Andrew Smart, AI, Consciousness, Turing Test |519|

#2
Looks to me like this guy had more to say then he actual said. But i wouldn't be to harsh on the guy he's got kids to feed and the Bay Area is expensive. It does give credence to Alex's idea of Google's strangle hold on certain ideas. Tow the line we are the gate keepers, lock step and we'll take care of you.
Which is proof of concept.
 
#4
I always find odd when the Turing test is seen as a test for consciousness. The point of the test, was, from an engineering perspective, you don't care what is going on internally. We don't have means of testing or measuring consciousness. At best, we can merely guess.

Things exist we can't measure. The Heisenberg principle gives examples of inherently unmeasurable things

Gödel's theorem inherently unprovable things that might still be true

Cook's theorem shows problems exist that are easily started for which a solution can't be efficiently computed and for which we require appropriate solutions
 
Last edited:
#5
Andy, Andy, Andy. Don’t worry your head with Frankenstein fantasies of getting AI to generate hallucinogenic experiences. (And we all know how Shelley’s cautionary tale of AI hijinx ended.)

It’s much easier to turn humans into robots than robots into humans. (Can someone please tell me who originally said this?)

Much more profitable to follow Harari, Schwab, and Co. in their vision of a world of “hackable human animals”.

“Some governments and corporations for the first time in history have the power to basically hack human beings…the big story of our era is the ability to hack human beings.

If you have enough data and computing power you can understand people better than they understand themselves and then you can manipulate them in ways which were previously impossible.

We need to reinvent democracy for this new era in which humans are hackable animals.

The whole idea that humans have a soul, spirit, or free will… Nobody knows what’s happening inside me so whatever I choose, whether in the election, or in the supermarket; my free will - that’s over.”

- Yuval Harari

Andy, let’s get some products in that pipeline.

What if we set up a tech ecosystem where sex dolls fart nanobots that infiltrate the epidermis of unsuspecting Incel software geeks? We can then hook em up via 5G directly to JustEat where they brainwave in their Mickey D orders. After lunch we remotely release insulin into their bloodstream. Take payments via nanoPay© using our new analProbe© technology (high colonic extra) powered by GooglEase (co-sponsored with Dulcolax). Now THAT’S an experience.

Andy, hire me. I have many more ideas where that came from. (I am joking, Andy, but the scenario is funny isn’t it? I had to share. But seriously, I can totally see leading a team to white board it out into some new products; prototypes out in no time…)
 

Alex

Administrator
#7
Andy, Andy, Andy. Don’t worry your head with Frankenstein fantasies of getting AI to generate hallucinogenic experiences. (And we all know how Shelley’s cautionary tale of AI hijinx ended.)

It’s much easier to turn humans into robots than robots into humans. (Can someone please tell me who originally said this?)

Much more profitable to follow Harari, Schwab, and Co. in their vision of a world of “hackable human animals”.

“Some governments and corporations for the first time in history have the power to basically hack human beings…the big story of our era is the ability to hack human beings.

If you have enough data and computing power you can understand people better than they understand themselves and then you can manipulate them in ways which were previously impossible.

We need to reinvent democracy for this new era in which humans are hackable animals.

The whole idea that humans have a soul, spirit, or free will… Nobody knows what’s happening inside me so whatever I choose, whether in the election, or in the supermarket; my free will - that’s over.”

- Yuval Harari

Andy, let’s get some products in that pipeline.

What if we set up a tech ecosystem where sex dolls fart nanobots that infiltrate the epidermis of unsuspecting Incel software geeks? We can then hook em up via 5G directly to JustEat where they brainwave in their Mickey D orders. After lunch we remotely release insulin into their bloodstream. Take payments via nanoPay© using our new analProbe© technology (high colonic extra) powered by GooglEase (co-sponsored with Dulcolax). Now THAT’S an experience.

Andy, hire me. I have many more ideas where that came from. (I am joking, Andy, but the scenario is funny isn’t it? I had to share. But seriously, I can totally see leading a team to white board it out into some new products; prototypes out in no time…)
It’s much easier to turn humans into robots than robots into humans. (Can someone please tell me who originally said this? -- IDK but I heard it from you first :))

nice.

we gotta get Harari on Skeptiko
 

Alex

Administrator
#9
Looks to me like this guy had more to say then he actual said. But i wouldn't be to harsh on the guy he's got kids to feed and the Bay Area is expensive.
agreed. it might also be that he wrote this book before the full google indoctrination took effect :)
 
Last edited:
#11
It’s much easier to turn humans into robots than robots into humans. (Can someone please tell me who originally said this? -- IDK but I heard it from you first :))

nice.

we gotta get Harari on Skeptiko
I don't know who said it but certainly any one with any sort of a brain thought it, including skeptics. Society focuses too much on the who and not enough on the what.

You guys obviously don't engage people who disagree with you. Pity that. Conversations don't seem part of the skeptiko culture.

Consciousness exists. We observe it. We haven't a clue how to measure it. How can I tell who you perceive red? I can guess. If I can manipulate your brain until you see "blue", if can focus on the property that changed. Perhaps I can make you perceive burned toast?
 
#12
Assuming that human consciousness does survive death, and\or that it can access some sort of global consciousness, then it seems to me that any AI equivalent would have to have whatever we have in our brains that does this. Given this, there could be the equivalent of an acid trip - though it would be unlikely to use the same molecule - LSD!

I don't believe in algorithmic consciousness, and I think this boot is very relevant to this discussion:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Myth-Artif...artificial+intelligence&qid=1632958354&sr=8-1

Note that it is written by an AI expert.

David
 
#13
Assuming that human consciousness does survive death, and\or that it can access some sort of global consciousness, then it seems to me that any AI equivalent would have to have whatever we have in our brains that does this. Given this, there could be the equivalent of an acid trip - though it would be unlikely to use the same molecule - LSD!
David
Unless the brain only modulates consciousness arrising from an external source (a simpler model because it doesn't require consciousness to be uprooted at birth/death).

In that case the primary obstacle of any AI aiming to replicate brain bevavior is one of recieving/decoding (and willingness of an external consciousness come to think of it). Acid trip will be a breeze if they can nail that (not holding my breath).
 
#15
Assuming that human consciousness does survive death, and\or that it can access some sort of global consciousness, then it seems to me that any AI equivalent would have to have whatever we have in our brains that does this. Given this, there could be the equivalent of an acid trip - though it would be unlikely to use the same molecule - LSD!

I don't believe in algorithmic consciousness, and I think this boot is very relevant to this discussion:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Myth-Artif...artificial+intelligence&qid=1632958354&sr=8-1

Note that it is written by an AI expert.

David
Unless the brain only modulates consciousness arrising from an external source (a simpler model because it doesn't require consciousness to be uprooted at birth/death).

In that case the primary obstacle of any AI aiming to replicate brain bevavior is one of recieving/decoding (and willingness of an external consciousness come to think of it). Acid trip will be a breeze if they can nail that (not holding my breath).
Chester Hunter has me convinced with his professing that the mind is a transceiver. I haven’t been able to see it differently since he stated it months ago.

Regarding AI developing consciousness, I believe there was a light bulb that went of amongst those following the subject some time in the last year. The idea switched from AI developing consciousness, To AI being capable of hosting consciousness. Personally, I just noticed myself one day referring (in my head) to the former conception as stupid, then I stopped myself and said “wait, weren’t you thinking that same thing like 6 months ago?” And I realized it just seemingly snuck up and became obvious that a computer wouldn’t “generate” consciousness.
 
#16
Chester Hunter has me convinced with his professing that the mind is a transceiver. I haven’t been able to see it differently since he stated it months ago.

Regarding AI developing consciousness, I believe there was a light bulb that went of amongst those following the subject some time in the last year. The idea switched from AI developing consciousness, To AI being capable of hosting consciousness. Personally, I just noticed myself one day referring (in my head) to the former conception as stupid, then I stopped myself and said “wait, weren’t you thinking that same thing like 6 months ago?” And I realized it just seemingly snuck up and became obvious that a computer wouldn’t “generate” consciousness.
Agreeing; i fail to understand stand how a computer can actually go past it's generally programation. How could it advance, change its own coding ?
And what of emotion? Would not any self reflection actually be a past reflection of the maker, the programer?
We are told there is machine learning but from my experience all of these programs miss obvious things that even the dumest would not...I suspect they,the industry, are lying.
It occurred to me that this whole argument revolves around our general lack of understanding of what we are. That we are machines and therefore can be duplicated materialy.

Castro's example went something like; we could create a perfect simulated liver with a computer but it won't piss on our desks (yes/no?)

Dreaming ,in part , is a exercise in selecting future probability a concept wholely lacking.

A simulation is not the thing which is why it is called a simulation.
 
#17
Agreeing; i fail to understand stand how a computer can actually go past it's generally programation. How could it advance, change its own coding ?
And what of emotion? Would not any self reflection actually be a past reflection of the maker, the programer?
We are told there is machine learning but from my experience all of these programs miss obvious things that even the dumest would not...I suspect they,the industry, are lying.
It occurred to me that this whole argument revolves around our general lack of understanding of what we are. That we are machines and therefore can be duplicated materialy.

Castro's example went something like; we could create a perfect simulated liver with a computer but it won't piss on our desks (yes/no?)

Dreaming ,in part , is a exercise in selecting future probability a concept wholely lacking.

A simulation is not the thing which is why it is called a simulation.
Agreed.
So, while we're on the same page..
If we humans are More than just the part of us which exists in the physical realm, then why would we not assume this More (part of us) couldn't slip into a machine-suit?
Stupid idea, but I dont doubt the possiblity for one second.

The part the idiots aren't considering is:
1 of a 1000 things that would make the experience proabably horrible and literal hell..:
"What's it like for a human that just finished breathing air for 70 years, to slip into a machine-suit and not have to
-breathe
-blink
-look away from the sun
-taste
-ringing in ear
-sense balance

and on...

The idiots who think these (and 1000's more) will translate into the machine-suit are in for a surprise.
 
#18
Andy, Andy, Andy. Don’t worry your head with Frankenstein fantasies of getting AI to generate hallucinogenic experiences. (And we all know how Shelley’s cautionary tale of AI hijinx ended.)

It’s much easier to turn humans into robots than robots into humans. (Can someone please tell me who originally said this?)

Much more profitable to follow Harari, Schwab, and Co. in their vision of a world of “hackable human animals”.

“Some governments and corporations for the first time in history have the power to basically hack human beings…the big story of our era is the ability to hack human beings.

If you have enough data and computing power you can understand people better than they understand themselves and then you can manipulate them in ways which were previously impossible.

We need to reinvent democracy for this new era in which humans are hackable animals.

The whole idea that humans have a soul, spirit, or free will… Nobody knows what’s happening inside me so whatever I choose, whether in the election, or in the supermarket; my free will - that’s over.”

- Yuval Harari

Andy, let’s get some products in that pipeline.

What if we set up a tech ecosystem where sex dolls fart nanobots that infiltrate the epidermis of unsuspecting Incel software geeks? We can then hook em up via 5G directly to JustEat where they brainwave in their Mickey D orders. After lunch we remotely release insulin into their bloodstream. Take payments via nanoPay© using our new analProbe© technology (high colonic extra) powered by GooglEase (co-sponsored with Dulcolax). Now THAT’S an experience.

Andy, hire me. I have many more ideas where that came from. (I am joking, Andy, but the scenario is funny isn’t it? I had to share. But seriously, I can totally see leading a team to white board it out into some new products; prototypes out in no time…)
HAHA man you are hilarious! Honestly, I don't know how the fuck they consider this guy a genius. Maybe he is great when he sits down at a computer, but this entire interview sounded like this: you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know. Can this guy finish one fucking coherent thought?
 
#19
Looks to me like this guy had more to say then he actual said. But i wouldn't be to harsh on the guy he's got kids to feed and the Bay Area is expensive. It does give credence to Alex's idea of Google's strangle hold on certain ideas. Tow the line we are the gate keepers, lock step and we'll take care of you.
Which is proof of concept.
The guy didn't say shit! In fact, I didn't hear him complete a single sentence. Why should he? In fact he tells you the entire interview.....YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW. As soon as he begins to say something, he can't even finish his fucking thought. He wants to give a computer LSD? What a fucking moron. HOLY! The guy probably wants to water his candle and light his plant as well.
 
#20
Agreed.
So, while we're on the same page..
If we humans are More than just the part of us which exists in the physical realm, then why would we not assume this More (part of us) couldn't slip into a machine-suit?
Stupid idea, but I dont doubt the possiblity for one second.

The part the idiots aren't considering is:
1 of a 1000 things that would make the experience proabably horrible and literal hell..:
"What's it like for a human that just finished breathing air for 70 years, to slip into a machine-suit and not have to
-breathe
-blink
-look away from the sun
-taste
-ringing in ear
-sense balance

and on...

The idiots who think these (and 1000's more) will translate into the machine-suit are in for a surprise.
His answer to that would be something like this: well, I thought about that, you know, and considering such, you know, when I worked in Sweden for the guy that invented, you know, this may be a bit off topic, but well, it needs to be looked at, you know, but I am not the one to, Sophists said, you know, but I am not going to split hairs or atoms on that even if, you know, but the possibility is probably, hahahah!
 
Top