On Jan 1, 12:14 am, Terren Suydam wrote:
> Uncanny vally is a psych level phenomenon.
I don't really see how different levels could exist in comp. Different
addresses and computational threads, different matrices and
topologies, but I can't see how qualitative layers of presentation
could arise.
On Dec 31 2011, 10:51 pm, meekerdb wrote:
>
> > On Dec 31, 4:17 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> I thought it was obvious how they are related. A computation that doesn't
> replicate
> certain functions, like recognizing danger, ends up having a small measure
> (if comp is true).
That's part of why I d
Uncanny vally is a psych level phenomenon. I would assume that most people
who take comp seriously would place the substitution level at the neuron
level or lower. I personally would never say yes to a doctor that offered a
replacement of my psychology (whatever that would mean).
On Dec 31, 2011 10
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> a bar of gold discovered in a dream is not bankable when you wake up.
>
Sure, but that's because a gold bar is a noun and I'm talking about
adjectives, in fact one of the definitions of adjectives could be something
that IS bankable when y
On 12/31/2011 7:31 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Dec 31, 4:17 pm, meekerdb wrote:
It's not a computational justification, it's an evolutionary one. People just
like you
are ones you can mate with and propagate genes which you likely share. Strange
people are
less likely to share your genes,
On Dec 31, 4:17 pm, meekerdb wrote:
>
> It's not a computational justification, it's an evolutionary one. People
> just like you
> are ones you can mate with and propagate genes which you likely share.
> Strange people are
> less likely to share your genes, but being people they will likely c
On Dec 31, 8:17 pm, Terren Suydam wrote:
> The phenonemon of the uncanny vally assumes a subject. What's the problem?
The problem is that the logic of comp doesn't seem to have a reason to
invent a revulsion response associated with increasing fidelity of
simulation when the whole point of comp i
On Dec 31, 2:21 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> On 12/30/2011 12:41 PM, John Clark wrote:
>
> > Yes it makes a lot of sense, but why did Evolution invent consciousness?
> > Evolution can
> > see intelligence but it can no more see consciousness than we can (other
> > than our own)
> > because it is a pure
On Dec 31, 2:27 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> On 12/30/2011 12:41 PM, John Clark wrote:
>
>
>
> > > If we found a brain growing in the attic and we had never
> > seen one before, we would put gloves on and throw it in the trash.
>
> > Ah...,well...,OK,but what is your point?
>
> I'm sure it's
On 12/31/2011 5:07 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 31 December 2011 23:35, Pierz wrote:
Not to wish to pre-empt Bruno's reply, but I think you're mixing up 1-
p and 3-p. From 3-p, all branches are conscious, but I only experience
myself on one branch at a time, probabilistically according to the
mea
The phenonemon of the uncanny vally assumes a subject. What's the problem?
On Dec 31, 2011 1:54 PM, "Craig Weinberg" wrote:
> Evolutionary psychology assumes a subject though. How does comp
> explain subjective discomfort with self simulation?
>
> craig
>
> On Dec 31, 1:22 pm, Terren Suydam wrot
On 31 December 2011 23:35, Pierz wrote:
> Not to wish to pre-empt Bruno's reply, but I think you're mixing up 1-
> p and 3-p. From 3-p, all branches are conscious, but I only experience
> myself on one branch at a time, probabilistically according to the
> measure of computations. There's no indi
On 12/31/2011 3:35 PM, Pierz wrote:
When you write things like that I'm left with the impression that you think
one's
consciousness is a thing, a soul, that moves to different bundles of
computation so there
are some bundles that don't have any consciousness but could have if you "jumped to
th
Stage hypnosis is one thing, but as a former psychotherapist who has
used hypnotherapy, I can say that it is a great oversimplification to
say that a hypnotic subject raises their hand without awareness. What
actually occurs is dissociation, in which awareness is split, not
absent. This has been ex
> When you write things like that I'm left with the impression that you think
> one's
> consciousness is a thing, a soul, that moves to different bundles of
> computation so there
> are some bundles that don't have any consciousness but could have if you
> "jumped to them".
>
Not to wish to pr
On 12/31/2011 1:49 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 31.12.2011 22:05 meekerdb said the following:
On 12/31/2011 6:07 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
So a self-driving car is probably much more close to have a
first person view than a rock, especially if you make it possible
for the car to memorize its sh
On 12/31/2011 1:33 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 31.12.2011 22:00 meekerdb said the following:
On 12/31/2011 5:49 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 31.12.2011 09:17 Pierz said the following:
On Dec 31, 6:17 pm, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/30/2011 12:51 AM, Pierz wrote:
On Dec 30, 6:35 pm, meekerdb wr
On 31.12.2011 22:05 meekerdb said the following:
On 12/31/2011 6:07 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
So a self-driving car is probably much more close to have a
first person view than a rock, especially if you make it possible
for the car to memorize its short term instances of computation
(sensing, pl
On 31.12.2011 22:00 meekerdb said the following:
On 12/31/2011 5:49 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 31.12.2011 09:17 Pierz said the following:
On Dec 31, 6:17 pm, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/30/2011 12:51 AM, Pierz wrote:
On Dec 30, 6:35 pm, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/29/2011 4:11 PM, Pierz wrote: You
On 12/31/2011 8:12 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Dec 31, 2:43 am, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/30/2011 4:23 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIuF5DcsbKU
The uncanny valley is a hypothesis in the field of robotics and 3D
computer animation which holds that when human replicas l
On 12/31/2011 6:07 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
>So a self-driving car is probably much more close to have a first
>person view than a rock, especially if you make it possible for the
>car to memorize its short term instances of computation (sensing,
>planning, etc.) into a "long scenario involving
On 12/31/2011 5:49 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 31.12.2011 09:17 Pierz said the following:
On Dec 31, 6:17 pm, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/30/2011 12:51 AM, Pierz wrote:
On Dec 30, 6:35 pm, meekerdbwrote:
On 12/29/2011 4:11 PM, Pierz wrote: You think it is ludicrous
that a Mars Rover is pro
On 12/31/2011 3:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
As I've said we're on the same team with regards to primitive
materialism. But I have sympathy for the materialists on this issue of
instantiation. After all, we need computers still, we can't rely on
the arithmetical platonia to predict the weather for
On 12/30/2011 12:41 PM, John Clark wrote:
> If we found a brain growing in the attic and we had never
seen one before, we would put gloves on and throw it in the trash.
Ah...,well...,OK,but what is your point?
I'm sure it's not Craig's point, but it illustrates my point that whil
On 12/30/2011 12:41 PM, John Clark wrote:
Yes it makes a lot of sense, but why did Evolution invent consciousness? Evolution can
see intelligence but it can no more see consciousness than we can (other than our own)
because it is a purely subjective phenomena, and yet I know for a fact that Evol
Evolutionary psychology assumes a subject though. How does comp
explain subjective discomfort with self simulation?
craig
On Dec 31, 1:22 pm, Terren Suydam wrote:
> There's a pretty straightforward explanation in terms of evolutionary
> psychology... nothing that contradicts comp.
>
> Terren
>
>
There's a pretty straightforward explanation in terms of evolutionary
psychology... nothing that contradicts comp.
Terren
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> On Dec 31, 2:43 am, meekerdb wrote:
>> On 12/30/2011 4:23 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>
>> >http://www.youtube.com/w
On Dec 31, 2:43 am, meekerdb wrote:
> On 12/30/2011 4:23 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIuF5DcsbKU
>
> > The uncanny valley is a hypothesis in the field of robotics and 3D
> > computer animation which holds that when human replicas look and act
> > almost, but not p
>So a self-driving car is probably much more close to have a first
>person view than a rock, especially if you make it possible for the
>car to memorize its short term instances of computation (sensing,
>planning, etc.) into a "long scenario involving herself".
Good point. Thanks Bruno. A self-dr
On 31.12.2011 09:17 Pierz said the following:
On Dec 31, 6:17 pm, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/30/2011 12:51 AM, Pierz wrote:
On Dec 30, 6:35 pm, meekerdbwrote:
On 12/29/2011 4:11 PM, Pierz wrote: You think it is ludicrous
that a Mars Rover is programmed to monitor the state of its
battery, t
On 30 December 2011 20:41, John Clark wrote:
> The only way to avoid this conclusion is if there is some ethereal substance
> that is all of one thing and has no parts thus is very simple, yet acts in a
> complex, intelligent way; and produces feeling and consciousness while it's
> at it.
What d
On 31 Dec 2011, at 03:37, Pierz wrote:
On Dec 31, 4:36 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 30 Dec 2011, at 03:10, Pierz wrote:
This thread has been extremely helpful to me in terms of getting to
the heart of this problem and the whole issue of supervenience -
thank
you Joseph for your clarific
On 31 Dec 2011, at 01:44, Joseph Knight wrote:
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
Which computation? I don't see any computation in the projection of
the computation-movie. The Boolean graph nodes are broken. The light
patterns is exactly the same, with the boolea
On Dec 31, 6:17 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> On 12/30/2011 12:51 AM, Pierz wrote:
>
> > On Dec 30, 6:35 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> >> On 12/29/2011 4:11 PM, Pierz wrote:
> >> You think it is ludicrous that a Mars Rover is programmed to monitor the
> >> state of its
> >> battery, the temperature of its mot
34 matches
Mail list logo
