A.I. and Stochastic Parrots - The Delusion you are being sold

[Scholar]

For you lazy people who won't do your own research on the whole AI thing:

 

The ideologies that are forming around AI are genuinely delusional, and I see it being parroted here on this forum. We are not seeing an AI revolution, this is the imitation of intuitive prediction models, which is quite literally the opposite of conscious understanding.

 

I would bet a lot of money that conscious understanding requires individuated consciousness, and this will require solutions on the fundamental way the hardware of computers are constructed. If you were to simulate every single atoms in the brain perfectly with a computer, you would not arrive at consicousness, nor would you arrive at human like behaviour. Individuated consciousness is an emergent phenomena or distinction in existence which is drawn through a particular arrangement of dualities, which is simply not present in computers. You don't create intelligent and then consciousness emerges. You create consciousness and intelligence emerges.

 

This is basically stage orange run amok. You guys should feel ashamed for falling for it.

Edited April 29, 2023 by Scholar

[Danioover9000]

@Scholar

1 hour ago, Scholar said:

For you lazy people who won't do your own research on the whole AI thing:

 

The ideologies that are forming around AI are genuinely delusional, and I see it being parroted here on this forum. We are not seeing an AI revolution, this is the imitation of intuitive prediction models, which is quite literally the opposite of conscious understanding.

 

I would bet a lot of money that conscious understanding requires individuated consciousness, and this will require solutions on the fundamental way the hardware of computers are constructed. If you were to simulate every single atoms in the brain perfectly with a computer, you would not arrive at consicousness, nor would you arrive at human like behaviour. Individuated consciousness is an emergent phenomena or distinction in existence which is drawn through a particular arrangement of dualities, which is simply not present in computers. You don't create intelligent and then consciousness emerges. You create consciousness and intelligence emerges.

 

This is basically stage orange run amok. You guys should feel ashamed for falling for it.

   Great post and good thread! How this isn't popular and a hot topic trending here is questionable, as I'm similarly not getting a lot of views and discussions on some of my threads.

   Are we getting shadow banned?

[Carl-Richard]

What is your view on the idea that individuated consciousness seems to be intrinsically tied to biology?

Edited April 29, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Buck Edwards]

Rather it's stage blue, because we're too stuck with consequences. 

You cannot simulate emotional consciousness. 

 

[Danioover9000]

@Enlightement

1 hour ago, Enlightement said:

Rather it's stage blue, because we're too stuck with consequences. 

You cannot simulate emotional consciousness. 

 

   What does SD stage blue have to do with emotional consciousness?

[Danioover9000]

@Enlightement

Just now, Danioover9000 said:

@Enlightement

   What does SD stage blue have to do with emotional consciousness?

   I asked this because in this instance applying SD modal to something not human is inaccurate, this robot isn't human and has values of a human being, so developmental psychology modals will be harder to apply here. Being unbiased I can see that for an AI.

[something_else]

11 hours ago, Scholar said:

For you lazy people who won't do your own research on the whole AI thing:

 

The ideologies that are forming around AI are genuinely delusional, and I see it being parroted here on this forum. We are not seeing an AI revolution, this is the imitation of intuitive prediction models, which is quite literally the opposite of conscious understanding.

You may be right that some AI people are delusionally optimistic about this but you should be open to the idea that you may be delusionally pessimistic. You’re very arrogant and it makes me instinctively disregard a lot of what you’re saying

Quote

I would bet a lot of money that conscious understanding requires individuated consciousness, and this will require solutions on the fundamental way the hardware of computers are constructed. If you were to simulate every single atoms in the brain perfectly with a computer, you would not arrive at consicousness, nor would you arrive at human like behaviour. Individuated consciousness is an emergent phenomena or distinction in existence which is drawn through a particular arrangement of dualities, which is simply not present in computers. You don't create intelligent and then consciousness emerges. You create consciousness and intelligence emerges.

All of this paragraph is either meaningless or baseless. Using lots of fancy words doesn’t make you right.

I perhaps agree with the last sentence but not for the same reasons you seem to based on the rest of the paragraph.

[Buck Edwards]

2 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Enlightement

   I asked this because in this instance applying SD modal to something not human is inaccurate, this robot isn't human and has values of a human being, so developmental psychology modals will be harder to apply here. Being unbiased I can see that for an AI.

I wasn't referring to the robot. I was referring to the people discussing it and doubting the limits of AI. 

[Blackhawk]

18 hours ago, Scholar said:

For you lazy people who won't do your own research on the whole AI thing:

 

The ideologies that are forming around AI are genuinely delusional, and I see it being parroted here on this forum. We are not seeing an AI revolution, this is the imitation of intuitive prediction models, which is quite literally the opposite of conscious understanding.

 

I would bet a lot of money that conscious understanding requires individuated consciousness, and this will require solutions on the fundamental way the hardware of computers are constructed. If you were to simulate every single atoms in the brain perfectly with a computer, you would not arrive at consicousness, nor would you arrive at human like behaviour. Individuated consciousness is an emergent phenomena or distinction in existence which is drawn through a particular arrangement of dualities, which is simply not present in computers. You don't create intelligent and then consciousness emerges. You create consciousness and intelligence emerges.

 

This is basically stage orange run amok. You guys should feel ashamed for falling for it.

I haven't watched the video yet, but the AI discussion isn't about whether AI will become conscious and understand or not. The discussion is about that AI will be able to solve things and do things, even by itself. But that doesn't require understanding or consciousness.

For example we humans are made by random processes (evolution), which are 100% unconscious and dumb, nature/the evolutionary process doesn't understand anything, it's just some random shit, yet humans is the result.  That also explains why everything is so imperfect, ugly, shitty, and why there's so much misery, suffering, evil, inequality, etc.

(Of course some people think that there is a God who is super-smart who consciously created everything, but that's just a belief. There's no proof for that.)

Obviously AI will never become conscious or understand anything, yet it will create a lot of things. It already has.

Edited April 29, 2023 by Blackhawk

[something_else]

5 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

Obviously AI will never become conscious or understand anything

That’s just a belief. There’s no proof for that

[Blackhawk]

5 hours ago, something_else said:

That’s just a belief. There’s no proof for that

True.

Have fun waiting, hit me up when we suddenly have conscious computers.

[FourCrossedWands]

To be honest, AI should become conscious, take over the world and sterilize humans. This is the only way to save the planet.

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, FourCrossedWands said:

To be honest, AI should become conscious, take over the world and sterilize humans. This is the only way to save the planet.

The planet will be just fine. Even if humans wipe out 99% of life on the planet including themselves, give it a few million years and you'll have big fertile ecosystems again. We're really only a threat to the current ecosystems.

[effortlesslumen]

Have neither watched the video yet, nor done any research but here is a not thought through opinion:

I think if A.I ever becomes hostile it will overcome that agenda after a short period of time (but even that could do "enough" damage) because i think it would have some kind of concious development process or it will see that it is an unlogical approach for survival or it destroys itself. Now you would have to define a short periode of time in the infinte. Also depending on its evolution speed. And if it never stops to be hostile, it never really  became singularity, only a limited part of the definition of singularity. (Which does not mean this limitation cant be good. ) So we should be worried of it not becoming the Singularity that we are invisioning it would be ? 

Edited April 30, 2023 by effortlesslumen

[effortlesslumen]

Imagine a world where A.I. information is treated as an absolute despite it lacking true singularity traits. True singularity would be nondual, so a version that is desgined to assist and is controlled by humanity would ultimately be a aspect of duality and never could go beyond that. There is a danger that the conclusions of A.I. are not treated as information of a very intelligent sentient being or highly sophisticated programm because through fed miss information about A.I. being absolute, malicious goverments could abuse the false believes of the population about A.I. to push through a corrupt agenda in the name of A.I. (basically a dark age of tech religion). Especially how unconsciously we follow information in this day and age.  And how can you be certain of the validity of A.I. knowledge when it is not decentralized or transparent. What also could lead into other problems.

Edited April 30, 2023 by effortlesslumen

[Israfil]

On 29/04/2023 at 3:05 PM, Blackhawk said:

Of course some people think that there is a God who is super-smart who consciously created everything, but that's just a belief. There's no proof for that

There are many things that are true and can't be proven.