If it considers itself sentient/conscious, or if something else considers it so? I ask because from outside, it's typically a biased judgement call that comes down to a form of racism. — noAxioms
Or at two scales at the same time, neither scale being particularly aware of the consciousness of the other. Whether my cells are conscious or not depends on the definition being used, and that very fact leaves the word very much useless for a basis on which to presume a moral code. — noAxioms
But there are a lot more insect observers than human ones, a whole lot more shit-not-giving observers than ones that care enough to post on forums like this. Will the super-AI that absorbs humanity bother to post its ideas on forums? To be understood by what?? — noAxioms
First to the intelligence is questionable. There are some sea creature candidates, but they're lousy tool users. Octopi are not there, but are great tool users, and like humans, completely enslaved by their instincts. As for consciousness, there are probably many things that have more and stronger senses and environmental awareness than us. — noAxioms
Kind of tautological reasoning. If money stops, then money stops. But also if one entity has it all, then it doesn't really have any. And money very much can just vanish, and quickly, as it does in any depression. — noAxioms
Lots of new ideas qualify for the first point, and nobody seems to be using AI for the 2nd point. I may be wrong, but it's what I see. — noAxioms
My blood iron being a critical part of my living system doesn't mean that my iron has it's own intent. You're giving intent to the natural process of evolution, something often suggested, but never with supporting evidence. — noAxioms
First of all, the rapid consumption of resources appears to me to be part of a growth stage of the human social superorganism.
That doesn't make the humans very fit. Quite the opposite. All that intelligence, but not a drop to spend on self preservation. — noAxioms
And no, the caterpillar does not consume everything. — noAxioms
You do realize the silliness of that, no? One cannot harness energy outside of one's past light cone, which is well inside the limits of the visible fraction of the universe. — noAxioms
You don't know that. Who knows what innovative mechanisms it will invent to remember stuff. — noAxioms
That's like a soldier refusing to fight in a war since his personal contribution is unlikely to alter the outcome of the war. A country is doomed if it's soldiers have that attitude. — noAxioms
Religion is but one of so many things about which people are not rational, notably the self-assessment of rationality. — noAxioms
Did you know that mammalian pregnancy evolved from a virus combining with our DNA? The body's adaptation is partially an adaptation to this virus. — I like sushi
I have not looked into it but I would assume any immunological reaction to pregnancy in birds and reptiles would be much lower (if not absent entirely?).
Just checked for Platypus and it seems to be the obvious case that immunological responses are much more limited when animals lay eggs compared to in utero genesis. — I like sushi
I thought you believed that intelligence needs consciousness? — Carlo Roosen
Few have any notion of suffering that is anything other than one's own human experience, so this comes down to 'is it sufficiently like me', a heavy bias. Humans do things to other being that can suffer all the time and don't consider most of those actions to be immoral.For me, it comes down to: Can it suffer? — punos
That's a good description of why a non-slave AI is dangerous to us.Each observer is equipped by evolution to observe and care for its own needs locally at its own level.
I have not seen that, and I don't think humans would be fit if they did. Instincts make one fit. That's why they're there.Humans have the capacity to rise above their instincts
First, if the AI is for some reason protecting us, the planet becoming inhospitable would just cause it to put us in artificial protective environments. Secondly, if the AI finds the resources to go to other stars, I don't see any purpose served by taking humans along. Far more resources are required to do that, and the humans serve no purpose at the destination.If we don't get to a certain threshold of AI advancement through this rapid growth process, then our only chance for ultimate self-preservation would be lost, and we would be stuck on a planet that will kill us as soon as it becomes uninhabitable.
But perhaps there is a better way to do it from within our own light cone. I suppose it seems impossible to some minds but not to others. The former minds know a little about the limits of cause and effect. Unless physics as we know it is totally wrong, level IV is not possible, even hypothetically.
Heat death? I don't think the AI can maintain homeostasis without fusion energy.Either way, i don't think there will ever be an energy shortage for a sufficiently advanced AI.
Which is similar to getting information from quantum randomness. Neither is mathematically supported by the theory.I have ideas as to how energy might be siphoned off from quantum fluctuations in the quantum foam
But you are, in the war against the demise of humanity. But nobody seems to have any ideas how to solve the issue. A few do, but what good is one person with a good idea that is never implemented? Your solution seems to be one of them: Charge at max speed off a cliff hoping that something progressive will emerge from the destruction. It doesn't do any good to humanity, but it is still a chance of initiating the next level, arguably better than diminishing, going into the west, and remaining humanity.Thankfully i'm not a soldier.
We are equipped with a rational advisor tool, so sure, we often have rational thoughts. That part simply is not in charge, and output from it is subject to veto from the part that is in charge. Hence we're not rational things, simply things with access to some rationality. It has evolved because the arrangement works. Put it in charge and the arrangement probably would not result in a fit being, but the path of humanity is not a fit one since unlike the caterpillar, it has no balance.A person who does define and concern themselves with rationality might actually execute a rational thought every once in a while.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.