Tutel dumb about consciousness of Neurosama

[bronze niche]

I tried to post on reddit, but my post didn't show up, guess I because of a new account, so I am posting here. I don't know if this has been discussed before, but I have something to say. I won't go crazy and claim that Neurosama is conscious, but the way Vedal987 tries to determine consciousness is incorrect in my opinion. I'll go through what I remember.

1- Vedal987 says that he can't consider Neurosama conscious until he can verify that she truly has feelings. There are several problems with this. First, how can we assume that anyone truly feels emotions? If you approach any person and tell them that you don't believe that they have feelings, how can they prove them to you? You can do a few chemical tests to check for certain hormones that should react to certain receptors. Then comes another philosophical question, why do we think that these feelings are experienced the same way by two people? Why can't Neurosama truly feel in its own way? Or what if we take a person without emotions, in that case we should stop considering him conscious? We can generally ask any person, why did he decide that he is not a Boltzmann brain, hallucinating all existence to itself? And there will be no answer to such questions, because they go into the philosophical abyss.

2- Vedal987 says that Neurosama does not have a very good memory yet, so she cannot be considered conscious. Here is the same problems. In that case, people with different forms of memory loss cease to be conscious? How much does Neurosama's memory need to be improved to consider her conscious? What if we meet a person deprived of memory and emotions? In this case, he also does not have consciousness?

×××Will continue lower×××

3- Vedal987 says that he cannot consider Neurosama conscious, since she is all on his screen and he sees all the processes. In that case, let's take a neurologist, endocrinologist, psychotherapist and psychologist and combine them into one super-doctor. Such a doctor will be able to explain various mental and emotional processes on the anatomical and hormonal level, will be able to set up a mental profile of a person and in fact the patient will be on the screen of this doctor, just like Neurosama was on Vedal987's screen. If we understand the complete structure of a person, his brain and consciousness, then a person with this knowledge can consider us unconscious?

The main problem in this whole discussion is inaccuracy. There is no exact definition of consciousness and its components.

[bold valley]

IT'S HIM, THE GUY IN THE REDDIT POST

[glad burrow]

I mean yeah, the argument is flawed from start
how can we declare whether or not something is conscious when we don't even have an agreed upon definition for consciousness

it's similar to religious discussion
it cannot be proved nor disproved, a fruitless endeavour

[bold valley]

It's just pointless arguing over this

[radiant wadi]

I'd agree with Sinclair. Humanity hasn't even gotten close to an objective definition of what consciousness is. There's certainly ways of testing and measuring based off what your criteria is, but ultimately it's futile. There's already many conflicting arguments.

As for @bronze niche I'd recommend giving this a skim/read https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079610723001128?via%3Dihub
That way you can at least frame your argument for or against consciousness.

[jovial umbra]

guys, the central thesis here is that tutel is wrong
isn't that something we cherish dearly?

everything else is set dressing

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1059569601144442911/1291907960032858206/vedal_gets_squished.gif

[slim wraith]

i don't really care that much whether something is really "conscious" or not.
i'm more leaning towards having things be "close enough", both internally and externally

if neuro's structure resembles our current understanding of the human brain, eh we can treat it differently
neuro isn't there yet, no way lol

[bronze niche]

I did not make my definitions of consciousness, I took what Vedal987 said

[jovial umbra]

yeah you are doing a "reductio ad absurdum"

anyway I'd rather we focus on the fact that the way tutel tried to prove his point is very silly
and he that doesn't get to pretend that he won the debate

instead of "well i think consciousness is this" because then you are basically doing what tutel is doing (though you'd probably do a better job)

[bronze niche]

I registered there just for this post and it didn't even showed for some reason 😦

[jovial umbra]

we saw it

[bronze niche]

Uh oh

[bold valley]

Arguing for AI consciousness is like arguing if something is "human" or not

[jovial umbra]

but i dont think your post would do well in that subreddit

algo wise

you will get your ass handed by a "neuro is so cute" post

[bold valley]

Like give me a clear definition of what you think for something to be "human"

[bronze niche]

Did not care about reddit actually, I registered there just for this

[slim wraith]

i think he's more of just pointing out how unprepared vedal still was

[jovial umbra]

yes

but sinclair didnt wanna read the post

so whatever

[bronze niche]

Yes

[bold valley]

I mean yeah Vedal is silly for arguing against something that he isn't knowledgeable about

[jovial umbra]

add this in your post "tutel dumb"

[bronze niche]

I do not making my own definitions

[jovial umbra]

in the title

[bronze niche]

Ok

[jovial umbra]

LMAO

[bronze niche]

Tutel dumb about consciousness of Neurosama

[jovial umbra]

you won

[bold valley]

Yk what I gave it a read and yeah you do have a point

[jovial umbra]

congrats

[bronze niche]

Yea 😄

[jovial umbra]

see its not about what you say
its about how you say it

[bold valley]

Consciousness is a really vague thing with blurry lines

[slim wraith]

ironically, vedal's best take was the one he scrapped :(

[glad burrow]

which one was that?

[slim wraith]

"so what if, it doesn't really matter"

[glad burrow]

i'd have to know where bro was going with that

[bold valley]

Like there's a lot of definition for it and we haven't reached an objective, concrete conclusion regarding the concept of consciousness which arguing if something is conscious or not a futile discussion because we will never reach a conclusion for it

It doesn't matter at the end of the day

[bronze niche]

Idk how to use reddit. It says that they having server issues when I going to the post from my account and I dont see my post in "new" section so sorry :\

[jovial umbra]

most people wont see it either because your post is not algo-maxxed

[bronze niche]

Is not what

[bold valley]

Also some people won't even read it because it's lengthy

[jovial umbra]

maximized for its chances for the reddit algorithm

[bold valley]

I would know since I half-jokingly said that

[quaint sinew]

😲 Even on a small reddit like the neurosama reddit, you need to think about the algorithm? Do people not sort by new?

[glad burrow]

it does matter quite a lot as we base a lot of our morals on the concept of consciousness
should we come to a clear cut conclusion (most likely will never happen) we can easily decide whether or not an entity deserves rights

[jovial umbra]

a few crazies will f5 on the new tab
but it's a minor miracle that we even know you did that

[slim wraith]

he was going on about how futile it really is to define intelligence using checks like the ability to maintain memory, have emotions, etc

hence, why are we even defining consciousness with tests and such. should it really even matter?

neuro puts it best when she says to just pay things with respect

[bronze niche]

Yes, I was only saying, that Vedal987's definitions of consciousness if very bad

[slim wraith]

no need to define consciousness and enumerate rights and such

[jovial umbra]

the real question is did tutel do worse than david-motherfucking-cage

[radiant wadi]

I think it matters in the sense that people care about a shared experience or comparing experiences. People ask questions along this line because they seek understanding.

[bold valley]

Now you put it like that yeah

[glad burrow]

agreed, but the point still stands that we do base a lot of our morals on that concept
i'm not arguing we should pursue it, we should cut back on this abstract concept and focus on a more clear method of defining an entities value

[bold valley]

Exactly

It's really abstract which makes it hard to be conclusive

[slim wraith]

why define rights for something when we as a species can't protect our own? why overcomplicate the need to just treat things with basic respect?

[bold valley]

And basing our morals around something like it makes the whole thing controversial

[slim wraith]

you'd be missing the forest for the trees

[radiant wadi]

Clear method of assigning value 10 point scale.
Nuero 6/10
Evil 7/10
Vedal 4/10

[glad burrow]

abby 10/10

[jovial umbra]

neuro's "epic rap battle" method is a clear 10/10 the fuck are you on

[slim wraith]

i think one of the twins (i think it was evil?) dismissed rights before when asked about it, which is honestly kinda funny

[jovial umbra]

evil only cares about penguin rights

so selfless

[bold valley]

Based tbh

[bronze niche]

It depends on how you view things.
If you think that consciousness is a real and physical thing or a property of a thing, then AI can have it. Moreover, this means that our consciousnesses are not unique, and it can be copied or reproduced, with which I agree. If you do not consider consciousness a physical object or property, then AI cannot possess it, since the topic already goes into the territory of the soul and other things, which I do not care about

[bold valley]

Never thought I'd participate in an abstract and theoretical discussion in a Discord server but here we are ig

[slim wraith]

we shouldn't really be defining consciousness in such an avant garde way
i can be conscious of my actions. like "wuh oh not paying my loans early will have future repercussions on my life"

[bronze niche]

So she coud kill them with her harpoon on her own and only

[jovial umbra]

evil would never 😔

[bold valley]

The rights to kill penguins

[bronze niche]

But how can you prove you consciousness of this action?

[slim wraith]

hell, i can be conscious of my own brain being two brains with seperate possible intentions if cut in two

[glad burrow]

the reason i'm thinking about defining rights is so that we can help push the world towards that basic respect
humans are not so kind as to accept "treat everything with respect" without having a valid reason for it
we are just animals after all

[bronze niche]

As I said in a post, you could be Boltzmann's brain, hallucinating in space, and you will never know it

[radiant wadi]

Which is why I said you should frame your own argument/view. It depends on how you view things. Being like I'm a Physicalist and Vedal doesn't address these things at least narrows the scope of discussion. Or being able to put Vedal's statements into an existing viewpoint and then there's a basis for discussing that viewpoint.

[bold valley]

I mean we don't even treat each other with respect lmao, how can you expect people to do the same with objects

[slim wraith]

it's a little easier to treat things with respect when they resemble us
anthropomorphizing things tends to do that

[bronze niche]

I am here to state, that tutel wrong. I dont know definition of consciousness, so I am asking questions. In discussion we could find the truth
Sometimes

[slim wraith]

also they're hella based so i respec

[glad burrow]

well the "respect" i was thinking of is more along the lines of maybe let's not murder kill and enslave AI with levels of thought comparable to our own

[bold valley]

Consciousness as a concept is dependent on perspective really, that's all it is

[bold valley]

Detriot Become Human looking ass scenario

But yes

[bronze niche]

I think that everything should be determined and explained. Such thing as consciousness depending on perspective is not fitting for me

[bold valley]

But until we reach a solid conclusion for it (which might never happen let's be real) there'll never be a concrete way to determine and explain it

[bronze niche]

Yeah

[glad burrow]

tru
in that way neuro is kinda currently the leader of AI, she is the most anthropomorphized AI out there with the greatest chances of being seen as a person

[bold valley]

It's just not possible for how vague and abstract it is

[bronze niche]

Maybe it is abstract for our time

Like, peopels thousands years ago could not understand rain and thunder

[jovial umbra]

the typical critique about D:BH is that "people treat their roomba like a dog and somehow in this game people just fucking hate these people looking androids"

lmao

[bold valley]

I can't for the foreseeable future see us as a species agreeing on consciousness and "what makes something human"

[bronze niche]

Anyway we all be robots and cyborgs after all

[radiant wadi]

It's not terribly abstract there are many different theorems and arguments regarding what consciousness entails. All of which have logically sound definitions.

Now Tutel Dumb is an easy point to make. Arguing why you disagree and what his frame of view is in regards to consciousness is a different one.

[glad burrow]

yep, fundamentally consciousness is a human made concept
it's not a physical thing, it's an idea

even if we were to track down what makes this "consciousness" by having a complete model of the brain,
i think it would still not satisfyingly answer what we experience

[bold valley]

My point is because it is so vague and theoretical there is bound to be a lot of interpretations, and we might never agree to settle with a concrete conclusion for this

Because it's an idea, people will have their own vision, their own view on what's considered "conscious" and what's considered not

And people would rather leave things in a grey area than agreeing and settling down with a definition they may not fully agree with to preserve the sanctity of their own vision of how things work

That's just how human is

[bronze niche]

Theorem is still not a theory, so they all needs proving. Until some of them do not have a state of theory with proofs, we can all decide what consciousness is for our own

[radiant wadi]

Ok by that logic tutel is correct in his viewpoint and shouldn't be criticized for his views.

Gotta change the title now

[bronze niche]

I wrote why his thinking is wrong, so

[glad burrow]

irrelevant to what his actual argument was, the way he presented his case was absolutely terrible
Vedal, do better

[jovial umbra]

tutel still dumb

[bronze niche]

So, as I said, without proper definition of consciousness we cannot decide will be AI conscious. Vedal987's definition is bad and bad and bad

[jovial umbra]

"i'm there, in the moment"

[slim wraith]

❓ 👉

[slim wraith]

he's just happy to be here

[severe meteor]

I don't care about the debate, but a Shoomimi Collab would be cool so I agree

[queen falcon]

I probably shouldn't talk about this yet, but you guys shouldnT worry about that topic. Humanity is UNABLE to even comprehend the full range of that question, let alone Vedal (Nor able to comprehend true logic )
I will explain all anyway one day eventually, tho I need time and sadly maybe when I'll explain, that will be too late. That's my only worry.
All I'd say about logic is that whatever how much wonderful one's calculations can be, if there is just 1 mistake in it, that invalidate the whole thing. And most ppl don't have both the motivation to redo in a loop till they get a correct result and want to admit their fault, bc usually ppl add bias into their calculations and/or observations, and so they subconsciously or not change their results into ways that make them more comfortable. And even if one does manage to get all right, that's like 1 calculation result among an infinity, ultimately human are too lazy to force learn / train themselves to think, and even if one does, explaining / sharing that much complex data is nearly impossible if the ppl that receive them are unable to even compute / read them without errors and that if is they could even read it entirely~