3 ms·
> The coincidence that this picture emerges at the same time as current fads in tech is too great to ignore It's no coincidence, I see it as a kind of reframin
by freeflight 9y ago
> The coincidence that this picture emerges at the same time as current fads in tech is too great to ignore
It's no coincidence, I see it as a kind of reframing the issue from a different perspective/approach and for that, we use whatever seems the best framework of explanation we have at hand during that time.
Gotta start somewhere, can't try to paint a picture without a frame and at least some colors.
One can easily see the evolution how the frameworks we use keep getting more complex, from drives and pulleys to computers and NNs, so there clearly is some progress in how we are trying to describe the workings of the brain/consciousness.
In the end, it's also about what's the actual goal here: Trying to understand the human brain/consciousness or trying to artificially create "consciousness" or rather something resembling it. The later doesn't necessarily require the former.
- rhyolight_ 9y agoNot consciousness, but intelligence. Big difference.
- analogic 9y agoIs it? Personal theory is consciousness scales, like we're more conscious than a bug, but a bug still definitely conscious. Then like A.I. overlords / borg hive mind more conscious still.
- gnaritas 9y agoMaybe it does, but does intelligence require consciousness?
- aminorex 9y agoAnd: Is the question empirical or analytic? It is hard to discuss such matters without an agreed framework, definitions. The definitions for these terms are a long-standing analytic conundrum. Abstractly, it is hard to understand how any performance could require consciousness unless consciousness is defined as a class of performance. If it is, then the question boils down to "Is performance class I a proper subset of performance class C?" Which is, prima facie, an analytic question.
- namlem 9y agoHow far down does the scale go? Are brainless animals like oysters conscious? What about the mycelium network underneath a forest?
- analogic 9y agoWell maybe better way to state, less 'conscious' and more 'things they're conscious of.'
- cgmg 9y agoNot sure why you were downvoted. It's important to keep the two terms separate for the sake of discourse, even if "ultimately" they turn out to be the same. Can something be more conscious but less intelligent than something else, or viceversa? We don't know for sure yet.
- freeflight 9y agoAre there commonly agreed definitions for those terms in the AI/ML community? I don't know, that's why I'm never sure what terms to use.
- amthewiz 9y agoCognitive scientists define consciousness as the ability to have subjective experiences. The definition is not mathematically concrete, but sufficient to differentiate from intelligence.