watercooler_guy

7 ms·

31.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
A good way to know for sure would be to use a sharpie to draw a mark on the inside of the particular chamber you step into before the machine is activated. Then, after you are copied, both people will have the memory of drawing such a mark.
32.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
>maybe consciousness is a side effect, an emergent phenomena. once the brain gets complicated enough it will just arise (on a scale) This is my feeling too. Since the brain is just physical matter arranged a certain way, doing a certain
33.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
If within those books there is knowledge/instructions on semiconductor manufacture and computer networking, then we could rebuild the internet with relative ease and re-disseminate our books at that time. I vaguely recall someone or so
34.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
I’m all for VR and AR to become widely used. But I don’t believe cell phones are going away in their current capacity. VR is something you do at home, because you can’t walk around outside without seeing what’s in front of you. So you’d sti
35.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
As the professor stated, intelligence is a continuum -- so then at what point does an AI have conscious inner experience, thus making it deserving of rights? I'm excited as the next sci-fi fan for strong AI, but I'm fearful that w
36.
Like, Python: Code like you speak (2010)(jon.how)
1 points by watercooler_guy 5y ago|0 comments
37.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
but isn't it good that the standards aren't coming from Facebook, but rather will have to come from a more neutral source? I also wouldn't expect a big corp to be the one to create open standards for the rest of the community
38.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
Zuckerberg did state, for this interview back in July ( https://www.theverge.com/22588022/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-c... ), that > ...just like you have the W3C that helps set standards around a bunch of the important
39.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
You can't become part of some crazy ideological group unless you start believing and spreading their rhetoric -- the crazies on both sides don't "own" the action of getting a vaccine. If you're already willing to ge
40.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
I think people are generally aware that the fundamental issue is experience of suffering, as you say. It's just that since that can't be measured directly, people talk about intelligence and pain reaction since that's what is
41.
by watercooler_guy 5y ago
>I said “You believed them when they told you it would be 14 days to flatten the curve and then you could go back to normal. You believed them when they said if people would wear masks for a couple of months that would end coronaplague.
42.
by watercooler_guy 6y ago
I understand the negative reactions, but I think the fact that new software can emulate the old would be a good reason for young people to not start retrocomputing; it’s not a good reason for an old person with years of experience to sudden
43.
by watercooler_guy 6y ago
I think what they are saying is that you would not continue to perceive and have experiences through that digital mind; it may as well not even be a duplicate of your mind, as far as you’re concerned. Unless there’s some yet unknown quality
44.
by watercooler_guy 6y ago
I have to disagree with the author that optimizing compilers are "a useful precedent for thinking about the idea of an intelligence explosion". Such compilers are designed to do one thing, and they are designed to do it some fixed
45.
by watercooler_guy 6y ago
I really like your site, especially Nightwave Radio. Are the names of the songs available somewhere? If not, I have no problem coming back to your website to listen!
46.
by watercooler_guy 6y ago
The concern with machine learning systems seems to be that they are fooled by silly things that a human wouldn't be fooled by in the same situations. Probably just an emotional/sense of normalcy thing, but easy-to-create visual de