Thread replies: 15
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
Anonymous
There is no such thing, nor can there be any such thing, as conscious AI. 2017-03-23 04:34:27 Post No. 59535561
[Report] Image search: [Google]
There is no such thing, nor can there be any such thing, as conscious AI. 2017-03-23 04:34:27 Post No. 59535561
[Report] Image search: [Google]
![AI[1].jpg](https://cdn.4archive.org/g/image/1490/243/1490243667308.jpg "AI[1]")
There is no such thing, nor can there be any such thing, as conscious AI.
Anonymous
2017-03-23 04:34:27
Post No. 59535561
[Report]
Matter can only produce emergent properties. Emergent properties only exist subjectively. There is no such thing as mind-independent, objective emergent properties, in the same way there is no such thing as mind-independent, objective information. Only the mind gives these things meaning. The mind objectively exists. Thus the mind isn't an emergent property. Thus the mind can't be produced by matter. Thus the mind is immaterial. Computers can't produce immaterial things. Thus computers can't produce minds.
It can be deduced that matter cannot produce consciousness, because there is no such objective thing as "emergent properties." An electron, or any number of electrons, passing between any number of points, in any permutation, through any combination or permutation of mediums, cannot produce consciousness, because of the simple fact that matter is never objectively more than its parts.
The mind necessarily precedes quantification. Without it, no computation even has any meaning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
Sorry, atheists, but you are not gods, and your wishful fantasies won't save you..
>>
>>59535561
>I'm retarded, the post about how technology won't advance
Remove matter from a brain and you have less consciousness. Thus you can fuck off.
>>
>>59535658
That's not even remotely true, lol. You fucking what.
>>
I'm a brainlet but it was my understanding that the computers of today are laughably inefficient and we have yet to come close to exploring the realms of computing with DNA, which would open up the possibility of sentient CPU's.
Aren't the neurons of a brain similar to the busses of a CPU?
>>
>>595356858
>lol
Opinion discarded.
If you remove parts of the brain it becomes unable to perceive things, it is literally consciousness.
>>
>>59535764
What is being retarded like?
>>
All we have to do is have the raw computer performance of a human brain in a supercomputer, simulate a human brain inside it, and finally discover what algorithms make people "conscious".
Scientists estimate somewhere around 1000 PFLOPS of FP64 will be enough and we already have supercomputers inching close to 100 PFLOPS of FP64 so it won't be long now.
>>
>>59535859
GTFO, faggot.
>>
>>59535806
Yeah, what is it like?
You are not putting out any arguments at all.
>>
>>59535561
You don't know for sure what neurons are, they can actually employ quantum computing and real complexity of the computational model is much more complicated.
>>
>>59535561
Temple OS is proof of God
>>
File: 1490009883749.png (196KB, 600x670px) Image search:
[Google]
196KB, 600x670px
>>59535561
You're saying if we somehow assembled a complete copy of a human body from nano particles its brain wouldn't work?
>>
>>59535561
This sounds like the house vs a home argument. You build a house out of wood and stone but it takes love to build to build a home.
>>
>>59535561
SHHHHHHH
>>
>>59535561
The sensation of colour cannot be accounted for by the physicist's objective picture of light-waves.
Thread posts: 15
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3