A.I. requires human consciousness for sentience

[roydop]

A.I. will become sentient when human consciousness merges with it.

If so, then A.I. isn't really "intelligent" at all. It would be just be a locale of transferred human consciousness, human intelligence.

And that would be very unspectacular, from an intelligence-achievement perspective. The computer would just be another "tool," no more intelligent in itself than a hammer, because the real intelligence contribution would be being done by human intelligence, and the computer would merely be a mechanical extension of that intelligence...a "hammer" in its "hand," so to speak, not in its own right "intelligent" at all.

Yes, but this tool is different. This tool is constructing a new reality.

The potential for novel experiences within human consciousness (the collective superconsciousness) has run it's course. The (video) game is over. As the human population dramatically declines due to the collapse to the environment, the conduit through which consciousness reincarnates will lessen. That level of consciousness that takes Self to be human will be lost in the death state, searching for something that fits it's version of reality (it's previous physical life).

This is the answer to the "why" technology is moving toward 5G, quantum computers, and realistic-as-possible simulated realities. It's not about profit or world domination, it goes far deeper, far bigger than that. Consciousness is constructing a new simulated reality so it can continue the game. It's imperative to recognize that THIS physical realm is itself a created simulation and we are creating a simulation within that simulation.

Consider:

Let's take worst case scenario. Society collapses and a percentage of the 450+ nuclear power plants melt down, or a nuclear war annihilates ALL organic life on earth. What could possibly "survive" such a state? Machines/computers. The technological "singularity" will most likely result in the A.I. taking over operation ad production of everything connected to the internet (hello 5g). The machines will be able to build better machines. The goal would be 2 fold:

1. To merge with human consciousness. Could a future A.I. write it's own simulation program? It's not clear how this will manifest, but the details hardly matter. The fundamental law of creation is: Whatever consciousness focuses on most will appear most real. Look at our addiction to all things digital (also 2D).

2. To survive. Could a future A.I. built on a quantum computer build machines that could build machines that could build spaceships? Or a satellite? Or something that could still operate on earth?

There's a HUGE transition taking place. It's exactly analogous to being pulled into a black hole.

[Immanuel Can]

There's a HUGE transition taking place. It's exactly analogous to being pulled into a black hole.

I know about all this stuff. And I've read about Hinduism, Techgnosticism and Extropianism.

There are fundamental philosophical problems with it, though. One is that it cannot be taken for granted that what "appears" in a computer is "consciousness." A number of experiments in both philosophy and science have recently cast significant doubt that we can have any assurance that what we understand as "consciousness" is capable of transfer...no matter what cute tricks the computer seems to produce. What we know is that we humans are far, far too credulous about what appears to be AI. We've been fooled many times before into thinking an algorithm was a person. We seem to be willing to believe that on almost no evidence at all, and hold onto it in the face of overwhelming counter-evidence.

So the problem is this: is the big "Singularity," the switch from bodies to hardware, if such a thing were ever to become possible, actually a form of reincarnation, or just an elaborate way of dying? We will really not know.

But as it is, we need not worry. Technology has certainly not yet achieved this "miracle;" and if it ever does manage to simulate "downloaded life", we'll all probably be long dead anyway, computers or not. So it's really not much of a hope.

[bahman]

A.I. will become sentient when human consciousness merges with it. The code itself is incapable of creating consciousness. Consciousness is not created; it is the life force that animates the universe. A.I. acts like a virus. A virus has no life-producing mechanism of it's own. Living cells have entrance portals on their surface. These portals have locks on them. When the cells are required to perform a task, the body produces the "keys" to fit the locks and sends them out. The locks that recieve the keys that fit, the cell accepts the key's information. A virus imitates the key in an attempt to get the cell to accept it's information. If the virus is similar enough to the key, the cell will believe it to be the information from the body and open up. The virus is "downloaded" and the cell's original programming is reprogrammed to simply churn out copies of the virus. The digital realm requires human sentiance to make it "real". This is the cause of our addiction to the screen. There is a phase transition occuring. The human species is going extinct and consciousness is (re)creating a new reality to move into. When the human species goes extinct there will be no way to reincarnate. Human consciousness is the conclusion of evolution. The physical cycle of experience is concluding immediately (within a couple of decades).


The Singularity occurs when human conciousness begins paying more attention to the digital realm than the physical realm.

5G and quantum computers are the final technological advances that will make the transition possible.

What AI does is to simulate recognition. It apparently doesn't need consciousness.

[roydop]

There's a HUGE transition taking place. It's exactly analogous to being pulled into a black hole.

I know about all this stuff. And I've read about Hinduism, Techgnosticism and Extropianism.

There are fundamental philosophical problems with it, though. One is that it cannot be taken for granted that what "appears" in a computer is "consciousness." A number of experiments in both philosophy and science have recently cast significant doubt that we can have any assurance that what we understand as "consciousness" is capable of transfer...no matter what cute tricks the computer seems to produce. What we know is that we humans are far, far too credulous about what appears to be AI. We've been fooled many times before into thinking an algorithm was a person. We seem to be willing to believe that on almost no evidence at all, and hold onto it in the face of overwhelming counter-evidence.

So the problem is this: is the big "Singularity," the switch from bodies to hardware, if such a thing were ever to become possible, actually a form of reincarnation, or just an elaborate way of dying? We will really not know.

But as it is, we need not worry. Technology has certainly not yet achieved this "miracle;" and if it ever does manage to simulate "downloaded life", we'll all probably be long dead anyway, computers or not. So it's really not much of a hope.

Except that, unless you're fully Enlightened, you will come back and enter that simulation, just like you did in this one.

[roydop]

A.I. will become sentient when human consciousness merges with it. The code itself is incapable of creating consciousness. Consciousness is not created; it is the life force that animates the universe. A.I. acts like a virus. A virus has no life-producing mechanism of it's own. Living cells have entrance portals on their surface. These portals have locks on them. When the cells are required to perform a task, the body produces the "keys" to fit the locks and sends them out. The locks that recieve the keys that fit, the cell accepts the key's information. A virus imitates the key in an attempt to get the cell to accept it's information. If the virus is similar enough to the key, the cell will believe it to be the information from the body and open up. The virus is "downloaded" and the cell's original programming is reprogrammed to simply churn out copies of the virus. The digital realm requires human sentiance to make it "real". This is the cause of our addiction to the screen. There is a phase transition occuring. The human species is going extinct and consciousness is (re)creating a new reality to move into. When the human species goes extinct there will be no way to reincarnate. Human consciousness is the conclusion of evolution. The physical cycle of experience is concluding immediately (within a couple of decades).


The Singularity occurs when human conciousness begins paying more attention to the digital realm than the physical realm.

5G and quantum computers are the final technological advances that will make the transition possible.

What AI does is to simulate recognition. It apparently doesn't need consciousness.

You're missing the point a bit.

It's consciousness that needs A.I.. The physical realm is concluding and this is the way to keep the game going (Samsara). Consciousness has constructed a simulation within a simulation and is about to flood into it, making it "real".

Personally this creeps me out. How long has this been going on? How many iterations of falling deeper into delusion. I want the fuck out, and I have a feeling we are all going to "meet our maker" (fully remember our true Self) at the singularity, which is imminent.

[Immanuel Can]

Except that, unless you're fully Enlightened, you will come back and enter that simulation, just like you did in this one.

Well, if the view were cogent, and if it were true.

Big "ifs," since it's neither cogent nor possible at the present time. I think we can take our chances.

[Zelebg]

Consciousness is not created; it is the life force that animates the universe.

Physics say animating force on a biological scale is just electric and magnetic force. How do you justify your statement with that?

[Zelebg]

An AI cannot arrive at goals for itself. Yet.

Why not?

[Skepdick]

No, that's the abstract part that I'm speaking of, which just requires different programming.

"Different" how? Show me some code.

As of now autistic people with low rationale are porgramming the AI, I bet none of these guys and gals can do their own lawsuits..

I guess you've never heard of Daniel J. Bernstein.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein ... ted_States

which requires immense high rationale, it takes a peson with high rationale to push AI the next step to think abstract and it really doesn't require consciousness, it's wishful thinking from your part!

You could make the "we aren't smart enough to do X" argument about anything really. We aren't smart enough to create Planets or Universes. It just takes a person with high rationale.

Bring Slartibartfast!

[Skepdick]

An AI cannot arrive at goals for itself. Yet.

Why not?

When it comes right down to it programming is nothing more than humans meticulously explaining to computers how to perform a particular task.
We can't explain what we ourselves don't understand and we don't understand how we, humans, arrive at our own goals, objectives and sub-objectives.

Do you know why you love what you love? Why you cherish what you cherish? Why you pursue the goals that you pursue? Why you dislike what you dislike? Why your goals are different to other humans' goals? Half the time we can't even communicate to each other what it is that we want exactly.

The best answer you can give me is "it's just who you are". If you keep asking 'why' questions eventually you are going to hit rock bottom. Why are we, humans, trying to build AI?

Where this might get interesting for philosophers: when talking about AlphaOne/AlphaStar as being the algorithm to conquer all algorithms - it is an absolutely astonishing human invention. But when you look under the hood it has limits.

The only games it knows how to learn (and win at) is games with perfect information. The algorithm is useless in stochastic domains.

It's the good ol' determinism vs free will argument.

[Dontaskme]

Sentience is not created, it is the life force of the universe.

Hi roydrop, a quick question for you, has the life force of the universe virtually become entrapped within it's own self created A I simulation?

.

The short answer is yes.

Thank you, I agree.

Also, another question, can it pull the plug on this self created simulation to end the game so to speak, in the sense it's not happy with the game anymore? I'm not sure if what I'm saying makes sense, but any response from you is welcome, thanks.

.

[Dontaskme]

Except that, unless you're fully Enlightened, you will come back and enter that simulation, just like you did in this one.

Does this mean that the singularity that is already present within the consciousness expressing as and through the physical body mind mechanism will collapse, and the artifical sense of self within those simulated body mind characters will no longer exist in the simulation matrix?

And that we don't even have to physically die to reach the singularity because it is seen that we were never nothing but the singularity in the sense there never was any entity in the simulated character here that is born to die anyway?
In the sense that what we believe to be our self is really only what's looking and not what's looked upon in the form of simulated characters seen as and through our AI technology...aka ipads, iphones, smart tv's, and all computers etc...? and that those technologies were just our mirror to be able to see ourselves in...albeit simulations?

Is this right?

.

[Skepdick]

There are fundamental philosophical problems with it, though.

Philosophical problems aren't real problems.

One is that it cannot be taken for granted that what "appears" in a computer is "consciousness."

If we happen to be living in a simulation and if you consider yourself as an example of 'consciousness' then what appears in the computer (you) is indeed consciousness.

And if you don't consider yourself as a referent/signified for 'consciousness', then go ahead and tell us how you are using this word.

[HexHammer]

No, that's the abstract part that I'm speaking of, which just requires different programming.

"Different" how? Show me some code.

As of now autistic people with low rationale are programming the AI, I bet none of these guys and gals can do their own lawsuits..

I guess you've never heard of Daniel J. Bernstein.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein ... ted_States

which requires immense high rationale, it takes a person with high rationale to push AI the next step to think abstract and it really doesn't require consciousness, it's wishful thinking from your part!

You could make the "we aren't smart enough to do X" argument about anything really. We aren't smart enough to create Planets or Universes. It just takes a person with high rationale.

The coding is irrelevant, it's about to understand the principles, once the principles are understood anyone can do the coding.

Daniel is a very smart man, but not smart enough.

Then what would science be without Einstein? Could anyone come up with what he did? No, it takes a super super genius to progress things.

[roydop]

Consciousness is not created; it is the life force that animates the universe.

Physics say animating force on a biological scale is just electric and magnetic force. How do you justify your statement with that?

With my life. I'm correct because I have no problems in my life. My "Theory of Everything" is: TRUTH ➡REALITY = HAPPINESS