subject:"Re\: Towards Conscious AI Systems"


> On 1 May 2019, at 20:13, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/1/2019 10:19 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:
>> No, this is the mistake that you make. You confuse artificial entities with 
>> natural entities. In an artificial entities the functional parts that they 
>> contain are 100% knowable by us, because it is us who put them there in the 
>> first place.
> 
> No.  We assemble them.  But they are not 100% knowable, c.f. Holevo's theorem.

Right. That is an important point, both in contemporary physics, and in the 
physics of the numbers.

Bruno


> 
>> On the other hand, in a natural entity, the functional parts are not 
>> completely known to us. You can look at the brain and see neurons, but you 
>> cannot conclude from this that neurons are all there are there.
> 
> No.  But you can experiment and determine what happens when one is removed or 
> stimulated.
> 
>> There can be an infinite amount of invisible entities, dark matter, dark 
>> energy, who knows what, that contributes to what the brain is and does. 
>> Therefore, you cannot look at the brain as a machine.
> 
> I can as an hypothesis.  And I can make intelligent machines .
> 
>> 
>> This of course, besides the fact that the brain does not exist, being just a 
>> quale in consciousness.
> 
> You keep saying that as though it has some significance.  It's fine that you 
> attempt and idealist TOE and take quale as fundamental.  But it is silly to 
> then say a brain is just quale.  In you theory everything is just quale.  But 
> you need to explain why brain quale are different from computer quale and 
> muscle quale.  Why having thumping quale interact  (how?) with brain quale 
> results in no  quale?
> 
> Brent
> 
>> 
>> You can even have a look at my SAND presentation if you want to hear once 
>> more how the brain does not exist:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jMAy6ft-ZQ 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 19:42:48 UTC+3, Brent wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Brent
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
>> .
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

> On 1 May 2019, at 19:27, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> Is it even possible to physical implement your "machine" ? If so, can you 
> elaborate on it ? What is it about the "physical world" that would allow your 
> "machine" to be "physically" implemented ?

That is a very complex question and when I “found Quantum mechanics” before 
realising that the physicist were already there, I was sure that mechanism 
allows far too much computational continuations, leading to an explosion of 
“white rabbits” prediction, and I thought that I would have been able to prove 
that such mess does not allow Turing universality, so that I thought simply 
that I was refuting Mechanism. But I did not succeed, and then QM appears to 
look like Mechanism predicts physics has to be. Now, why is physics Turing 
universal is not yet entirely explained, but there is no inconsistency on the 
horizon, especially that the quantum appears in the first person plural. It is 
an illusion, but it is sharable among different branches of the differentiating 
consciousness flux.

Bruno

> 
> On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 19:53:54 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
> When I talk about digital machine, I don’t talk about their physical 
> implementation.
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 1 May 2019, at 19:19, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> No, this is the mistake that you make. You confuse artificial entities with 
> natural entities.

That contradicts the monism related to the idea that consciousness is the 
fundamental things.

With mechanism, the difference between natural and artificial is … artificial. 
And thus it is natural, plausibly for the entities who have a big ego, and feel 
different if not superior. 



> In an artificial entities the functional parts that they contain are 100% 
> knowable by us, because it is us who put them there in the first place. On 
> the other hand, in a natural entity, the functional parts are not completely 
> known to us. You can look at the brain and see neurons, but you cannot 
> conclude from this that neurons are all there are there. There can be an 
> infinite amount of invisible entities, dark matter, dark energy, who knows 
> what, that contributes to what the brain is and does. Therefore, you cannot 
> look at the brain as a machine.

But you speculate that there is such infinities playing some role. Why? In 
science, we usually prefer to assumes simple things, and make them more 
complex, only when evidences forces us into. Or we abandon the theory, and look 
for another simple theory.



> 
> This of course, besides the fact that the brain does not exist, being just a 
> quale in consciousness.

Literally, I agree with you, but I begin to think it is more like a 
coincidence, given you apparent certainty that machine can not think, in your 
theory.

Bruno



> 
> You can even have a look at my SAND presentation if you want to hear once 
> more how the brain does not exist:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jMAy6ft-ZQ
> 
> On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 19:42:48 UTC+3, Brent wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brent
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

> On 1 May 2019, at 18:39, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/1/2019 2:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>> My point is that "qualia" don't exist independent of an environment, and an 
>>> evolutionary history.
>> 
>> That is ambiguous. A human qualia needs a human history.
> 
> Human qualia are the only kind we know.  Other qualia, independent of 
> environment and evolutionary history, would be "to speculate on something 
> that we have no evidence for”.

I have few doubts that all mammals, and some invertebrates have qualia. I doubt 
that if there were alien, they would not have qualia, and if you agree with the 
(meta—definition I gave of consciousness, then it is a theorem that all 
universal machine have qualia. But for such qualia to be comparable to pours, 
they need some histories comparable to ours. 

> 
>> But with mechanism, a human qualia can be encoded into a program or a 
>> number, and copied.
> 
> That's the assumption of Mechanism. 

Yes.

> But it is not clear to me how the semantics that allow the encoded qualia to 
> refer to the environment are preserved.

If they are not, you will get p-zombies, or the guy with the artificial brain 
will just “not work”, perhaps looking dead, or something. By definition of 
Mechanism, there is such a level, and they like Darwinism, to function needs 
such a level, as Darwin mentioned rather explicitly (and from which he 
correctly predicts the existence of digital encoding, which has been verified 
by Molecular biologist (cf A, T, G, C).

> 
>> 
>> It is true for other “deep notion”. The work of Shakespeare needs also a 
>> human long history, but you can copy the entire work of Shakespeare on a 
>> disk.
> 
> But it can only be decoded into "The work of Shakespeare" in our environment 
> (or every similar).

Yes, but with mechanism, we can always truncate the information at some digital 
level.

I don’t claim mechanism is true, I just derive the metaphysical/theological 
conclusion, including the necessary laws of physics. It fits with the facts, 
including consciousness, where physicalism has to invoke some dubious (and 
inconsistent with mechanism) ontological commitment.

> 
>> 
>> If your point is that you would only say “yes” to the doctor, if he copies 
>> your brain+a part of the environment, you are still in the frame of the 
>> mechanist assumption, unless you explicit posit something both not coinable 
>> in the environment and relevant for your conscious state to survive the 
>> copy, but in that case, we are out of my working hypothesis (at a place 
>> where I will ask why to speculate on something that we have no evidence for).
> 
> But we do have evidence for it.  Nature is quantum mechanical and that puts 
> limits on what is "coinable in the environment”.

I guess you meant “clonable”; On the contrary, with mechanism matter is not 
clonable for all its aspect belonging below our substitution level, which has 
to exists (due to the infinity of computations going through or relevant finite 
state), so that the non cloning theorem confirms mechanism. 

Bruno

> 
> Brent
> 
>> (Would Z1* depart from Nature, that would be such an evidence, but that has 
>> not yet been shown.)
>> 
>> Bruno
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 1 May 2019, at 18:23, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/1/2019 1:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
 I am not sure I understand. By definition, the substitution level take 
 into account all what is relevant.
>>> But definitions don't call the definidum into existence.??
>> Indeed. But I did not use a definition to claim any truth (of existence, or 
>> else). Mechanism assumes that you have a brain, that computer exists 
>> physically, that doctors exist, etc.
>> 
>> It does not assume that the physical existence is primary, though, and 
>> eventually, the reasoning shows that the physical existence (which is never 
>> doubted) is not primary.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> By definition God is omnipotent.??
>> By *some* definition. 
>> 
>> 
>>> But that doesn't mean there's an omnipotent being.
>> On the contrary indeed. Nothing is omnipotent. Omnipotence and omniscience 
>> are two inconsistent notions, even when taken in isolation.
>> 
>> I am not sure what was your point here Brent?
> 
> You wrote, "By definition, the substitution level take into account all what 
> is relevant."  My point is that Holevo's theorem entails that there is lower 
> bound on the incompleteness of the substitution; so it is not at all clear 
> that there is a substitution level that takes into account all that is 
> relevant.  Simply saying there is a definition of the term doesn't mean it 
> refers.

Yes, so Mechanism might implied that we (as abstract immaterial computational 
object) are above the Holevo bound. Simply. But now, this is incorrect. Even if 
we need to go below that bound, like if we have a quantum brain, there is still 
a possibility that we don’t use the continuous information related to it, so we 
will still be “reconstituted” in the arithmetical reality, and the reversal 
physics/psychology-theology still occurs.

Mechanism would be false, if not only we are quantum machine, but some infinite 
information is relevant, and if that infinite information is not recoverable by 
the first person indeterminacy in arithmetic. In that case mechanism is false, 
and materialism is against consistent (but not yet necessarily true, note).

Bruno



> 
> Brent
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-05-01 Thread 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List




On 5/1/2019 10:19 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:
No, this is the mistake that you make. You confuse artificial entities 
with natural entities. In an artificial entities the functional parts 
that they contain are 100% knowable by us, because it is us who put 
them there in the first place.


No.  We assemble them.  But they are not 100% knowable, c.f. Holevo's 
theorem.


On the other hand, in a natural entity, the functional parts are not 
completely known to us. You can look at the brain and see neurons, but 
you cannot conclude from this that neurons are all there are there.


No.  But you can experiment and determine what happens when one is 
removed or stimulated.


There can be an infinite amount of invisible entities, dark matter, 
dark energy, who knows what, that contributes to what the brain is and 
does. Therefore, you cannot look at the brain as a machine.


I can as an hypothesis.  And I can make intelligent machines .



This of course, besides the fact that the brain does not exist, being 
just a quale in consciousness.


You keep saying that as though it has some significance.  It's fine that 
you attempt and idealist TOE and take quale as fundamental. But it is 
silly to then say a brain is just quale.  In you theory everything is 
just quale.  But you need to explain why brain quale are different from 
computer quale and muscle quale.  Why having thumping quale interact  
(how?) with brain quale results in no quale?


Brent



You can even have a look at my SAND presentation if you want to hear 
once more how the brain does not exist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jMAy6ft-ZQ

On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 19:42:48 UTC+3, Brent wrote:





Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-05-01 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

Is it even possible to physical implement your "machine" ? If so, can you 
elaborate on it ? What is it about the "physical world" that would allow 
your "machine" to be "physically" implemented ?

On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 19:53:54 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> When I talk about digital machine, I don’t talk about their physical 
> implementation.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-05-01 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

No, this is the mistake that you make. You confuse artificial entities with 
natural entities. In an artificial entities the functional parts that they 
contain are 100% knowable by us, because it is us who put them there in the 
first place. On the other hand, in a natural entity, the functional parts 
are not completely known to us. You can look at the brain and see neurons, 
but you cannot conclude from this that neurons are all there are there. 
There can be an infinite amount of invisible entities, dark matter, dark 
energy, who knows what, that contributes to what the brain is and does. 
Therefore, you cannot look at the brain as a machine.

This of course, besides the fact that the brain does not exist, being just 
a quale in consciousness.

You can even have a look at my SAND presentation if you want to hear once 
more how the brain does not exist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jMAy6ft-ZQ

On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 19:42:48 UTC+3, Brent wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Brent
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

> On 1 May 2019, at 11:14, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> What is the difference ? Basically, what is the difference between this 
> machine:
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and this machine:
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ?

The first one is a particular (non Turing universal) machine, implemented in 
the physical reality. As such, it is better to view it as an analogue machine, 
but we can see it also as a digital machine. The machine here is not well 
defined to be sure.

The second one is, I guess, a Turing universal boolean net, implemented also in 
the physical reality. That one is a genuine universal number, implemented, or 
incarnated in the physical reality.

When I talk about digital machine, I don’t talk about their physical 
implementation. To fix the things, and avoid confusion (given that the goal is 
to derive physics from arithmetic), I consider their implementation in 
arithmetic, or their abstract definition in lambda calculus, or sometimes in 
semi-formal languages. 

I do not claim that digital mechanism is true. Only that it is logically 
incompatible with a. Weak form of materialism/physicalism, and that we can do 
the test, and that, thanks to QM, the test done up to now, favours mechanism, 
and already refutes materialism. (Again, simplifying a bit, to be short).

Bruno

PS, I will be more and more busy in the next days. Apology for slow answering.

> 
> On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 11:43:47 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
> I talk of digital machine, in the sense of Church and Turing. I can say more. 
> Just ask (and be patient, as I am in a busy period).
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-05-01 Thread 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List





On 5/1/2019 2:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
My point is that "qualia" don't exist independent of an environment, 
and an evolutionary history.


That is ambiguous. A human qualia needs a human history.


Human qualia are the only kind we know.  Other qualia, independent of 
environment and evolutionary history, would be "to speculate on 
something that we have no evidence for".


But with mechanism, a human qualia can be encoded into a program or a 
number, and copied.


That's the assumption of Mechanism.  But it is not clear to me how the 
semantics that allow the encoded qualia to refer to the environment are 
preserved.




It is true for other “deep notion”. The work of Shakespeare needs also 
a human long history, but you can copy the entire work of Shakespeare 
on a disk.


But it can only be decoded into "The work of Shakespeare" in our 
environment (or every similar).




If your point is that you would only say “yes” to the doctor, if he 
copies your brain+a part of the environment, you are still in the 
frame of the mechanist assumption, unless you explicit posit something 
both not coinable in the environment and relevant for your conscious 
state to survive the copy, but in that case, we are out of my working 
hypothesis (at a place where I will ask why to speculate on something 
that we have no evidence for).


But we do have evidence for it.  Nature is quantum mechanical and that 
puts limits on what is "coinable in the environment".


Brent

(Would Z1* depart from Nature, that would be such an evidence, but 
that has not yet been shown.)


Bruno



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-05-01 Thread 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List




On 5/1/2019 1:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

I am not sure I understand. By definition, the substitution level take into 
account all what is relevant.

But definitions don't call the definidum into existence.??

Indeed. But I did not use a definition to claim any truth (of existence, or 
else). Mechanism assumes that you have a brain, that computer exists 
physically, that doctors exist, etc.

It does not assume that the physical existence is primary, though, and 
eventually, the reasoning shows that the physical existence (which is never 
doubted) is not primary.





By definition God is omnipotent.??

By*some*  definition.



But that doesn't mean there's an omnipotent being.

On the contrary indeed. Nothing is omnipotent. Omnipotence and omniscience are 
two inconsistent notions, even when taken in isolation.

I am not sure what was your point here Brent?


You wrote, "By definition, the substitution level take into account all what is 
relevant."  My point is that Holevo's theorem entails that there is lower bound on 
the incompleteness of the substitution; so it is not at all clear that there is a 
substitution level that takes into account all that is relevant.  Simply saying there is 
a definition of the term doesn't mean it refers.

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-05-01 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

What is the difference ? Basically, what is the difference between this 
machine:















and this machine:













?

On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 11:43:47 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:

>
> I talk of digital machine, in the sense of Church and Turing. I can say 
> more. Just ask (and be patient, as I am in a busy period).
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 1 May 2019, at 00:20, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/30/2019 3:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> 
>>> On 28 Apr 2019, at 22:50, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 4/28/2019 11:09 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:
 Ok, so how does it appear ?
>>> 
>>> Like this (you're getting kind of dense).
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I agree that to define the qualia red, the ostensive definition is the only 
>> possible. But that does not mean that ???ostensive definition??? explains 
>> the existence of the impression. With ???red???, it is well known that we 
>> cannot be sure if we live all a similar qualia. 
> 
> Of course not.Red has many associations which inform the emotions, values, 
> and actions it evokes; many derived from the fact that it is the color of 
> one's blood.?? But some may associate it more with roses or the sky at sunset.

OK. We agree.


> 
>> 
>> Cosmin is kind of dense, but I still agree you can quick on consciousness. 
>> With mechanism, it is up to the believer in matter to justify what is matter 
>> and how it selects the computations in arithmetic to make it more real, or 
>> conscious, etc. 
> 
> My point is that "qualia" don't exist independent of an environment, and an 
> evolutionary history.

That is ambiguous. A human qualia needs a human history. But with mechanism, a 
human qualia can be encoded into a program or a number, and copied.

It is true for other “deep notion”. The work of Shakespeare needs also a human 
long history, but you can copy the entire work of Shakespeare on a disk.

If your point is that you would only say “yes” to the doctor, if he copies your 
brain+a part of the environment, you are still in the frame of the mechanist 
assumption, unless you explicit posit something both not coinable in the 
environment and relevant for your conscious state to survive the copy, but in 
that case, we are out of my working hypothesis (at a place where I will ask why 
to speculate on something that we have no evidence for). 
(Would Z1* depart from Nature, that would be such an evidence, but that has not 
yet been shown.)

Bruno

> 
> Brent
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems



> On 1 May 2019, at 00:15, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/30/2019 2:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>> On 28 Apr 2019, at 21:57, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 4/28/2019 8:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
 Indexical Digital Mechanism, or simply Mechanism, is the idea that we can 
 survive with an artificial brain. It is the idea that my consciousness, or 
 my first-person experience, is invariant for some functional digital 
 substitution of my brain/body at some level of substitution (neurons, or 
 perhaps atoms, or quarks and electron, or strings, etc.).
>>> But notice that already quantum mechanics strongly limits this.?? By 
>>> Holevo's theorem only half the information defining one's state can be 
>>> read.??
>> OK. But that is easily explained (and predicted) by classical digital 
>> mechanism. My first person is distributed on the infinitely many 
>> computations coming from a refinement of the computation on any possible 
>> details below my substitution level. So the ???parent matter??? available to 
>> a digital machine (in the arithmetical reality) will appear to be not 
>> duplicable. But ??? ah, I see you see the point below.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> I agree that the brain processes instantiating thoughts that define our 
>>> memories and character are mostly classical and therefore can be read, 
>>> there will be, statistically, some variation between the original and a 
>>> copy and between two copies.
>> Yes, but they don???t not endangered the personal identity. Like the 
>> Washington-guy and the Moscow-guy remains the same person as the Helsinki 
>> guy, despite differentiating a lot very quickly, especially after tasting 
>> the cup of coffee!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> So it becomes a question of whether this variation is significant...not 
>>> whether it can be eliminated by going to "some level of substitution???.
>> I am not sure I understand. By definition, the substitution level take into 
>> account all what is relevant.
> 
> But definitions don't call the definidum into existence.??

Indeed. But I did not use a definition to claim any truth (of existence, or 
else). Mechanism assumes that you have a brain, that computer exists 
physically, that doctors exist, etc.

It does not assume that the physical existence is primary, though, and 
eventually, the reasoning shows that the physical existence (which is never 
doubted) is not primary.




> By definition God is omnipotent.??

By *some* definition. 


> But that doesn't mean there's an omnipotent being.

On the contrary indeed. Nothing is omnipotent. Omnipotence and omniscience are 
two inconsistent notions, even when taken in isolation.

I am not sure what was your point here Brent?

Bruno




> 
> Brent
> 
>> If that needs all decimal of the real numbers used by a physical 
>> description, then Digital Mechanism is wrong, per definition, and we are out 
>> of the scope of my working hypothesis.
>> 
>> Bruno
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Brent
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>> "Everything List" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 30 Apr 2019, at 13:27, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> Maybe if you would stop using words that mean something else, people will 
> actually understand you.

What word have you a problem with? 

Just ask specific question, and avoid ad hominem comment, please. Also, quote 
the passage where you have a problem.




> Go and take a dictionary and see what "machine" and "number" mean, and them 
> maybe we can talk.


I talk of digital machine, in the sense of Church and Turing. I can say more. 
Just ask (and be patient, as I am in a busy period).




> What you do is like instead of "eating" you use "dancing" and then you tell 
> people: "I'm hungry, let's dance!". Don't get surprised when people will give 
> you weird looks.


Avoid also the straw man fallacy. 

Bruno



> 
> On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 13:38:51 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
>> On 26 Apr 2019, at 12:19, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>> > wrote:
>> 
>> Sorry, if I want to read fairy-tales I read Harry Potter. AI is a rather 
>> boring fairy-tale.
> 
> You are quick here.
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-05-01 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

Whaaa... so magic happens. Santa Claus has been born! And it was so 
simple... just add a line of code and pufff... the object becomes alive. ( 
͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )つ──☆*:・ﾟ

On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 00:55:09 UTC+3, Brent wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/29/2019 11:35 PM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, 29 April 2019 21:09:01 UTC+3, Brent wrote: 
>>
>> Ok, so I will make a 2 line computer program that I will connect to a 
>> camera:
>>
>> if (signal == 1) {
>> System.out.println("I see red.");
>> }
>>
>> Does this computer program see red ? 
>>
>>
>> No, it would fail the colorblindness test.
>>
>>
>>
> Ok, then I will make it pass the colorblindness test:
>
> if (signal == 1) {
> System.out.println("I see red.");
> } else if (signal == 2) {
> System.out.println("I see green.");
> }
>
> Now, does it see red ?
>
>
> Depends on what test you give it.?? If it can pass as many tests as most 
> people then I'd say it recognizes red.
>
> Brent
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-05-01 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

As Donald Hoffman says, to take things seriously doesn't mean to take them 
literally. You take the tiger seriously because you need to survive, in the 
same way you don't put the blue folder on your computer screen on the 
recycle bin. Not because there is actually there a blue folder that get 
deleted in the recycle bin. Literally there is no tiger and no blue folder.

Besides, you are not doing pattern re-cognition, you are doing pattern 
cognition, i.e. creation out of nothing.

On Wednesday, 1 May 2019 02:21:17 UTC+3, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 2:58 PM 'Cosmin Visan'  <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
> > To talk about errors is to have a standard of (ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ*:・ﾟ✧ OBJECTIVE 
>> REALITY
>>
>
> Yes, reality has a way of informing one about what is objectively true and 
> what is not. If you look at a Saber Toothed Tiger and erroneously 
> identify it as a cute little bunny rabbit then your genes will not make it 
> into the next generation, but the genes of one of your fellow primates who 
> is better at pattern recognition will.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 2:58 PM 'Cosmin Visan'  <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> To talk about errors is to have a standard of (ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ*:・ﾟ✧ OBJECTIVE
> REALITY
>

Yes, reality has a way of informing one about what is objectively true and
what is not. If you look at a Saber Toothed Tiger and erroneously identify
it as a cute little bunny rabbit then your genes will not make it into the
next generation, but the genes of one of your fellow primates who is better
at pattern recognition will.

> Your problem is that you don't notice the process of creation in action.
>

A better name would be objective reality lessons with a vengeance, but an
even better name would be *Evolution In Action.*

John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List




On 4/30/2019 3:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 28 Apr 2019, at 22:50, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
> wrote:




On 4/28/2019 11:09 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:

Ok, so how does it appear ?


Like this (you're getting kind of dense).





I agree that to define the qualia red, the ostensive definition is the 
only possible. But that does not mean that ???ostensive definition??? 
explains the existence of the impression. With ???red???, it is well known 
that we cannot be sure if we live all a similar qualia.


Of course not.Red has many associations which inform the emotions, 
values, and actions it evokes; many derived from the fact that it is the 
color of one's blood.?? But some may associate it more with roses or the 
sky at sunset.




Cosmin is kind of dense, but I still agree you can quick on 
consciousness. With mechanism, it is up to the believer in matter to 
justify what is matter and how it selects the computations in 
arithmetic to make it more real, or conscious, etc.


My point is that "qualia" don't exist independent of an environment, and 
an evolutionary history.


Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List





On 4/30/2019 2:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

On 28 Apr 2019, at 21:57, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
 wrote:



On 4/28/2019 8:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

Indexical Digital Mechanism, or simply Mechanism, is the idea that we can 
survive with an artificial brain. It is the idea that my consciousness, or my 
first-person experience, is invariant for some functional digital substitution 
of my brain/body at some level of substitution (neurons, or perhaps atoms, or 
quarks and electron, or strings, etc.).

But notice that already quantum mechanics strongly limits this.?? By Holevo's 
theorem only half the information defining one's state can be read.??

OK. But that is easily explained (and predicted) by classical digital 
mechanism. My first person is distributed on the infinitely many computations 
coming from a refinement of the computation on any possible details below my 
substitution level. So the ???parent matter??? available to a digital machine 
(in the arithmetical reality) will appear to be not duplicable. But ??? ah, I 
see you see the point below.




I agree that the brain processes instantiating thoughts that define our 
memories and character are mostly classical and therefore can be read, there 
will be, statistically, some variation between the original and a copy and 
between two copies.

Yes, but they don???t not endangered the personal identity. Like the 
Washington-guy and the Moscow-guy remains the same person as the Helsinki guy, 
despite differentiating a lot very quickly, especially after tasting the cup of 
coffee!





So it becomes a question of whether this variation is significant...not whether it 
can be eliminated by going to "some level of substitution???.

I am not sure I understand. By definition, the substitution level take into 
account all what is relevant.


But definitions don't call the definidum into existence.?? By definition 
God is omnipotent.?? But that doesn't mean there's an omnipotent being.


Brent


If that needs all decimal of the real numbers used by a physical description, 
then Digital Mechanism is wrong, per definition, and we are out of the scope of 
my working hypothesis.

Bruno






Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List




On 4/29/2019 11:35 PM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:



On Monday, 29 April 2019 21:09:01 UTC+3, Brent wrote:


Ok, so I will make a 2 line computer program that I will connect
to a camera:

if (signal == 1) {
System.out.println("I see red.");
}

Does this computer program see red ?


No, it would fail the colorblindness test.



Ok, then I will make it pass the colorblindness test:

if (signal == 1) {
System.out.println("I see red.");
} else if (signal == 2) {
System.out.println("I see green.");
}

Now, does it see red ?


Depends on what test you give it.?? If it can pass as many tests as most 
people then I'd say it recognizes red.


Brent


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

You are again attacking a strawman. Only because we cannot create 
everything, it doesn't mean we cannot create anything. Some things are 
indeed under our controls.

On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 20:32:40 UTC+3, John Clark wrote:
>
> *> it means you have the ability to create reality.*
>>
>
> Then why don't you create the reality that you won the debate and go away 
> with the knowledge of a job well done?
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

To talk about errors is to have a standard of (ﾉ◕*ヮ*◕)ﾉ*:・*ﾟ*✧ OBJECTIVE 
REALITY ✧*ﾟ*・: **ヽ*(◕*ヮ*◕*ヽ*) on which to refer those errors to. What is 
the *:・*ﾟ**:・*ﾟ**:・*ﾟ**:・*ﾟOBJECTIVE, ABSOLUTE and GOD-GIVEN REALITY**:・*ﾟ*
*:・*ﾟ**:・*ﾟ**:・*ﾟ**:・*ﾟ* behind those evil errors of duck and rabbit ?

Your problem is that you don't notice the process of creation in action. To 
you it seems trivial that you see a duck or a rabbit. You are totally 
oblivious to how your own consciousness works. You totally and completely 
REFUSE to see the fact that the qualia of rabbit and duck that you see are 
utterly CREATIONS. They are 100% NEW and DISTINCT entities. They are not 
just "a bunch of pixels". They are on their own, NEW experiences. You 
simply fail to notice that something new really APPEARS OUT OF NOTHING. You 
are trivializing a profound phenomenon about existence. Why are you 
refusing to see this ? 

On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 20:32:40 UTC+3, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 1:15 PM 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > 
>
>>  
>
>> *> The duck-rabbit image shows a lot of profound things.*
>>
>
> It shows that image identification is a difficult task so it's not 
> difficult to make a ambiguous image, and it shows that both computers and 
> humans can make errors. 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 1:15 PM 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com>

>

> *> The duck-rabbit image shows a lot of profound things.*
>

It shows that image identification is a difficult task so it's not
difficult to make a ambiguous image, and it shows that both computers and
humans can make errors. But I know it's something. If I see something that
looks like a duck-rabbit in my sniper scope and pull the trigger on my
rifle I know I will eat tonight, although until I get closer and have a
better look at it I won't know if I will be eating duck or rabbit.


> *> it means you have the ability to create reality.*
>

Then why don't you create the reality that you won the debate and go away
with the knowledge of a job well done?

John K Clark


>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

Since I am a holly spirit and you are a lost soul, it is my duty to bring
you on the right path.

The duck-rabbit image shows a lot of profound things. But since you have no
understanding of consciousness whatsoever, you cannot go at this moment in
all the depths and beauty that duck-rabbit unveils. I will only go on the
easiest aspect of it, namely the creation of something that "is not
out-there". So listen carefully! Since all that you have on the screen is
just a collection of pixels, and you are able nevertheless to see those
random pixels as a rabbit or a duck, it means you have the ability to
create reality. If this happens in the duck-rabbit case, what makes you
believe that in other cases is any different ? Well... there shouldn't be
anything that can give you that belief, since duck-rabbit image proves
before your very eyes how you create out of nothing either a duck or a
rabbit. Another example: is this dress white with yellow or blue with black
?

I personally see it yellow with white, but other people are seeing it blue
with black. If different people see different things, what makes you
believe there is an (ﾉ◕*ヮ*◕)ﾉ*:・*ﾟ*✧ OBJECTIVE ✧*ﾟ*・: **ヽ*(◕*ヮ*◕*ヽ*) world
out-there ?

Another example from another qualia domain. Is this yanny or laurel ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X_WvGAhMlQ

I personally hear laurel, but other people hear yanny. If the experiences
in consciousness are so different from one another even on basic stuff,
what make you believe there is an (ﾉ◕*ヮ*◕)ﾉ*:・*ﾟ*✧ OBJECTIVE ✧*ﾟ*・: **ヽ*(◕
*ヮ*◕*ヽ*) world out-there ?

I understand when you are small and naive and just take everything for
granted and don't use your reason too much to analyze what is happening to
you. But when you grow up, especially in this era of internet with so many
examples and so many experiment to which you can subject your own
consciousness, how can you remain at that naive 5 years baby view that
there is an objective world out there ? Yeah, it's comfortable, but comfort
should not be a criteria for assessing the truth. So, what is your excuse ?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:42 PM 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> Oh, so now you praise yourself for believing in object permanence ?
> Pfff... you are going down with each post.
>




> Even QM showed by Bell's inequalities that there are no objective
> properties until measurement.
>

No, that is only one possibility. The experimental violation of Bell's
inequality
showed that at least one of the following must be untrue:
1)Determinism
2)Locality
3)Realism

 John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

Oh, so now you praise yourself for believing in object permanence ? Pfff... 
you are going down with each post. Even QM showed by Bell's inequalities 
that there are no objective properties until measurement.

What will be your next move ? Finally coming out as a believer in Santa 
Claus ?

On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 19:38:54 UTC+3, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM 'Cosmin Visan' <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
> *> You are behaving like a 5 years old. *
>>
>
> Maybe, but 5 year olds believe in object permanence but infants younger 
> than 7 months don't and neither do you.
>
>  John K Clark
>  
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM 'Cosmin Visan' <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

*> You are behaving like a 5 years old. *
>

Maybe, but 5 year olds believe in object permanence but infants younger
than 7 months don't and neither do you.

 John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

You are just showing a collection of pictures that are generated based on 
certain pre-established rules by human consciousnesses. If computers are so 
super-duper, why don't you show me a picture with a new colors invented by 
a computer ?

You are so naive that you forget that that system is built in certain ways 
by humans, and you start to believe that those images are generated by 
magic. In Foundation by Asimov, future scientists were using humans as 
slave making them believe that the energy that was coming from a nuclear 
reactor is actually sent by God. No wonder with such low level of 
intelligence, people were slaves along all the human history. You can trick 
them instantly as you trick a 5 years old.

On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 18:41:15 UTC+3, telmo wrote:
>
> > And since a computer cannot bring anything into existence on its own if 
> you don't specifically put that information in the database, a computer 
> will never be conscious.
>
> https://www.thispersondoesnotexist.com/
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_antenna
>
> Telmo.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

You are behaving like a 5 years old. Pathetic.

On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 19:28:08 UTC+3, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:52 AM 'Cosmin Visan'  <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
> *> All your answers are answered by the duck-rabbit image,*
>>
>
> But you've taught me so much! You've taught me that just like computers 
> and brains the duck-rabbit image does not exist. Sure I can see the 
> duck-rabbit image but that doesn't mean the duck-rabbit image exists, I 
> need to believe you not my lying eyes.
>
> John K Clark
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:52 AM 'Cosmin Visan'  <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

*> All your answers are answered by the duck-rabbit image,*
>

But you've taught me so much! You've taught me that just like computers and
brains the duck-rabbit image does not exist. Sure I can see the duck-rabbit
image but that doesn't mean the duck-rabbit image exists, I need to believe
you not my lying eyes.

John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

All your answers are answered by the duck-rabbit image, because it contains 
the entire manifestation of consciousness, in the same way that the 
double-slit contains the entire manifestation of QM. So if you don't 
understand duck-rabbit, you don't understand anything.

On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 18:49:50 UTC+3, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:35 AM 'Cosmin Visan'  <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
> *> Aren't you going to answer the things about duck-rabbit image ?*
>>
>
> Aren't you going to work up your courage and try to answer all the 
> questions, or even one, that I asked you in my long post? And I already 
> answered your question about what the computer would see, in fact I did it
>  twice.
>
>  John K Clark
>
>
>
>  
>
>> You are left with no arguments and instead of accepting the truth, you 
>> just go someplace else to preach your religion ?
>>
>> On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 17:54:48 UTC+3, John Clark wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 5:31 AM Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>>>
>>> *> You* [Cosmin Visan] *need to study what is a digital machine. You 
 need to read the original paper of Turing,*

>>>
>>> Bruno you're wasting your time, Cosmin Visan doesn't think computers 
>>> exist so he's not going to read a paper about them. And besides papers 
>>> don't exist either. Cosmin believes he could figure out how the world works 
>>> by just sitting under a lotus tree and contemplating his navel except that 
>>> lotus trees don't exist and neither do navels. 
>>>
>>>  John K Clark 
>>>
>>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to everyth...@googlegroups.com .
>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:35 AM 'Cosmin Visan'  <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

*> Aren't you going to answer the things about duck-rabbit image ?*
>

Aren't you going to work up your courage and try to answer all the
questions, or even one, that I asked you in my long post? And I already
answered your question about what the computer would see, in fact I did it
 twice.

 John K Clark





> You are left with no arguments and instead of accepting the truth, you
> just go someplace else to preach your religion ?
>
> On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 17:54:48 UTC+3, John Clark wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 5:31 AM Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>>
>> *> You* [Cosmin Visan] *need to study what is a digital machine. You
>>> need to read the original paper of Turing,*
>>>
>>
>> Bruno you're wasting your time, Cosmin Visan doesn't think computers
>> exist so he's not going to read a paper about them. And besides papers
>> don't exist either. Cosmin believes he could figure out how the world works
>> by just sitting under a lotus tree and contemplating his navel except that
>> lotus trees don't exist and neither do navels.
>>
>>  John K Clark
>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread Telmo Menezes

> And since a computer cannot bring anything into existence on its own if you 
> don't specifically put that information in the database, a computer will 
> never be conscious.

https://www.thispersondoesnotexist.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_antenna

Telmo.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

Aren't you going to answer the things about duck-rabbit image ? You are 
left with no arguments and instead of accepting the truth, you just go 
someplace else to preach your religion ?

On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 17:54:48 UTC+3, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 5:31 AM Bruno Marchal  > wrote:
>
> *> You* [Cosmin Visan] *need to study what is a digital machine. You need 
>> to read the original paper of Turing,*
>>
>
> Bruno you're wasting your time, Cosmin Visan doesn't think computers exist 
> so he's not going to read a paper about them. And besides papers don't 
> exist either. Cosmin believes he could figure out how the world works by 
> just sitting under a lotus tree and contemplating his navel except that 
> lotus trees don't exist and neither do navels. 
>
>  John K Clark 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 5:31 AM Bruno Marchal  wrote:

*> You* [Cosmin Visan] *need to study what is a digital machine. You need
> to read the original paper of Turing,*
>

Bruno you're wasting your time, Cosmin Visan doesn't think computers exist
so he's not going to read a paper about them. And besides papers don't
exist either. Cosmin believes he could figure out how the world works by
just sitting under a lotus tree and contemplating his navel except that
lotus trees don't exist and neither do navels.

 John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

2019-04-30 Thread 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List

Maybe if you would stop using words that mean something else, people will 
actually understand you. Go and take a dictionary and see what "machine" 
and "number" mean, and them maybe we can talk. What you do is like instead 
of "eating" you use "dancing" and then you tell people: "I'm hungry, let's 
dance!". Don't get surprised when people will give you weird looks.

On Tuesday, 30 April 2019 13:38:51 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 26 Apr 2019, at 12:19, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
> Sorry, if I want to read fairy-tales I read Harry Potter. AI is a rather 
> boring fairy-tale.
>
>
> You are quick here.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 26 Apr 2019, at 12:19, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> Sorry, if I want to read fairy-tales I read Harry Potter. AI is a rather 
> boring fairy-tale.

You are quick here. Without such justification. You talk like if you knew the 
truth, which is (provably in the theology of the universal machine) a symptom 
of pseudo-religion/pseudo-science.

You should try to formalise your theory, either in first order logic, or at 
least in some interpretation internal to some first order logical theory, like 
Peano arithmetic, or Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory.

Having some insight is good, but it asks for a lot of work to communicate it to 
others, especially if you main conclusion needs a change of paradigm.

Bruno




> 
> On Friday, 26 April 2019 12:30:13 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
> If mechanism is true, a reasoning can show that even your laptop can be said 
> conscious, even maximally conscious,
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 25 Apr 2019, at 18:37, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> That's how existence is: miraculous.

I agree that the existence of the natural numbers is miraculous, because we can 
prove in elementary logic that we cannot derive them from anything simpler and 
not Turing-equivalent. 

But that is the case for all theories: we cannot derive anything from nothing: 
we need starting axioms, and we need to make them all explicit, given the 
complexity of the subject. But we try to start from what all people agrees, 
like x + 0 = x, for exemple.



> And we have evidence for it: just get out of the chair and move around the 
> room and there's your evidence.

I see evidence for phenomenological chair and objects, but that is an evidence 
for my experience, not for your experience. This requires to assume something. 
My experience does not explain your experience, nor your (apparent) body, and 
its (apparent) role.

Bruno



> 
> On Thursday, 25 April 2019 15:27:17 UTC+3, stathisp wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 at 8:38 pm, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
> > wrote:
> You forgot the last point where consciousness initiate the signal.
> 
> That would mean, at some point in this causal chain, something miraculous 
> happening, like a bone moving without any muscle contracting. If this 
> happened, we would have evidence for it, since we consciously do things all 
> the time.
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 25 Apr 2019, at 15:23, cloudver...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 1:18:44 AM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 at 2:42 pm, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
> > wrote:
> But it happens all the time. How do you think you move your body if not by 
> top-down influence in levels from consciousness ?
> 
> At the molecular level, if this were true, we would see miracles happening, 
> like a table levitating without any applied force. No such thing has ever 
> been observed. Neurons and muscle cells only fire according to the laws of 
> physics. If you documented an example of a miracle in the brain you would 
> overthrow science and be famous.
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
> 
> 
> 
> The "laws of physics" are not a static thing, in terms of history. One can 
> say the "laws of physics" are in 2019 "The Standard Model" (about 40 years 
> old now) and maybe some others like electromagnetism. Before 1900 there was 
> no quantum mechanics that was a part of "laws of physics". There are also 
> chemical and neurobiological "laws" that have become a part of science that 
> also address "neurons and other cells".
> 
> The "laws of physics" may be different in  2119 than in 2019. What we "list" 
> as "laws of physics" changes over time.

Then there is more laws in physics, and all physical laws are contingent 
geographic-historical events. That would have been the case if all the 
modalities imposed by incompleteness have collapsed, but incompleteness 
prevents this. Mechanism explains why they are real absolute physical laws, 
lived by *all* universal numbers. It explains also why they are divided into an 
explanation for quanta (and their first person plural reality) and explanation 
for qualia (which are lived, but are not sharable at all, except indirectly, 
usually through art or ostensive acts “here and now”).

Bruno



> 
> - pt
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 25 Apr 2019, at 11:31, Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 at 16:38, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
> mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>> 
> wrote:
> You are randomly extrapolating. I think this is called "strawman logical 
> error". Things are not random. There are reasons for why consciousness only 
> exercises its powers in certain conditions. Evolution confined those powers 
> to own body alone, though in some cases indeed you get connections between 
> consciousnesses related to different bodies. But for those as well there are 
> certain reasons for why they happen. 
> 
> Neurons, muscles, tendons, bones are all physically connected and causally 
> linked.  A bone will not move unless a tendon pulls it, a tendon won't pull 
> until the muscle attached to it contracts, the muscle won't contract unless 
> the peripheral nerve it is attached to fires, the nerve won't fire unless 
> upper motor neurons with projections in the spinal cord fire, those nerves 
> won't fire unless other cortical nerves connected to them fire, and so on. 
> There is a reason for every event in the body. A bone won't suddenly move by 
> itself.

Yes, and that is the basic motivation for mechanism (and why Diderot called it 
simply “rationalism”).

Then with mechanism, eventually all those “causal interaction” becomes descend 
of arithmetical, partially computable, relations. There is still, today, a risk 
that this predicts too much white rabbits, and leads to a contradiction with 
observation, but like with QM, there are expectations that the “white rabbits” 
remains confined below the substitution level, and of making it into very rare 
events.

Bruno


> 
> 
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 25 Apr 2019, at 08:40, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> One interpretation might be that consciousness sends its influence from the 
> future to the past.

Which future? Which past? 

It is unclear what you assume, and what you drive from the assumption. 

You take consciousness as primitive, but then refer to evolution, future, etc.

It is hard to make sense.

Bruno



> 
> On Thursday, 25 April 2019 09:37:53 UTC+3, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
> So you are saying that we are fooled when doing experiments showing movement 
> is seen before in brain motor function before the subject being aware of 
> it... and assert that is always the consciousness that initiates movement 
> despite experiments showing the contrary.. so we can't test anything of your 
> theory against the reality and as reality experiment invalidate your 
> position, your position is to say we are fooled and we have to believe you ? 
> Is that right ?
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

> On 28 Apr 2019, at 22:50, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/28/2019 11:09 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:
>> Ok, so how does it appear ?
> 
> Like this (you're getting kind of dense).
> 
> 

I agree that to define the qualia red, the ostensive definition is the only 
possible. But that does not mean that “ostensive definition” explains the 
existence of the impression. With “red”, it is well known that we cannot be 
sure if we live all a similar qualia. 

Cosmin is kind of dense, but I still agree you can quick on consciousness. With 
mechanism, it is up to the believer in matter to justify what is matter and how 
it selects the computations in arithmetic to make it more real, or conscious, 
etc. 

> 
> 
>> If you show that picture to a rock, does the rock see red ?
> 
> I tried it and the rock had no response, so I conclude it doesn't see read or 
> hear questions.

Or that it cannot talk …

Here Cosmin should like the mechanist explanation. There is no rock. There is 
no digital program working in the phenomenological rocks either. But arithmetic 
(and its meta-arithmetic which is embedded in arithmetic) explains why numbers 
get lasting persistent dreams of rock and red images, including why it contains 
a part in the surrational (true but not rationally justified) which exist by 
incompleteness.

Bruno

> 
> Brent
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems

> On 28 Apr 2019, at 21:57, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/28/2019 8:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> Indexical Digital Mechanism, or simply Mechanism, is the idea that we can 
>> survive with an artificial brain. It is the idea that my consciousness, or 
>> my first-person experience, is invariant for some functional digital 
>> substitution of my brain/body at some level of substitution (neurons, or 
>> perhaps atoms, or quarks and electron, or strings, etc.).
> 
> But notice that already quantum mechanics strongly limits this.?? By Holevo's 
> theorem only half the information defining one's state can be read.??

OK. But that is easily explained (and predicted) by classical digital 
mechanism. My first person is distributed on the infinitely many computations 
coming from a refinement of the computation on any possible details below my 
substitution level. So the “parent matter” available to a digital machine (in 
the arithmetical reality) will appear to be not duplicable. But … ah, I see you 
see the point below.

> I agree that the brain processes instantiating thoughts that define our 
> memories and character are mostly classical and therefore can be read, there 
> will be, statistically, some variation between the original and a copy and 
> between two copies.

Yes, but they don’t not endangered the personal identity. Like the 
Washington-guy and the Moscow-guy remains the same person as the Helsinki guy, 
despite differentiating a lot very quickly, especially after tasting the cup of 
coffee!

> So it becomes a question of whether this variation is significant...not 
> whether it can be eliminated by going to "some level of substitution”.

I am not sure I understand. By definition, the substitution level take into 
account all what is relevant. If that needs all decimal of the real numbers 
used by a physical description, then Digital Mechanism is wrong, per 
definition, and we are out of the scope of my working hypothesis. 

Bruno

> 
> Brent
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 26 Apr 2019, at 12:51, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> Yeah, ok, you seem to know everything. Probably you are God or something. I 
> cannot take seriously people that know everything.

I just said that the second theorem of recursion by Kleene solved Descartes’ 
problem of self-reproduction and self-reference of the (digital) machines.

See my paper “Amoeba, Planaria and Dreaming Machine”, or my longer text. Or 
search for the paper by John Case. Some textbooks explain the main ideas (like 
the book by Cutland).

Please avoid ad hominem distractions, and let try to discuss only the ideas. 
You do seem to ignore computer science. 

Bruno



> 
> On Friday, 26 April 2019 13:00:52 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
>> On 22 Apr 2019, at 22:57, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>> > wrote:
>> 
>> Nobody knows how an embryo develops.
> 
> That is entirely solved by the second recursion theorem of Kleene.
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems


> On 26 Apr 2019, at 12:26, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> You're just making a mess of concepts gathered from everywhere. A is like B, 
> $@#$@ is like 423423, Hampty-Dampty is like Harry Potter. Sorry, there can be 
> no dialogue with you.

You need to study what is a digital machine. You need to read the original 
paper of Turing, Church,
You can search the archive of this list where I have provided more explanation.

Bruno



>  
> On Friday, 26 April 2019 12:30:13 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
> The “singularity” belongs to the past, it is just a matter of time before the 
> machine becomes as much “stupid” as the humans … 
> 
> A brain, or a number, machine, … are filtering the consciousness of the 
> universal machine, a bit like as et of equation filters the varieties obeying 
> to the equation, or like the fact that when you add axioms to a theory, you 
> filter the models of the theory.
> 
> The relation between mind and brain is like the relation between semantics 
> and theories, or between surfaces and equations. It is variant of Galois 
> connection. 
> 
> Bruno
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to everyth...@googlegroups.com .
>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
>> .
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Towards Conscious AI Systems