5 ms·

Then we'll make machines out of "human organic compounds" to exploit those processes. We're machines. That we may not have made a machine of the same class ou

by Freaky 17y ago

Then we'll make machines out of "human organic compounds" to exploit those processes. We're machines. That we may not have made a machine of the same class ourselves is an implementation detail. Maybe a large one, but still not really an argument against making conscious intelligent machines. Biology can do it, sooner or later so can we.

joubert 17y ago
We are biological. So if we do it, it is really just a phenotypical expression of our genes. Perhaps the disagreement is about when do machines (keeping in mind they're mechanical by definition) cross over to becoming more and more like biological entities (replication). And once they do, is it still coherent to think of them as machines as we use the term today. Or would we then think machines have been elevated to the biological level.
- tetha 17y ago
  This is certainly a good point. At least I somewhen crossed the line when I just started to see things as input-output-devices with more or less complicated algorithms in the middle. The human has a hideous complicated algorithm in there, involving a live-long history, internal feedback and reflection and arbitrary side constraints. A spider for example is much simpler. 'If the net shakes, walk where it shakes and eat.' (Certainly, + a batch of regulations to be able to walk and sense, but the point stands). However, imo at a certain point, a computer program passes the complexity of, say, a spider. Just consider modern compilers. These things are of baffling complexity and do things inside no human can imagine in details :) Or, imagine data mining software, or even just very complicated, security aware network guards. All of these softwares are very, very complicated in their input-output-behaviour, and even though they are not as complicated as a human, they certainly can compete with a spider, at least for me. And exactly this view is what caused some pretty nasty discussions for me, since some people are just not crossing the line of 'everything is an input-output device of different forms' and they stand hard on the ground that machines and animals are different, because they are machines and animals (and some go ridiculous ways, 'god made animals, humans made machines', and whatsoever, not even some 'but the spider might be more complicated than FOO, because, which whould be a nice discussion :) ). So, overall, I, as a person who is working hard on being a tolerant, non-racist person (which is really hard), don't see a reason to exclude the possibility of machines and robots being conscious, just because 'they are electrical and not organic' (which has a ring of "he is black, he CANNOT do science" to me. Sorry if I just offended a lot of people).
elduderino 17y ago
Are you saying it will be possible someday to kill a human being, disassemble all its parts, reassemble them and bring that person back to life?
- mgrouchy 17y ago
  Are you saying its not possible? I don't know if I agree with Freaky, but I learned a long time ago to be hesitant saying anything is impossible.
- Freaky 17y ago
  Er.. no, I'm saying if there's something magically special about our organic composition required to make a conscious being, then we can build machines out of the same organic compounds. If you want to get those compounds by disassembling people, well.. I guess waste not want not, but it isn't really what I had in mind ;) "Consciousness is not computable" just means we need to build a new class of machine. Whether it's a blob of organic jelly in a box, or an IC with currently unknown structures on it to exploit certain handwavy quantum processes, or whatever; it just makes the task more complex, it doesn't make it impossible.

by Freaky 17y ago

joubert 17y ago

We are biological. So if we do it, it is really just a phenotypical expression of our genes. Perhaps the disagreement is about when do machines (keeping in mind they're mechanical by definition) cross over to becoming more and more like biological entities (replication). And once they do, is it still coherent to think of them as machines as we use the term today. Or would we then think machines have been elevated to the biological level.

tetha 17y ago
This is certainly a good point. At least I somewhen crossed the line when I just started to see things as input-output-devices with more or less complicated algorithms in the middle. The human has a hideous complicated algorithm in there, involving a live-long history, internal feedback and reflection and arbitrary side constraints. A spider for example is much simpler. 'If the net shakes, walk where it shakes and eat.' (Certainly, + a batch of regulations to be able to walk and sense, but the point stands). However, imo at a certain point, a computer program passes the complexity of, say, a spider. Just consider modern compilers. These things are of baffling complexity and do things inside no human can imagine in details :) Or, imagine data mining software, or even just very complicated, security aware network guards. All of these softwares are very, very complicated in their input-output-behaviour, and even though they are not as complicated as a human, they certainly can compete with a spider, at least for me. And exactly this view is what caused some pretty nasty discussions for me, since some people are just not crossing the line of 'everything is an input-output device of different forms' and they stand hard on the ground that machines and animals are different, because they are machines and animals (and some go ridiculous ways, 'god made animals, humans made machines', and whatsoever, not even some 'but the spider might be more complicated than FOO, because, which whould be a nice discussion :) ). So, overall, I, as a person who is working hard on being a tolerant, non-racist person (which is really hard), don't see a reason to exclude the possibility of machines and robots being conscious, just because 'they are electrical and not organic' (which has a ring of "he is black, he CANNOT do science" to me. Sorry if I just offended a lot of people).

elduderino 17y ago

Are you saying it will be possible someday to kill a human being, disassemble all its parts, reassemble them and bring that person back to life?

mgrouchy 17y ago
Are you saying its not possible? I don't know if I agree with Freaky, but I learned a long time ago to be hesitant saying anything is impossible.
Freaky 17y ago
Er.. no, I'm saying if there's something magically special about our organic composition required to make a conscious being, then we can build machines out of the same organic compounds. If you want to get those compounds by disassembling people, well.. I guess waste not want not, but it isn't really what I had in mind ;) "Consciousness is not computable" just means we need to build a new class of machine. Whether it's a blob of organic jelly in a box, or an IC with currently unknown structures on it to exploit certain handwavy quantum processes, or whatever; it just makes the task more complex, it doesn't make it impossible.