22 ms·

> Is AI conscious? I believe "yes" [...] and in a way that somehow means I don't think anyone who believes "no" is wrong. What does it even mean to "believe th

by dleary 10mo ago

> Is AI conscious? I believe "yes" [...] and in a way that somehow means I don't think anyone who believes "no" is wrong. What does it even mean to "believe the answer is yes", but "in a way that somehow means" the direct contradiction of that is not wrong? Do "believe", "yes", and "no" have definitions? ... This rhetorical device sucks and gets used WAY too often. "Does Foo have the Bar quality?" "Yes, but first understand that when everyone else talks about Bar, I am actually talking about Baz, or maybe I'm talking about something else entirely that even I can't nail down. Oh, and also, when I say Yes, it does not mean the opposite of No. So, good luck figuring out whatever I'm trying to say."

armchairhacker 10mo ago
> What does it even mean to "believe the answer is yes", but "in a way that somehow means" the direct contradiction of that is not wrong? Opinion Another example: when I hear the famous "Yanny or Laurel" recording (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel) I hear "Laurel". I can understand how someone hears "Yanny". Our perceptions conflict, but neither of us are objectively wrong, because (from Wikipedia) "analysis of the sound frequencies has confirmed that both sets of sounds are present".
- dleary 10mo ago
  > Opinion The single word "opinion" is not an answer to the question I asked. > Another example: ... "Yanny or Laurel" This is not remotely the same thing. > I can understand how someone hears "Yanny"> So can everybody else. Everyone I have heard speak on this topic has the same exact experience. Everyone "hears" one of the words 'naturally', but can easily understand how someone else could hear the other word, because the audio clip is so ambiguous. An ambiguous audio recording, which basically everyone agrees can be interpreted multiple ways, which wikipedia explicitly documents as being ambiguous, is very different from meanings of the words "yes", "no", and "believe". These words have concrete meanings. You wouldn't say that "you believe the recording says Laurel". You say "I hear Laurel, but I can understand how someone else hears Yanny".

by dleary 10mo ago

armchairhacker 10mo ago

> What does it even mean to "believe the answer is yes", but "in a way that somehow means" the direct contradiction of that is not wrong? Opinion Another example: when I hear the famous "Yanny or Laurel" recording (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel) I hear "Laurel". I can understand how someone hears "Yanny". Our perceptions conflict, but neither of us are objectively wrong, because (from Wikipedia) "analysis of the sound frequencies has confirmed that both sets of sounds are present".

dleary 10mo ago
> Opinion The single word "opinion" is not an answer to the question I asked. > Another example: ... "Yanny or Laurel" This is not remotely the same thing. > I can understand how someone hears "Yanny"> So can everybody else. Everyone I have heard speak on this topic has the same exact experience. Everyone "hears" one of the words 'naturally', but can easily understand how someone else could hear the other word, because the audio clip is so ambiguous. An ambiguous audio recording, which basically everyone agrees can be interpreted multiple ways, which wikipedia explicitly documents as being ambiguous, is very different from meanings of the words "yes", "no", and "believe". These words have concrete meanings. You wouldn't say that "you believe the recording says Laurel". You say "I hear Laurel, but I can understand how someone else hears Yanny".