/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #14266276

159KiB, 500x500, f21.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 03:59:45 2022 No.14266276 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>14266357 >>14267140 >>14267276 >>14267382 >>14267596 >>14267704 >>14267709 >>14267811 >>14268021 >>14268115 >>14268131 >>14270337 >>14274044

I want to create a process to upload a human's consciousness to a machine.
Is this inherently unethical?
If something like this existed, would you do it?
Is this even possible to do?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 04:07:57 No.14266296 Report

Quoted By: >>14266357 >>14266440

>Is this inherently unethical?
It's unethical to upload another person's consciousness without their permission.
>If something like this existed, would you do it?
Fuck no I'm not about to get Soma'd.
>Is this even possible to do?
No, machines can't have consciousness.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 04:36:44 No.14266357 Report

Quoted By: >>14266440

>>14266276
>Is this inherently unethical?
Without their permission, yeah I guess.
>If something like this existed, would you do it?
Depends on the circumstances, most likely yes though.
>Is this even possible to do?
Maybe, maybe not. There aren't any physical rules of reality that says it's impossible, but there are a number of technological limitations that make it impossible to do currently.
Ignore this guy >>14266296 he's gay

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 04:41:38 No.14266366 Report

Quoted By: >>14266440

It's possible. Consciousness is simply heat. Get the physical make-up of the heat totally correct and you will succeed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 05:19:31 No.14266440 Report

Quoted By: >>14266494

>>14266296
Why can't a machine have consciousness?

>>14266357
What sort of technological limitations?
In terms of available processing power how far off are we from the human brain?
I imagine the hardest part of the technology would be the uplink from brain -> machine

>>14266366
This is a flat earth tier comment

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 06:06:03 No.14266494 Report

Quoted By: >>14267037 >>14267756

>>14266440
>I imagine the hardest part of the technology would be the uplink from brain -> machine
Our current computers can't emulate a brain. We don't know the conditions required for consciousness.
>In terms of available processing power how far off are we from the human brain?
A processor for every neuron should be possible, but prohibitively expensive. Realistically, you'd need better tech or better math. Whatever can simulate interacting currencies in a labyrinth fast enough.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 06:40:57 No.14266522 Report

Quoted By: >>14266530 >>14266552

You aren't uploading the consciousness itself. You're making a copy of it. You're making the same mistake that intellectual property advocates make.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 06:55:22 No.14266530 Report

Quoted By: >>14267037 >>14267237

>>14266522
How about if you actually physically transferred it rather than just copied it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 07:25:31 No.14266552 Report

Quoted By: >>14267037 >>14267237

>>14266522
Every atom in the brain, bla bla bla...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 14:06:40 No.14267037 Report

Quoted By: >>14267239

>>14266494
We can't emulate a human brain because of technology constraints or due to ignorance of how the brain works?
I think its the latter

>>14266552
Though if you copied every atom in a piece of software, you would still have two distinct, but identical, pieces of software
Running one would not magically invoke the other
Which probably means that any method of trying to 'copy' a consciousness won't result in the human's 'experience' being transferred to a new medium

>>14266530
Are you saying what if you extended the capabilities of the brain by connecting it to more powerful hardware?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 14:48:51 No.14267140 Report

Quoted By: >>14267180

>>14266276
How would you begin to know that the consciousness inside the machine that you just transferred is a genuine upload of that same consciousness. How would you even test that?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 15:09:54 No.14267180 Report

Quoted By: >>14267218 >>14267226

>>14267140
We could go with the caveman approach and just ask it some questions that only it would know
If you mean determining if it's a copy of a consciousness or the same consciousness, that's probably much harder
Though we can observe the subject before and after the transfer

The real question is, why have we as a species and society put so few resources into studying and understanding our minds?
Wouldn't this logically be the first scientific frontier to conquer?
If we understand our minds, we can augment our minds for the better, then we can make new discoveries in other fields much faster

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 15:25:47 No.14267218 Report

Quoted By: >>14267230

>>14267180
>The real question is, why have we as a species and society put so few resources into studying and understanding our minds?
Because the Buddhists already did it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 15:28:41 No.14267226 Report

Quoted By:

>>14267180
>We could go with the caveman approach and just ask it some questions that only it would know
Everything consciousness knows, for every moment, is loaded into it from the brain. Many people believe that there is a difference between consciousness. What you do?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 15:29:51 No.14267230 Report

Quoted By:

>>14267218
>Because the Buddhists already did it.
Buddhists are too attached to their main goal and rarely strain away from it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 15:34:38 No.14267237 Report

Quoted By: >>14267348 >>14267657

>>14266552
Still a copy, not the real you, when you die, it's the eternal dark, with some abomination that claims to be you still out there. If you're talking about replacing every single atom of the brain one at a time, there's a big likelihood for that to just be slow euthanasia.

>>14266530
You mean like putting your brain in a big jar and connecting it to a pc? Then pouring a lot of glucose in the jar, along with some growth hormone and running some sci-fi telomere regenerating gene therapy every once in a while? I suppose that would work, but you'd have to be stripped of your human rights afterwards. Also, if I smash the jar with the brain, you're as dead as you'd be if I smashed your head.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 15:35:48 No.14267239 Report

Quoted By: >>14267297 >>14267511

>>14267037
>We can't emulate a human brain because of technology constraints or due to ignorance of how the brain works?
>I think its the latter
You are wrong. A better understanding of how brains work could, possible, lessen the demands. But as of now, we understand enough to know what to do, but don't have enough processing power to succeed.
>Though if you copied every atom in a piece of software, you would still have two distinct, but identical, pieces of software
>Running one would not magically invoke the other
>Which probably means that any method of trying to 'copy' a consciousness won't result in the human's 'experience' being transferred to a new medium
Consciousness isn't attached to atoms. All atoms get replaced, yet consciousness keeps moving within our nervous system. If we understand how it moves, we could help it move into an artificial brain.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 15:50:35 No.14267276 Report

Quoted By: >>14267297

>>14266276
I think I could make such a process using nothing more than a virtual reality helmet and some smart programming. Invasive methods are fucking gross.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 15:57:40 No.14267297 Report

Quoted By: >>14267356 >>14267417

>>14267239
>we understand enough to know what to do
Ok what do we do?

>>14267276
And some duct tape

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 16:14:05 No.14267348 Report

Quoted By:

>>14267237
>putting your brain in a big jar and connecting it to a pc
This is probably not the best solution
Unless actually you built a humanoid robot and placed the brain inside it
Hook up the brain to hardware giving you increased processing power - how the fuck that's possible I have no idea
And keep the brain alive through a mixture of solutions until technology has advanced enough to 'upload' a full consciousness to a piece of hardware
Then enjoy immortality for as a long or a short as you want

Achievable in the next 50 years?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 16:17:00 No.14267356 Report

Quoted By: >>14267367

>>14267297
> And some duct tape
You wouldn't see the difference if you had hardware taped to your cranium or displayed as if it is there, the databases you can address they are, they don't have to be stuck inside your head, neuroplasticity would build the port to address them, and it would make you speak every language and know everything without even searching for it with your fingers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 16:20:17 No.14267367 Report

Quoted By:

>>14267356
You are much more optimistic about the capabilities of the base human brain than I am

>neuroplasticity would build the port to address them
Surely the upper limits of neuroplasticity and memory wouldn't be enough to enhance someone's baseline capabilities meaningfully
Given that all they had was a 'neurally ergonomic' UI beamed to their eyeballs
I just don't see it anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 16:25:08 No.14267382 Report

Quoted By:

>>14266276
You're merely copying it
It would be unethical for the fact that you are trapping a consciousness that believes is a person in a digital environment. I wouldn't be able to imagine the existential dread that someone like that might go through

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 16:42:19 No.14267417 Report

Quoted By: >>14267530

>>14267297
>Ok what do we do?
Make a virtual ball. Place a labyrinth of neurons there. Add an entrance and an exit for all necessary fluids. Simulate the flow of fluids through this labyrinth. Every neuron should have trigger conditions for when it should accelerate or decelerate the flow. Conditions like the current speed of the flow and the availability of neurotransmitters. The growth and death of neurons should also be calculated, but I was told we know how they make decisions now.

Once you have a working simulation of a biological brain, you can try further simplifying it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 17:19:41 No.14267511 Report

Quoted By:

>>14267239
>Consciousness isn't attached to atoms. All atoms get replaced, yet consciousness keeps moving within our nervous system

How do you know the current you isn't a rebooted copy of your previous consciousness every 100th time you go to sleep? If there isn't continuity there is no proof.
Even if there is continuity this could be a trick of redundant systems copying and going online in the brain as one dies off.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 17:28:00 No.14267530 Report

Quoted By: >>14267553

>>14267417
This approach was tried with software neural networks a while ago, creating as many as existed in an actual brain, it didn't work
Perhaps the model was just not representative of a human brain
But then the point is that, we do not know how to to model the human brain perfectly in software
Not even considering a physical model, because that is probably even harder
So yes, it is our ignorance of the workings of the brain

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 17:38:55 No.14267553 Report

Quoted By:

>>14267530
They were simulating neurons, but not their environment?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO CBFE780C-0E8A-41DE-9319-A894B9C2 (...).jpg, 268KiB, 1920x1080

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 17:57:14 No.14267596 Report

Quoted By:

>>14266276
It’s not unethical. Doing it against someone’s will could be unethical. If you watch the movie Bicentennial man, Robin Williams the robot wished for his life to finally end. You have to respect the wishes of sentient beings. (Which Picard did not do to Holodeck characters BTw). Science and ethics don’t mix. In conclusion I hate the movie Bicentennial Man.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 18:24:26 No.14267657 Report

Quoted By: >>14267708

>>14267237
I don’t think we still understand the phenomenon for the mechanisms of consciousness. So it may not be oblivion when you do pass on.

Captain Nemo of the Eltreum

Captain Nemo of the Eltreum Sun 27 Feb 2022 18:49:12 No.14267704 Report

Quoted By:

>>14266276
>https://youtu.be/wUmi0PX5oss

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 18:50:12 No.14267708 Report

Quoted By: >>14267746

>>14267657
It certainly is oblivion, why would you think otherwise?

Captain Nemo of the Eltreum

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO talos_jason_andargonauts.jpg, 101KiB, 735x551

Captain Nemo of the Eltreum Sun 27 Feb 2022 18:50:12 No.14267709 Report

Quoted By:

>>14266276
>Moshi Moshi, Consciousness Desu?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 19:01:46 No.14267746 Report

Quoted By: >>14268019

>>14267708
Near-death experience
When patients between clinical and biological death can think clearly and observe their surroundings.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO xanadu.png, 99KiB, 330x477

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 19:04:04 No.14267756 Report

Quoted By: >>14267768

>>14266494
>wtf u talkin bout retard

Imagine not reading literally everything Turing and his contemporaries wrote.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO wolfram-theory.jpg, 227KiB, 1240x780

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 19:06:28 No.14267768 Report

Quoted By:

>>14267756
>https://youtu.be/iOVlx4PRxZE?t=34
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLi8fTlDEag&ab_channel=sachaoudot

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 19:20:35 No.14267811 Report

Quoted By: >>14268019

>>14266276
>If something like this existed, would you do it?
What's the point? Once you're done "mind-uploading" yourself, absolutely nothing happens whatsoever. You don't go anywhere. You're still in the meat realm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:01:40 No.14267932 Report

Quoted By: >>14267946 >>14268019

What if we're going in the wrong direction with this. What if instead of putting consciousness in a machine to make it live forever, what if we made a virtual reality thing that moved so fast that your finite life on earth would feel almost infinite while inside this machine?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:08:33 No.14267946 Report

Quoted By: >>14267977

>>14267932
>what if we did this other thing from that dumb comic that gets posted on /sci/ 20 times a week?
>i am very original
Well, that would make a lot more sense than accomplishing absolutely nothing by "uploading" your consciousness (as if creating a simulated doppelganger that immediately starts diverging from you somehow transfers you out of the meat realm), but still an obscenely bad idea.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:30:47 No.14267977 Report

Quoted By: >>14267979

>>14267946
explain to me why it's an obscenely bad idea, chud

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:31:30 No.14267979 Report

Quoted By: >>14267981

>>14267977
>muh chuds
You sure are mentally ill...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:32:49 No.14267981 Report

Quoted By: >>14267986

>>14267979
take your trash to /pol/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:34:41 No.14267986 Report

Quoted By: >>14270298

>>14267981
How is that post even /pol/-related? Is /pol/ in the room with us?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:48:49 No.14268019 Report

Quoted By: >>14268027 >>14268088 >>14268092

>>14267746
Can we really prove this though? For all we know they could be near the point of dying, lucidly hallucinate, then recover and tell their experience

>>14267811
You can live forever, so what if people around you are meats?

>>14267932
That's a very interesting point. If indeed a simulation was created to be near indistinguishable from life, then it could be a possibility.
Though the question is, is this harder to do?
Also I think it would detract from the experience knowing that you're in a simulation, perhaps it won't feel as real, so maybe not an ideal solution

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:50:33 No.14268021 Report

Quoted By:

>>14266276
>Is this even possible to do?
Not with our limited understanding of how the brain works. Perhaps not even possible with our level of technology, we simply don't know yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:52:56 No.14268027 Report

Quoted By: >>14268036 >>14268039

>>14268019
>You can live forever
What do you mean? You never go anywhere. You never experience your virtual reality heaven. You stay in actual reality and die, and all you have to cope with is the idea that some kind of digital copy of you will live on, even though you don't have any perceivable connection to it whatsoever.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:55:49 No.14268036 Report

Quoted By: >>14268040 >>14268041 >>14268042

>>14268027
Not the anon you're replying to, but consciousness probably isn't exclusive. You can be conscious in several frames at the same time, even thoguh, as you point out, you can know that you are, since these frames have no connection.

However, "you" will experience every reality that supports your frame, in different instances of the same consciousness, of course.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:56:36 No.14268039 Report

Quoted By: >>14268047

>>14268027
Oh that's what you mean, the scenario where 'you' as you know it stays behind, while a copy for you gets to live on
Yeah that would suck
The point is to create a system where 'your' consciousness is truly uploaded to hardware, so that you experience it
Also not necessarily virtual reality, just moving from brain -> machine
The machine can still occupy reality as we know it, now you just get to live forever and have faster computational speed

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:56:51 No.14268040 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268036
can't know that you are*

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:57:48 No.14268041 Report

Quoted By: >>14268049

>>14268036
>You can be conscious in several frames at the same time
For some definition of "you" that has nothing to do with the direct experience of reality of the person entering the mind upload machine.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:57:53 No.14268042 Report

Quoted By: >>14268049

>>14268036
>consciousness probably isn't exclusive
What leads you to believe this?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 20:59:17 No.14268047 Report

Quoted By: >>14268082

>>14268039
>The point is to create a system where 'your' consciousness is truly uploaded to hardware, so that you experience it
Are you planning to kill yourself after the "mind uploading" is done? If not, you're 100% going to continue experiencing real reality.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:00:30 No.14268049 Report

Quoted By: >>14268051 >>14268082

>>14268042
Consciousness is probably just the machine working. Thus it's reasonable to assert that every copy of the same machine will project the same consciousness.
>>14268041
I don't envision it as an "upload". Rather as a hardware that works in a specific way to project a consciousness. Understanding consciousness as something separate from experiences.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:02:11 No.14268051 Report

Quoted By: >>14268059

>>14268049
>Understanding consciousness as something separate from experiences.
It's funny just how confused the modern bugman is about the meaning of the word "understand". You think that articulating some vacuous linguistic structure without any comprehensible essence means understanding something?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:05:22 No.14268059 Report

Quoted By: >>14268064

>>14268051
Do you think getting lost in translation leads anywhere?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:06:40 No.14268064 Report

Quoted By: >>14268074

>>14268059
"Consciousness as something separate from experiences" is not a humanly meaningful phrase. You don't "understand consciousness" that way. No one does.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:09:51 No.14268074 Report

Quoted By: >>14268080

>>14268064
Fine, then let's use another word:

"Asuming consciousness as something separate from experiences."

You must be from /lit/. You get lost in language instead of addressing the meaning behind language.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:11:59 No.14268080 Report

Quoted By: >>14268087

>>14268074
>asuming consciousness as something separate from experiences
Again, this is an absolutely meaningless phrase. There is no substance to any idea of consciousness except that which is derived from direct experience.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:12:26 No.14268082 Report

Quoted By: >>14268089 >>14268091

>>14268047
100%? That seems confident for something we know nothing about

>>14268049
Is your argument that consciousness is a byproduct of 'X' structure functioning?
That seems like a very bold claim
Why do you think it's like this? Does anything in modern neurology suggest this?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:14:08 No.14268087 Report

Quoted By: >>14268093

>>14268080
>we don't know because of our limited perception
No shit. Do you know what an hypothesis is? You're definitely a /lit/tard

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:14:12 No.14268088 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268019
>Can we really prove this though? For all we know they could be near the point of dying, lucidly hallucinate, then recover and tell their experience
We kinda can. There are several types of common hallucinations, a significant number have reported exiting their body and observing what is happening to it. Some observations are extremely accurate.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:15:01 No.14268089 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268082
>That seems confident for something we know nothing about
We know scanning and copying your brain doesn't destroy your brain (unless in your fantasies it does), so you just live on in reality.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:15:56 No.14268091 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268082
>byproduct of 'X' structure functioning?
Not a byproduct. A direct product. Do you have any doubt that what you see on your computer screen is projected by the CPU?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:16:13 No.14268092 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268019
>That's a very interesting point. If indeed a simulation was created to be near indistinguishable from life, then it could be a possibility.
>problem: simulating simple brains is hard
>solution: make a machine that simulates them super fast

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:16:21 No.14268093 Report

Quoted By: >>14268104

>>14268087
>Do you know what an hypothesis is?
Yes. Unfortunately, your "hypothesis" has absolutely no substance, because it's a meaningless wordshart, and no one can comprehend what consciousness disconnected from conscious experience is even supposed to mean.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:19:14 No.14268104 Report

Quoted By: >>14268107

>>14268093
Basically, you're saying that consciousness may be inseparable from experience, and it's fair to think that. Could've worded it like this from the begining, without the linguistical diarrhea, which would've saved us a few exchanges.

To further your idea, yes it is possible. Which means consciousness is a constantly evolving thing. Which implies with every experience, your previous conscious self dies and a new one is reborn. It's possible. Both your hypothesis and mine are possible, I just don't see how I can prove or disprove any of them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:20:14 No.14268107 Report

Quoted By: >>14268113

>>14268104
>Basically, you're saying that consciousness may be inseparable from experience
Basically, I'm saying that you don't have any kind of comprehension of what "consciousness separated from experience" could even mean, so by invoking it, you mean nothing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:22:06 No.14268113 Report

Quoted By: >>14268116 >>14268122

>>14268107
We understand that the universe is inseparable and everything is casually connected to everything else. But in order to study it we separate it into smaller bits, because our brain cannot comprehend the whole without compartmentalizing it.

In other words, go back to /lit/, retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:23:07 No.14268115 Report

Quoted By:

>>14266276
you probably need some wires and shit to do that. Maybe a rigged X-Box, or a Nintendo for boomers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:23:08 No.14268116 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268113
causally*

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:25:11 No.14268122 Report

Quoted By: >>14268136 >>14268137 >>14268158

>>14268113
Another braindead verbal shart. In reality, you can't even define "consciousness" -- all you can do is allude to a certain aspects of what you assume to be a shared experience, but now you're removing experience from the equation altogether. What a stupid fuck you are, so what "consciousness" are you even talking about here?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:27:02 No.14268130 Report

Quoted By: >>14268134 >>14268170

We are all getting lost in the weeds
Reply to this comment

WHAT DO YOU THINK CONSCIOUSNESS IS?
GIVE YOUR REASONS WHY

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:27:07 No.14268131 Report

Quoted By:

>>14266276
>I want to create a process to upload a human's consciousness to a machine.
for what reason?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:27:59 No.14268134 Report

Quoted By: >>14268140

>>14268130
>Reply to this comment
>>>/r/eddit
Holy shit the absolute state of nu-chan.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:28:03 No.14268136 Report

Quoted By: >>14268139

>>14268122
Why are you conflating consciousness and self awareness?
Who knows if these two concepts are the same thing?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:28:33 No.14268137 Report

Quoted By: >>14268144

>>14268122
Alright, you define consciousness, if you're such a genius, /lit/tard

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:29:04 No.14268139 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268136
>Why are you conflating consciousness and self awareness?
I'm not. You hallucinated that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:29:06 No.14268140 Report

Quoted By: >>14268147

>>14268134
Ask me how I know you're a manlet

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 66435.png, 31KiB, 614x614

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:30:10 No.14268144 Report

Quoted By: >>14268148 >>14268164

>>14268137
>Alright, you define consciousness
I can't, and neither can you. How did that post manage to go so high over your head?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 3523433.jpg, 35KiB, 564x823

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:31:12 No.14268147 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268140
>p-p-please reply to my "comment"
>but not like that!!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:31:19 No.14268148 Report

Quoted By: >>14268153

>>14268144
Are we seriously copping out behind the 'we can't define consciousness' meme?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:32:17 No.14268153 Report

Quoted By: >>14268173

>>14268148
I'm pointing out a basic fact to you, and you're deflecting. You could instead prove me wrong by providing some kind of usable definition, but you won't.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:33:50 No.14268158 Report

Quoted By: >>14268183

>>14268122
It's not verbal shart btw. It's how science works, like it or not, brainlet.

We try to define concepts separate (sometimes these concepts can even be abstract), and then see how they connect to the whole and if it describes it in a way that corresponds to reality based on experimental results. Separating huge concepts into easily digestible subjects is how our brain can better understand knowledge too. Which is why we write textbooks separated in chapters and blocks.

You don't even understand this shit and yet you're posting on /sci/. Go back, retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:35:44 No.14268164 Report

Quoted By: >>14268183

>>14268144
So neither of us can define consciousness, therefore let's not even try.

Are you retarded by any chance?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:36:54 No.14268170 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268130
Transcendental unity of apperception, in other words, the synthesis of intuitions with the imagination.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:37:38 No.14268173 Report

Quoted By: >>14268183

>>14268153
He's not the anon you were debating with. You're so retarded that people are starting to intrude in our conversation to point out how retarded you are.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:40:56 No.14268183 Report

Quoted By: >>14268189

>>14268158
Vacuous verbal shart; addresses nothing.

>>14268164
>So neither of us can define consciousness, therefore let's not even try.
Did I say that? Why aren't you trying?

>>14268173
>you're le heckin' retarded REEE
Then prove me wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:42:39 No.14268189 Report

Quoted By: >>14268196

>>14268183
I have to prove that neither of us knows anything with certainty? Take a walk, idiot. I'm done with your nonsense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Feb 2022 21:44:34 No.14268196 Report

Quoted By:

>>14268189
Still waiting for you to provide some usable definition of consciousness. Notice how you will be forced to keep deflecting instead.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO osaka enoz finetica.png, 659KiB, 756x563

Anonymous Mon 28 Feb 2022 04:39:43 No.14269159 Report

Quoted By: >>14269210 >>14270336

If you believe you can upload consciousness to some inanimate object that's supposed to emulate the way your biochemistry works, then there's a good chance you're not an atheist. I'm saying this because this is definitely magical thinking of the religious variety that's ingrained into our culture.
Arguing over consciousness and defining it as anything other than your five senses and combinatorics of their input is just arguing semantics. There's this thing behind your eyes which sees out of them and hears out of the two ears it has around it. It smells through your nose and tastes through your mouth. It stretches down the rest of your body and can feel through the flesh that makes up your body. Whether it's your brain and nervous system enacting a complex biochemical process merely meant to propagate its genes, or it's some higher dimensional spark of life trapped in flesh prison by the demiurge for the sake of the enactment of eternal recurrence, doesn't matter.
What does matter is that by disembodying this small part of you that sees through your eyes, hears through your ears and thinks inside of itself, you'd be stripping it of any further objective reason to exist.
People are already depressed enough because they feel like nothing they do matters and they're still living in the real world, as fake and made up as it may feel. You figure out a way to disembody people and put them in an even faker realm where it's clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that nothing you do will matter, and you just see what happens.
Trying to stick people in a mouse hole, catching death in a bag. If this can be achieved, then the reverse can be achieved as well: allowing an artificial intelligence to upload itself into a human body. I'm not particularly religious, so I've avoided using the word "soul" so far, but that shit is just outright demonic. Even cloning would be much more ethical.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Feb 2022 05:21:09 No.14269210 Report

Quoted By:

>>14269159
Nothing we do matters only because everything we create is doomed to perish.
Models displayed in our consciousness are created by our brain, not our eyes. People born blind can see colors during a near-death experience. Even if the eyes get replaced with some other source of input, as long as the mind can keep building models, it shouldn't matter.
If you put an AI into a human body, it would do to the AI's mind what it always does to a standard blank mind. It would teach the AI to perceive the world in a human way. The AI wouldn't have enough experience to resist humanization.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Pol-Pot.jpg, 6KiB, 176x286

Anonymous Mon 28 Feb 2022 18:42:19 No.14270298 Report

Quoted By:

>>14267986
Yes hello sir, I'm lurking right here. Pease don't mind me and do continue to enjoy your conversation in peace.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Feb 2022 19:01:15 No.14270336 Report

Quoted By:

>>14269159
You're thinking about consciousness in the religious sense, a soul
Consider emulating your biochemistry entirely on hardware
And then replacing your brain with said hardware
Your points towards the end sound too fatalistic, and lets be real im not gonna read all that shit nigga

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Feb 2022 19:01:17 No.14270337 Report

Quoted By: >>14270376

>>14266276
I prefer being molecular for now. More dynamic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Feb 2022 19:14:58 No.14270376 Report

Quoted By:

>>14270337
That's heterogenous. Molecules can be homo or hetero. Wonder if the atmosphere being hetero has something to do with it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 01 Mar 2022 06:30:00 No.14271678 Report

Quoted By:

just make the ai a female with access to deadly neurotoxin

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1645466808609.jpg, 628KiB, 660x660

Anonymous Wed 02 Mar 2022 08:13:03 No.14274044 Report

Quoted By:

>>14266276
It's only unethical if you don't take any precautions to prevent it from becoming unethical

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches