On 13/09/2007, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think the usual explanation is that the "split" doubles the number
> > of universes and the number of copies of a brain. It wouldn't make any
> > difference if tomorrow we discovered a method of communicating with
> > the parallel univer
--- Stathis Papaioannou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/09/2007, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > No, you are thinking in the present, where there can be only one copy
> of a
> > > > brain. When technology for uploading exists, you have a 100% chance
> of
> > > > becoming th
On 09/09/2007, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- Nathan Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > What if the copy is not exact, but close enough to fool others who
> know
> > > you?
> > > Maybe you won't have a choice. Suppose you die before we have
> developed
> > > the
> > >
On 11/09/2007, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > No, you are thinking in the present, where there can be only one copy of a
> > > brain. When technology for uploading exists, you have a 100% chance of
> > > becoming the original and a 100% chance of becoming the copy.
> >
> > It's the
--- Panu Horsmalahti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/9/10, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > - Human belief in consciousness and subjective experience is universal and
> > accepted without question.
>
>
> It isn't.
I am glad you spotted the flaw in these statements.
>
> Any belief
2007/9/10, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> - Human belief in consciousness and subjective experience is universal and
> accepted without question.
It isn't.
Any belief programmed into the brain through
> natural selection must be true in any logical system that the human mind
> can
> comp
--- Stathis Papaioannou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/09/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > No, it is not necessary to destroy the original. If you do destroy the
> > > original you have a 100% chance of ending up as the copy, while if you
> > > don't you have a 50% chance
On 10/09/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, it is not necessary to destroy the original. If you do destroy the
> > original you have a 100% chance of ending up as the copy, while if you
> > don't you have a 50% chance of ending up as the copy. It's like
> > probability if the MWI
--- Stathis Papaioannou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 09/09/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > Your dilemma: after you upload, does the original human them become a
> > > > p-zombie, or are there two copies of your consciousness? Is it
> necessary
> > > to
> > > > kill the
--- Nathan Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > What if the copy is not exact, but close enough to fool others who know
> > you?
> > Maybe you won't have a choice. Suppose you die before we have developed
> > the
> > technology to scan neurons, so family members customize an AGI in your
> > l
>
> What if the copy is not exact, but close enough to fool others who know
> you?
> Maybe you won't have a choice. Suppose you die before we have developed
> the
> technology to scan neurons, so family members customize an AGI in your
> likeness based on all of your writing, photos, and interview
On 09/09/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Your dilemma: after you upload, does the original human them become a
> > > p-zombie, or are there two copies of your consciousness? Is it necessary
> > to
> > > kill the human body for your consciousness to transfer?
> >
> > I have the s
--- Stathis Papaioannou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 09/09/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Your dilemma: after you upload, does the original human them become a
> > p-zombie, or are there two copies of your consciousness? Is it necessary
> to
> > kill the human body for you
On 09/09/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your dilemma: after you upload, does the original human them become a
> p-zombie, or are there two copies of your consciousness? Is it necessary to
> kill the human body for your consciousness to transfer?
I have the same problem in ordinary
--- Stathis Papaioannou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 08/09/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I agree this is a great risk. The motivation to upload is driven by fear
> of
> > death and our incorrect but biologically programmed belief in
> consciousness.
> > The result will be
--- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/8/07, Tom McCabe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > An out-of-context quote does not magically
> overrule
> > three historical examples. And I can easily
> provide
> > more: Darwin,
Talking about all this negative stuff is making me feel like a tired and
ranting old man.
I think I am making things worse instead of better for everyone. No, I do
not know all the answers. No, I am not anyone's daddy. I could even be
completely, or just half, wrong. I feel the more I talk, the gr
On 08/09/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree this is a great risk. The motivation to upload is driven by fear of
> death and our incorrect but biologically programmed belief in consciousness.
> The result will be the extinction of human life and its replacement with
> godlike in
Talking about all this negative stuff is making me feel like a tired and
ranting old man.
I think I am making things worse instead of better for everyone. No, I do
not know all the answers. No, I am not anyone's daddy. I could even be
completely, or just half, wrong. I feel the more I talk, the gr
On 9/8/07, Tom McCabe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> An out-of-context quote does not magically overrule
> three historical examples. And I can easily provide
> more: Darwin, Galileo, Copernicus, Kepler, Mendeleev,
> etc.
Please read some more a
--- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/7/07, Tom McCabe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > If you want to build a spacecraft, you cannot
> simply
> > put lots and lots of chimpanzee engineers to work
> on
> > the problem.
--- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/7/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I see several possible avenues for implementing
> a self-aware machine
> > which
> > > can pass the Turing test
On 9/7/07, Tom McCabe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If you want to build a spacecraft, you cannot simply
> put lots and lots of chimpanzee engineers to work on
> the problem. A single smart guy- eg., Einstein,
> Newton, Hawking- can advance scien
On 9/7/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I see several possible avenues for implementing a self-aware machine
> which
> > can pass the Turing test: i.e. human level AI. Mechanical and
> Electronic.
> > However, I see l
--- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I see several possible avenues for implementing a
> self-aware machine which
> can pass the Turing test: i.e. human level AI.
> Mechanical and Electronic.
> However, I see little purpose in doing this. Fact
> is, we already have self
> a
--- Quasar Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I see several possible avenues for implementing a self-aware machine which
> can pass the Turing test: i.e. human level AI. Mechanical and Electronic.
> However, I see little purpose in doing this. Fact is, we already have self
> aware ma
Hello,
I see several possible avenues for implementing a self-aware machine which
can pass the Turing test: i.e. human level AI. Mechanical and Electronic.
However, I see little purpose in doing this. Fact is, we already have self
aware machines which can pass the Turing test: Humans beings.
If w
27 matches
Mail list logo
