3 ms·
I think the crux of this is defining `consciousness`, which I haven't seen defined in a way that I feel is sufficient in this context and can be tested/measured
by marzell 6y ago
I think the crux of this is defining `consciousness`, which I haven't seen defined in a way that I feel is sufficient in this context and can be tested/measured.
I can program a chat app where if you ask `are you conscious` it will say `yes`, but I think we can all agree that does not amount to consciousness. So how do we define consciousness in order to determine whether human technology is capable of exhibiting it?
Ultimately, following a measureable definition as a guideline, I imagine that any number of people might argue whether human tech can become conscious... I would guess it really comes down to people having very different definitions of consciousness.
I so far lack an eloquent definition of my perspective, but I feel we fundamentally lack the ability to 'create' consciousness, and ideas of 'conscious AI' and 'digital afterlife' make me involuntarily roll my eyes.
- nscalf 6y agoI don't really understand the definition argument, I cannot imagine a definition of consciousness that feels like it's in good faith and sufficiently difficult to capture intelligence and consciousness. Either you make a definition that seems we can clearly make that system eventually, or the definition is something that most would call unfair and narrow. Can you think of a "fair" definition that seems like AI systems couldn't get there? If not, this is not a valid counter point, and more of a communication problem. Any definition about a subset of tasks or creativity clearly is possible by AI systems, given the progress we're already seeing.