is to be alive - and IF machines could do the same or if there is some kind of barrier (which I don’t have reason to believe exists)
Honestly if an AI can bring about world peace for my grand babies, bring it on! Although that’s a stretch…
I just think we’ll get there one day whether we want it or not
Yeah, I think world peace has a lot to do with getting away from this idea of individual agency. Like I don’t make any major decisions without consulting my wife. I’ve always had a problem with how we tally votes in an individualist way. It seems right on its face, this is an algorithm I came up with, but nobody ever thinks it’s useful: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Tu6i2Zm1UxBIzmNE6-q_bRbdmoVraPSm/view?usp=drivesdk
Oddly enough I have an aversion to clicking on links these days… fr
Host that stuff on nostr so we can zap it.
There are epistemological limits wich make it such that we cant make these definitive ontological claims. Its a nice hypothesis though.
Well, yes, you only have free will to act self sacrificially. Any active selfishness is easily predictable. The only unpredictable thing would be self sacrificial.
No, the point is that its a nice story but ultimately just a story. If you want to believe you dont have free will or whatever, go ahead. Its in the same realm as 'God', or questions as to what constitutes 'energy'. We dont know what energy is, we only know its expression.
Anyone making definitive claims on any of this is overstepping their bounds
Oh, I’m sure you want to continue believing you have autonomy. I’m sure you want to believe that you’re not controlled by the polar power dynamics of geopolitics and ingroup/outgroup identity formation. You’re the one trapped in a story, bro. Religion is a proponent of free will, and the lie that a misappropriation of that will results in chaos. The reality is we all have a role to play and you can’t pray that shit away. You making a decision is what you were gonna do anyway. You can call it whatever you want, but the only way to be fully free is to do the exact opposite of continue to live. And honestly, I think this simulation is a whole lot more fun than death.
I am making an epistemological statement you midwit; yet here you are rambling off assumptions as to what my position/beliefs would be, lol.
Knowledge acquisition is not done by an individual agent. Knowledge is an evolving response informed by multi agent environmental threat assessments that are voted on between agents to determine an outcome best suited for all agents. You seem frustrated. What a silly thing to get emotional.