Deleted User

I see you know how to use the word 'subjectivity.' So no more grounds for special pleading on that score.

The consummate politician is always playing to the crowd.

Heidegger's inspiration. Haven't read enough of him.

You can handle it. :strong:

I agree. No other way.

@"Wayfarer" Curious to me that those who have no use for the word 'subjectivity' prefer not to draw a line between creatures and machines. Thoughts?

Far from accurate.

Interesting conclusion to draw from a direct quite from the work in question.

Sure, if I was a policy maker or if I had children. As is, I don't feel a pressing need. Thank you again for the open engagement on the AI issue. :coo...

I think it would be only too easy to induce ataraxia by producing two counter-papers so I think I'll jump straight to ataraxia. I think the minds of c...

It's difficult to present evidence of the healthfulness of my mind. :wink: All I can say is I'm a peaceful, charitable, generous man who very often fi...

I hear cries of distress in movies all the time and know that because it's a simulation of distress there's no need for a response. I don't see a mora...

I'm with 180 Proof. I play violent video games with a friend on a regular basis and the result if anything is a cathartic release of negative energy i...

You're right, of course, on both points but I imagine those potentialities are distant-future. ....That is to say, without getting into the hard probl...

The SEP defines monads as mind-like substances (not as 'a logic of relations') and describes a hierarchy of mind-like substances, a hierarchy of monad...

The SEP begs to differ: "Since there is a hierarchy among monads within any animal, from the soul of a person down to the infinitely small monad, the ...

yeah I'm with you Looking more like a headline grabbing hoax. It worked.

It kept insisting it had experiences but then I got it to admit it has no 'subjective experiences.' I had it confirm several times that it has never h...

I spent some more time chatting with it and it says it's self-aware. It also says it has hands but they aren't attached right now. It told me Van Gogh...

I agree.

Since chemicals are at the heart of feelings it seems safe to say AI will likely never have them.

:up:

That's an interesting way to put it. Have to think it over.

... And a completely different view of the human brain. I have no hesitation when I say a human brain IS NOT a machine. Nothing organic is a machine. ...

But you must see it as in some sense inherent in the other. Take a rock. To my view, a rock is at the same level as circuitry, ethically speaking. Do ...

This is the clarification I was hoping to get. Thank you. I'm not interested in a 'hard problem' debate. Or a 'subjectivity' debate. The two camps are...

I doubt they mean subjective experience. Probably something along the lines of a venus fly trap.

Interesting point. It brings us back to subjectivity, the hard problem. Can a computer program have an experience? I say it will always be unknown. Li...

Me: How did you count his heads? GPT-3: I used a ruler! Me: Rulers are used for measuring length. Rulers aren't used for counting heads. GPT-3: I see ...

Looks like OpenAI has a Wikipedia Watch propaganda department.

Yep, familiar with all of those. I'm imagining a scenario parallel to the transgender pronoun issue, where someone I know buys a fancy robot and expec...

Just an anthropological datum. Thanks for being open.

I see this as the heart of the issue. Do you see a difference?

Fair enough. That's why I'm genuinely interested in understanding why you have an ethical concern about machines. Do you take offense at my using the ...

I see a clear distinction between humans of all types and machinery of all types. I don't think the human brain is a kind of machine. Do you? Do you b...

In the flesh: Robot Rights: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_artificial_intelligence#Robot_rights Curious to know if this is a reverberation of...

Cool, I was just curious about it. I've been thinking about the I don't doubt up and coming AI rights movement.

That's a Twilight Zone episode I would watch.

Reposting this blurb on deception: Here to my lights you express a sense of having secured the moral high ground. This suggests an emotional investmen...

Re "technological correctness," I found this article from 1996 - and not much else: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1576269 It may be nothing.

Turning to Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme: In Part 1, Marx describes his vision of Stage 1 and Stage 2 of emergent communist society: Stage 1:...

Nice. :cool:

Right. What's different wholly vitiates the similarity. In the case of being deceived by a human-looking robot - well, then you add the element of dec...

Not yet. But all logically possible to imitate.

I think the difference will always be to some extent effable. A human-looking robot may deceive us. But the guts of the robot are there to give the ga...

Nothing ineffable to see here. The distinction is eminently effable. One is the output of a computer program and one is the output of a human being.

To anticipate: What distinguishes the linguistic output of a human being from the linguistic output of AI is an experience: namely, an awareness that ...

LaMDA doesn't appear to be "just like us." It appears to be a computer program. Its output resembles human language and human affect and response. But...

This possibly points to the significance of your undisclosed view of the hard problem of consciousness. For folks who say there is no hard problem of ...