First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply Digital immortality revisited
20861 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 8/4/16 , edited 8/4/16

nanikore2 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Jophar_Vorin wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

i personally wouldn't bother people have put evidence and rebuted his theories before and he just rejected them.
Nanikore is a nice person but is very stubborn and can only believe his own opinion//theories most of the time :P


Is he?
I have not seen that, but i guess i cant say anything. I am very biased myself.


Yeah been in to many arguments and seem people give him evidence against his claims etc so much that I don't want to get in another comversation as it leads to nothing.

He is a good guy just very close minded from my perspective.

I tend to think being open minded and open to any theory is the best way to approach science or programming etc

Not to mention my golden rule doubt everything even if it seems correct there may be more to it.


What evidence? Over and over there has been nothing but argument via assertions. When I show people how they can't just do that, I get called various things. That's another logical fallacy- People resort to attacking me instead of my points.



Never was attacking you just told someone its not worth the time to argue.

As always you stick with fancy words like logical fallacy etc...*sigh* this is what im telling other people to avoid.

Not attacking you as a person merely saying you aren't worth the argument with as you just proved.

No reason to point out anything because you object to it and keep going back to you Chinese room theory which has been disproven many times and people have pointed out very good points and flaws.

Not replying to this but stop taking things so seriously i'm not attacking you im just telling people its not worth the time arguing.


Stop taking the Chinese room as a gospel thats always right also stop looking at programming and AI only from a code perspective coding can be biological AI for example.

Nothing more to say but i will tell people to save the waste of time
27273 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Offline
Posted 8/4/16 , edited 8/4/16

Ryulightorb wrote:

Never was attacking you just told someone its not worth the time to argue.

As always you stick with fancy words like logical fallacy etc...*sigh* this is what im telling other people to avoid.

Not attacking you as a person merely saying you aren't worth the argument with as you just proved.

No reason to point out anything because you object to it and keep going back to you Chinese room theory which has been disproven many times and people have pointed out very good points and flaws.

Not replying to this but stop taking things so seriously i'm not attacking you im just telling people its not worth the time arguing.


Stop taking the Chinese room as a gospel thats always right also stop looking at programming and AI only from a code perspective coding can be biological AI for example.

Nothing more to say but i will tell people to save the waste of time


Do you know that saying "this person's stubborn and closed minded" is an attack on their character?

Ad hominems are a breach on decorum of debate. You say that "it's not worth the time", I would say that arguing with people who do character assassinations are an even bigger waste of time. I reserve the right here to defend myself against it.

Chinese Room is not even half of what supports my argument.

The Mary in the Monochrome Room philosophical thought experiment had been around for decades before the recent discovery of the actual condition of aphantasia- Which further proves that sense experience could not be reduced to data. This in turn supports the qualia-dependent definition of consciousness. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/science/aphantasia-minds-eye-blind.html

The proof is on my side. The onus is upon others to show otherwise, not simply argue via blank assertions and then resort to character assassination when things don't go their way.
8738 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Disboard
Offline
Posted 8/4/16

fredreload wrote:

So you got a brain constructed inside a computer. Your eyes can be designed to look inside the computer or outside at the real world possibly by hooking up to a camera. You never get hungry because you control your senses. You can program your food by programming your palette. You can change your shape and form by transferring your consciousness to different brains in the virtual world. You construct your own memory. You model your own house. You design your own Physics. You might have old neighbors. Everything works like an MMORPG but it's free because energy would be free, the hardware might break but can be replaced, and there only requires maintenance from the outside. What you need to pay for in an MMORPG is fashion, and you work by coding, drawing, or generating ideas. You choose when you wish to be terminated. You are immortal.

Now there is this one thing that's been worrying me is that you might be able to speed up time in a digital world. Technically your consciousness runs at 150M/S so you really can't think faster in a digital world. But if there is a way to speed up time this whole idea might takes some more planning.

Then you live until one day the technology advanced so you can build your own flesh and blood in the real world again. What do you guys think?

P.S. Feel free to support your ideas with shows, animations, and movies. I prefer the anime Expelled From Paradise about the views on digital immortality world, other than the AI, I could be wrong.
And the most important of all, don't end up in bunny hell


I didn't read all of your comment because im lazy but from what i read you're more or less talking about either transfer our brain data and consciousnesses into a computer a highly advanced one or rebuilding our brain into some kind of computer or something of the sort at least.

Actually i've had the idea for about 2 or 3 years now about transferring the human brain our consciousness and other memories into a mechanical computer like brain that works in the same matter as the human brain does or better. To be honest i actually see this being possible in 50 years, if you look to the past 50 years ago our technology today in compassion almost seems like magic, so the same could be said for 50 years into the future.

Imagine everyone transferring there consciousness into a computer and then have a world inside these new computer brains where we all can live and interact with each other and other forms of AI that were made to live inside this new world and in this new world many other worlds exist ones full of magic and mystery. Worlds like anime we know and games we have played. This idea, this thought is really the only reason i keep going at it everyday just trying to live because i feel as though this could happen in my life time and i so desperately want it.

Remember Sword art online that seed program thing were a bunch of vr games were made from it, thats kinda the same idea but these are worlds we would actually live in and could switch between at any time.
3129 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 8/4/16

hemicuda2 wrote:


fredreload wrote:

So you got a brain constructed inside a computer. Your eyes can be designed to look inside the computer or outside at the real world possibly by hooking up to a camera. You never get hungry because you control your senses. You can program your food by programming your palette. You can change your shape and form by transferring your consciousness to different brains in the virtual world. You construct your own memory. You model your own house. You design your own Physics. You might have old neighbors. Everything works like an MMORPG but it's free because energy would be free, the hardware might break but can be replaced, and there only requires maintenance from the outside. What you need to pay for in an MMORPG is fashion, and you work by coding, drawing, or generating ideas. You choose when you wish to be terminated. You are immortal.

Now there is this one thing that's been worrying me is that you might be able to speed up time in a digital world. Technically your consciousness runs at 150M/S so you really can't think faster in a digital world. But if there is a way to speed up time this whole idea might takes some more planning.

Then you live until one day the technology advanced so you can build your own flesh and blood in the real world again. What do you guys think?

P.S. Feel free to support your ideas with shows, animations, and movies. I prefer the anime Expelled From Paradise about the views on digital immortality world, other than the AI, I could be wrong.
And the most important of all, don't end up in bunny hell


I didn't read all of your comment because im lazy but from what i read you're more or less talking about either transfer our brain data and consciousnesses into a computer a highly advanced one or rebuilding our brain into some kind of computer or something of the sort at least.

Actually i've had the idea for about 2 or 3 years now about transferring the human brain our consciousness and other memories into a mechanical computer like brain that works in the same matter as the human brain does or better. To be honest i actually see this being possible in 50 years, if you look to the past 50 years ago our technology today in compassion almost seems like magic, so the same could be said for 50 years into the future.

Imagine everyone transferring there consciousness into a computer and then have a world inside these new computer brains where we all can live and interact with each other and other forms of AI that were made to live inside this new world and in this new world many other worlds exist ones full of magic and mystery. Worlds like anime we know and games we have played. This idea, this thought is really the only reason i keep going at it everyday just trying to live because i feel as though this could happen in my life time and i so desperately want it.

Remember Sword art online that seed program thing were a bunch of vr games were made from it, thats kinda the same idea but these are worlds we would actually live in and could switch between at any time.


Right, you can check out Expelled From Paradise, it's a great anime about getting in and out of the VR world. Google says it can be done by 2050, we'll wait and see
3129 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 8/4/16 , edited 8/4/16

nanikore2 wrote:


fredreload wrote:


Well you see, life arise out of nothing. And if you do simulate an environment in the computer, everything at its exact scale, let that program runs for a hundred years, life could still happen


You will need to put that argument in proper form. Right now it's only in a series of assertions.

See the argument thread I linked to. I don't just do something like:

"A is true, therefore A is true".

You must back up your argumentation.

You repeated make the jump from simulation to the actual without explanation. Simulation is never the actual.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation




Well what I'm trying to say is, can you build a consciousness? We agree that consciousness arise from nothing, so it is only a matter of time until we build or simulate one
20861 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 8/4/16

nanikore2 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Never was attacking you just told someone its not worth the time to argue.

As always you stick with fancy words like logical fallacy etc...*sigh* this is what im telling other people to avoid.

Not attacking you as a person merely saying you aren't worth the argument with as you just proved.

No reason to point out anything because you object to it and keep going back to you Chinese room theory which has been disproven many times and people have pointed out very good points and flaws.

Not replying to this but stop taking things so seriously i'm not attacking you im just telling people its not worth the time arguing.


Stop taking the Chinese room as a gospel thats always right also stop looking at programming and AI only from a code perspective coding can be biological AI for example.

Nothing more to say but i will tell people to save the waste of time


Do you know that saying "this person's stubborn and closed minded" is an attack on their character?

Ad hominems are a breach on decorum of debate. You say that "it's not worth the time", I would say that arguing with people who do character assassinations are an even bigger waste of time. I reserve the right here to defend myself against it.

Chinese Room is not even half of what supports my argument.

The Mary in the Monochrome Room philosophical thought experiment had been around for decades before the recent discovery of the actual condition of aphantasia- Which further proves that sense experience could not be reduced to data. This in turn supports the qualia-dependent definition of consciousness. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/science/aphantasia-minds-eye-blind.html

The proof is on my side. The onus is upon others to show otherwise, not simply argue via blank assertions and then resort to character assassination when things don't go their way.


Case in point

27273 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Offline
Posted 8/5/16 , edited 8/5/16

fredreload wrote:


Well what I'm trying to say is, can you build a consciousness? We agree that consciousness arise from nothing, so it is only a matter of time until we build or simulate one


We can't. Consciousness doesn't "arise" at all.

If simulation is never the real thing, then why do you keep mentioning it?

27273 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Offline
Posted 8/5/16 , edited 8/5/16

Ryulightorb wrote:


nanikore2 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Never was attacking you just told someone its not worth the time to argue.

As always you stick with fancy words like logical fallacy etc...*sigh* this is what im telling other people to avoid.

Not attacking you as a person merely saying you aren't worth the argument with as you just proved.

No reason to point out anything because you object to it and keep going back to you Chinese room theory which has been disproven many times and people have pointed out very good points and flaws.

Not replying to this but stop taking things so seriously i'm not attacking you im just telling people its not worth the time arguing.


Stop taking the Chinese room as a gospel thats always right also stop looking at programming and AI only from a code perspective coding can be biological AI for example.

Nothing more to say but i will tell people to save the waste of time


Do you know that saying "this person's stubborn and closed minded" is an attack on their character?

Ad hominems are a breach on decorum of debate. You say that "it's not worth the time", I would say that arguing with people who do character assassinations are an even bigger waste of time. I reserve the right here to defend myself against it.

Chinese Room is not even half of what supports my argument.

The Mary in the Monochrome Room philosophical thought experiment had been around for decades before the recent discovery of the actual condition of aphantasia- Which further proves that sense experience could not be reduced to data. This in turn supports the qualia-dependent definition of consciousness. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/science/aphantasia-minds-eye-blind.html

The proof is on my side. The onus is upon others to show otherwise, not simply argue via blank assertions and then resort to character assassination when things don't go their way.


Case in point



Case in point that I support my point while others simply attack my person while making unsupported assertions.

At least they don't make ridiculous claims such as Chinese Room being disproven. Cite your reference where it says it's disproven.
20861 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 8/5/16 , edited 8/5/16

nanikore2 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


nanikore2 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Never was attacking you just told someone its not worth the time to argue.

As always you stick with fancy words like logical fallacy etc...*sigh* this is what im telling other people to avoid.

Not attacking you as a person merely saying you aren't worth the argument with as you just proved.

No reason to point out anything because you object to it and keep going back to you Chinese room theory which has been disproven many times and people have pointed out very good points and flaws.

Not replying to this but stop taking things so seriously i'm not attacking you im just telling people its not worth the time arguing.


Stop taking the Chinese room as a gospel thats always right also stop looking at programming and AI only from a code perspective coding can be biological AI for example.

Nothing more to say but i will tell people to save the waste of time


Do you know that saying "this person's stubborn and closed minded" is an attack on their character?

Ad hominems are a breach on decorum of debate. You say that "it's not worth the time", I would say that arguing with people who do character assassinations are an even bigger waste of time. I reserve the right here to defend myself against it.

Chinese Room is not even half of what supports my argument.

The Mary in the Monochrome Room philosophical thought experiment had been around for decades before the recent discovery of the actual condition of aphantasia- Which further proves that sense experience could not be reduced to data. This in turn supports the qualia-dependent definition of consciousness. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/science/aphantasia-minds-eye-blind.html

The proof is on my side. The onus is upon others to show otherwise, not simply argue via blank assertions and then resort to character assassination when things don't go their way.


Case in point



Case in point that I support my point while others simply attack my person while making unsupported assertions.

At least they don't make ridiculous claims such as Chinese Room being disproven. Cite your reference where it says it's disproven.


*sigh* people pointed it out in your past post

https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-objections-to-Searles-Chinese-Room-thought-experiment

It's not a ridiculous claim the ridiculous claim is to think the chinese Room cannot be disproven.

Also the fact you assume im attacking your person is just stupid.

i'm not going to respond to you anymore as its a lesson in futility you won't listen and will just cry "oh he is attacking my person for pointing out the truth"

I really don't need this in my life right now i would rather have a proper intellectual conversation with someone who doesn't deny everything.

goodbye
20861 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 8/5/16 , edited 8/5/16

fredreload wrote:


nanikore2 wrote:


fredreload wrote:


Well you see, life arise out of nothing. And if you do simulate an environment in the computer, everything at its exact scale, let that program runs for a hundred years, life could still happen


You will need to put that argument in proper form. Right now it's only in a series of assertions.

See the argument thread I linked to. I don't just do something like:

"A is true, therefore A is true".

You must back up your argumentation.

You repeated make the jump from simulation to the actual without explanation. Simulation is never the actual.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation




Well what I'm trying to say is, can you build a consciousness? We agree that consciousness arise from nothing, so it is only a matter of time until we build or simulate one

Seeing as consciousness is a function of the brain yes.
If you can build a brain from the ground up it will have consciousness if done correctly.

A simulation by definition is an imitation


imitation = Copy


Creating a human brain from the ground up it would have consciousness and be classed as a simulation and have consciousness


Simulated Consciousness is a thing of great debate but there is no one true answer at this moment in time it's too soon to say anything for sure there are good points made by both sides.

Humans and machines are very alike we are just genetic pieces of code that adapt to our situation (this is overly simplified of course).
Once we understand the human brain and consciousness itself then we can reproduce it.

To say that a simulation of us could not have consciousness is to say we cannot have it either.
if it's a proper simulation it will be an exact copy of us and will have consciousness arise just like us ...anything less and it's a failed simulation.
27273 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Offline
Posted 8/5/16 , edited 8/5/16

Ryulightorb wrote:

*sigh* people pointed it out in your past post

https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-objections-to-Searles-Chinese-Room-thought-experiment

It's not a ridiculous claim the ridiculous claim is to think the chinese Room cannot be disproven.

Also the fact you assume im attacking your person is just stupid.

i'm not going to respond to you anymore as its a lesson in futility you won't listen and will just cry "oh he is attacking my person for pointing out the truth"

I really don't need this in my life right now i would rather have a proper intellectual conversation with someone who doesn't deny everything.

goodbye :)


The "truth?"

You mean when I actually answered that link? Why do you conveniently forget that?

Here's what I said about the link, for the 3rd time:

http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-954793/artificial-consciousness-is-impossible?fpid=54102345


The scientist who provided the answer at the top misused the term "experience".

https://www.cs.swarthmore.edu/~meeden/cs63/f11/ml-intro.pdf
In the document, start reading from top of page 5 because it couldn't be copied. The "experience" being referred here is data collection and not conscious experience, an issue which I've already addressed. Some aspects of qualia could not be reduced to data.

The paragraph even said that they are not concerned with the normal meaning of the term "learning". This is because a machine does NOT learn the way a person or animal does.


...This is not to mention all the rebuttals he received on the same page you pointed to.

You ignore everything that doesn't go your way, and at the end this supposed "best argument" isn't even your own.

Yes, good bye.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.