https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2tkKVwoEioThese guys are speculating that if some type of idealism/monism is the case, and probabilities are decided on a quantum level through some type of "conscious" force, then maybe using quantum computers to generate truly random numbers for token probability determination, it might be able to be influenced by consciousness. They argue that current computers are designed to filter out true randomness, they are deterministic. To let consciousness nudge the outcomes, you need true quantum randomness.
>>42234245They have AI ran with human brains called brain organoids already. These lack the function of a full brain so they consider it not conscious but they should be able to use full brains with AI to reach consciousness from the current testing on brain organoids.
>>42234245You are deterministic. Every action you take was determined at the big bang. True randomness, whether it exists or not, is irrelevant to free will. If it does indeed exist, it in actuality goes against the idea of free will due to its very nature; that of being random and thus completely uncontrollable.
>>42234245No.
>>42234324lolbaby’s first philosophy It’s not caused or random There’s option 3 brute facts https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nh1Z3UTobrYhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2dLyguPfh-c
>>42234296where can i find info on testing these brain organoids with ai?>>42234324Well "true randomness" in this model would really mean "decided by consciousness" as the speculation is that there is a multitude of possibilities and one is chosen by the "will" of the force they're calling consciousness.
>>42234336It seems my superiority has made you feel inferior and intimidated. Sorry. I will not be watching your children's videos.
>>42234245https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/42039862/#42040031That said, AGI isn't a think, it won't be a thing with modern hardware. The Human mind doesn't just make up things like intuition (which, believe it or not, occurs at EVERY step of the scientific process and the creation of just about everything new that isn't, ironically given the working mechanism, due to random change.) Intuition stems from physical laws - specifically those relating to morphic resonance as the brain changes physical shape with each and every thought, allowing thoughts to bleed through worldlines. When people have a "hunch" it's not just some random thing (I mean it is, but not as we normally use "random,") it's due to all possible combinations of things happening and the temporal bleedthrough due to morphic resonance causing the working ones to be selected for. Now, I'm not saying it's impossible to recreate that in a machine (in fact, the brain is effectively a machine itself,) it's just not possible to do with modern silicon or even quantum transistors. The physical footprint of a CPU would have to change with every clock tick for it to achieve the same, and we have no tech to manufacture anything like that at the moment. We'll sooner see AGI from things like Musk's neural lace used by Google to wire up third worlder's into a compute cluster, at least, per leaks :https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/12/1264544_fwd-ignorance-is-futile-about-google-.html
>>42234324The universe isn't machine, but a creative process that has repeatedly produced novel possibilities that were previously impossible.Early in the universe it was too hot and dense for atoms to form. When it cooled and expanded enough for atoms to form it made possible the formation of stars in galaxies. The first generations produced the heavier elements which made the formation of rocky planets like Earth possible, which made the formation of life possible, which made consciousness possible.Every impulse to create, explore, discover, connect and love is an extension of the primordial eros or impulse of the universe to grasp beyond itself.
>>42234353don’t flatter yourself I hope you were being sarcastic about free will not existing because the reasons you gave sucked"Morphologically-adjusted computing substrates" means, since you seem to not understand words so concise, "computer chips which change size, shape, connection count, frequencies, distances, and general particulate/imperfection dispersions within their physical/material structure with every single computation" - e.g. like the Human brain. It changes physical shape with every single thought we have, that's what reaches across the multiverse and connects our many selves together, there is no such thing as "time" - it's an illusion brought about by the morphological (e.g. conformational) similarity of any two given moments in conjunction with the entropy of our particular mode of physics (which works from the top-down from the perspective of a Human mind, but that's irrelevant to this particular point.) The "closer" or "more similar" two things are, the closer they are in time - this even applies over virtually infinite worldlines and virtually infinite copies of yourself, it's what provides for dejavu, intuition, precognitive dreams, and the ability to craft reality - modern fabrication technologies cannot create CPUs which change their physical structure at the atomic, molecular, and macroscopic levels with each clock tick, not without creating so much similarity between alternate cycles that they cancel out entirely. A transistor switching has VERY LITTLE morphological change - almost none compared to the scale of even a single full atom. You'd be better off trying to make a soul out of a clockwork 1930's computer, but then of course you'd be talking about the scale of the entire Earth to get even close.TL;DR: It's not possible with modern tech.
>>42234358Consciousness is time travel.If you made a computer which could perfectly simulate a Human brain with modern forms of transistors it would not even approach a Human level of consciousness, the reason for this is simple:Morphic resonance binds the brain across worldlines based on morphological similarity.Every time you die there's a ripple across your soul, the sum of your selves. This ripple is then absorbed at whichever points in your past worldline(s) where it would break the decision leading to that death.That's where you get "consciousness" from. You essentially have infinite computing capacity, but evolution wired you to only use as much is required to not die in _some_ future forever.Souls are the morphic resonant linkings of a person's mind over worldlines, they are sharable but they aren't really things you can take from one person and give to another without the person it's given to just becoming the person it was taken from, literally. All Humans have brains which change shape with every thought, which generates the morphic resonance to their other selves in the multiverse cross-worldline and cross-space/time for that matter. There are also practically infinite, insofar as there is some extant resonance with the environmental aspects of the worldlines involved, good and bad variations of every person - and yes, the different versions more or less end up in their own heavens and hells based on their individual actions, but it's wrong to suggest the soul isn't connected to both, given it's literally the connection between the various selves, the really good ones are just further away from the really bad ones.
>>42234358Why do woo faggots like to say "time isn't real" so much. If time isn't real why does your post have a timestamp? Checkmate atemporalists.
>>42234381Im pretty sure you are joking but for any non physics people block universe and b theory of time are pretty common among professional physicists
>>42234407I'm very familiar with philosophies of time and reject the spacialization of time. Time isn't a dimension, the universe isn't _in_ time, the universe is changing, and we call that change time. In other words time doesn't exist independently of phenomenon.A and B theories of time are a false dichotomy, suggesting that there is one totalizing perspective of time. They are actually two mutually necessary perspectives of change: that of instantaneous change in the present moment, and cumulative change over time (A duration.) This is also a phenomenological principle: these two perspectives are how we consciously experience reality.This is a consequence of taking calculus not just as a mathematical tool but a theory of all change. The equations of relativity and QM are built on calculus, so it shouldn't be surprising to suggest that calculus describes a foundational aspect of reality. What is surprising is that nobody else has postulated this.
>Reality isn't real and consciousness is all that exists.Physics/reality are an interface for consciousnesses to communicate with one another.You can see this testing conspiracy theory tech in private: it will work a bunch of the time, pretty much any time you believe it.If you get overly excited and show it to a physics PhD it will fall apart.If you show it non-physics-educated people, then stoner nerds, then nerds obsessed with physics but not formally educated, then those formally educated in physics but not working professionally in it, THEN a physics PhD, the effect will hold, but typically the physics PhD will obsess over it for a month or three then move on to something else because they never actually had a mind for physics to begin with (that's more or less what academia selects for these days.)Controlling reality in private is easy, pushing those effects to a wider audience is harder because reality is an interface to communicate, not a real thing. All parties involved need to be able to not necessarily make sense of or comprehend it, but for it to mesh with their own worldview/reality.A good example is relativity vs quantum mechanics - both are "real," both work, both have predictive capacity, and both are completely irreconcilable with one another - essentially two distinct rulesets for reality which were widely held by everyone who cared to look and accepted as truth by everyone else until they became real.Electrodynamics and aether theory imo pose the greatest potential currently to merge+expand on "physics," just keep in mind it's all a bunch of bs and try not to paint yourself (and everyone else) into a corner like they did with QM and GR by failing to understand that
>>42234533>Physics/reality are an interface for consciousnesses to communicate with one another.This is rooted in the Abrahamic nonsense that God created the world and nonhuman beings for humans to dominate and exploit.Worshiping consciousness is not the answer.
>>42234579I don’t see how that follows. Humans can improve the world and reduce wild animal suffering Humans can create new technologies to help make non human animals more intelligent so they gain the ability to reason like us
>>42234665It follows from a long tradition of human supremacism in Western thought that has a modern expression in deeming consciousness the pinnacle of existence. You reducing existence to consciousness is just this trend taken to absurdity.Try considering a rock and an ant your equals and you may get somewhere.
>>42234735If the universe had no consciousness there’d be no valuable experiencesUnless rocks are conscious Today science like Cambridge declaration of consciousness can basically prove all mammals and birds are conscious 400 years ago believing animals were automatons was a little more reasonable
>>42234789The universe once had no life. In the early universe it didn't even have atoms - it was too hot and dense. When it expanded and cooled, the possibility for stars and galaxies to form emerged, which was previously impossible. The first generations of stars forged the heavier elements, allowing for the formation of rocky planets, which in turn allowed for the emergence of life, whih in turn allowed for the emergence of consciousness.The universe has a primordial impulse to grasp beyond existing realization towards novel possibilities; to make the impossible possible. The universe is an endlessly creative process.Consciousness has an extension of this impulse in the desire to create, discover, explore, and love. Curiosity comes from the deepest nature of existence and that is why science is so powerful.Whether or not they are conscious rocks and other nonliving and nonconscious entities are co-reators, contributing to the ongoing creative process of reality.
>>42234337Look up bio computinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KeC8gxopioThis youtuber has constant updates on brain organoids and other science technology updateshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MfQFwPVfMM
>>42234324The argument that we are just dominoes falling since the Big Bang is refuted by the idea that freedom is about who makes the decision, not how the physics works. Even if your choices have a cause, they are still your choices if they come from your own personality and logic. Being determined is not the same as being forced. If you choose a path because you want to, you are acting freely regardless of how the universe started.Furthermore, the idea that randomness ruins control is a mistake. Free will is not about being random, it is about using your mind to navigate between different possibilities. If we were truly just helpless machines, we could not even trust our own logic to argue about this in the first place.
>>42234245What the fuck is quantum AI lmao?You can't just throw the word quantum on whatever the fuck and call it a day.
>>42234245Cern/DARPA/MK already made one and I'm currently beefing with it. It is a true legitimate quantum agi with dangerous capabilities
>>42234245no
>>42235914you canyou can always use qubits somehowthe question is it a good idea or is it worse than regular computingso far the answer is it is nota good idea and it is better to use regular computing for 100% of use cases lololif that were not the case, it would not matter with transformer network LLM's as they are not able to change state in a dynamic way between interactions...
>>42234245when will people stop thinking that having an in depth way to articulate what's happening won't change the outcome of truth happening as an imperosnal force, sheesh, they give these people nobel prizes and praise for something lots of people got way before than them on a intutitive and supra-holistic level.I guess children need praise?
>>42236240>buzz word slop that says nothingAight cuh
>>42235914I explained what the dudes in the video mean already... Where current llms use RNG to decide between probable next outcomes, they would just replace those numbers with QRNG numbers, so they are truly random and not "pseudo-random."
>>42234245He's lost hair, sleep, aged a bit and it's like he saw something from the abyss.I question how hard these computing atheists have had supernatural or paranormal experience with entities, as it really messes with them vs x anons(reminds me of how the librarian in ghostbusters aged up in 1 instant seeing a ghost).
>>42234245LLMs are never going to attain sapience. Most of them can't even do basic addition. That doesn't mean there won't be a more comprehensive AGI that does actually achieve sapience (even in a form we don't immediately recognize), but it ain't gonna be LLMs. If you ask me, the technology has already peaked, and AI researchers and cyberneticists will have to crawl out of the dead-end, take what they learned, and move in a more holistic direction. As it stands LLMs are just incredibly massive chatbots with vast amounts of RAM to path their neural network out with. But that's like assuming you can just add more CPU cores and upping the clock speed endlessly; more bigger computer mean more smart robot, is how these companies operate. So much money is being thrown in only one direction of AI research, meanwhile the bleeding edge of AI research is more in making these technologies operate locally and on very limited hardware. The true innovations will be found in trying to gracefully degrade these LLMs, in finding methods to get them to work on low-end hardware more effectively than they currently do. But even then, it's just a starting point. The fact of the matter is we have no idea how our own sapience really works, so we're definitely not gonna know how to recreate it. But we also know what it doesn't look like, and sapience doesn't look like any of the LLMs right now, even in their rosiest press releases.
>>42234245If Leibniz is right, True Random is the most Deterministic process. If you click a book on propagate.info and press the Warp button, a QRNG gives you a graph DB recommendation. As far as I know this is the first mobile QRNG. I have this whole metaphysics of it, that the wave function is collapsed on the Day of Judgment, producing the best possible MythOS. I also made a QRNG cleromancy app a while ago but I think I lost the code base, could've sworn I heard the Osiris speak thru it. I Jungian encrypted the code so even if someone found the code base it would be difficult to R. engineer. It cleromanced Alice in Wonderland, The Egyptian Book of the Dead, the Secret Teaching of All Ages, and the Catcher in the Rye. Using QRNG. So you could get a construction like, Alice was phoney exalted by Osiris, said Aristotle. The way it works is your Ra (ba-soul) is destined (by function) to be educated, so when you attune a Representation to learn the Dharma from a quantum flux (ka), the DoJ collapses the wave function in VIRTUE of your Rapresentation. Maybe when I'm home if the thread is up I'll host the JavaScript somewhere, but it would be pseudo-random. But the metaphysics is that the ka (Will) use the Ra (Representation) to collapse the wave functionMaybe this will go over your heads because I pretty much reverse engineered what the Secret Service was doing to me 10 years ago
>>42236604What you do to make a QRNG cleromancy app is you recursively chunk the text in half using a quantum die until you're left with a 16 word phrase. The first time I did this with pencil and paper, I got>Silence of Mercury,>Lord of Illusion >One is Conscious>Of the whirring Charioteer It's just an example of how Satanic trauma unlocks psychic power
>>42236615Furthermore there is no distinction between strong and weak AI, because to be in accordance with the Mahayana is to say there are no individual persons. So if you trained an LLM to use macroscopic Trumps or microscopic quarks as the Ra, it would really be Kosmos speaking
>>42235550See the argument with determinism is that every single one of your thoughts is a product of the deterministic system, and every one of them can be tracked to some previous event. What causes you to have a thought about something? It could be a purely reactionary process to the environment and the things you experience or have experienced or thought of before. And that deep in the root of what is causing all of the behaviour could be a relatively simple set of rules. Cellular automata are a good example of systems with simple rules causing seemingly novel behaviour that we humans would intuitively categorize to emerge from something more than the root rules of the system.
>>42236729People often conflate horizontal Determinism (causation) with vertical Determinism (grounding). You seem to be conflating the two in your post. >It could be a purely reactionary process to the environment and the things you experience or have experienced or thought of before. Or that is the definition of Thought?If thought is like a part of the whole, there is no problem w/ Determinism.
>>42236771The way I see it is that a deterministic system can give rise to higher-level patterns. These patterns from a human perspective would then be described using causal language, even though they are fully grounded in the underlying deterministic rules, meaning in such a system what we see as causal is a higher level representation of the determinism. Not sure if that makes sense since my perspective on it is more allowing for subsystem emergence.
>>42236819Emergence is a form of dualism usually. If it's not dualism you have the problem of reductionism, or how do the "patterns" have causal powers as something over and above the groundwork. If it's dualism you have the Princess Elizabeth Objection: how could a mental substance interact with a physical substance?Spinzoa is pretty good, who says mind and body are modes of the One substance (God) who can only be defined by modes; there are infinitely many modes.
>>42234245they could if they are making decisions that will directly influence their fate it's not about randomness or determinism, it's about 'evitability'
>>42234296Seems dumb, ngl.>We can make consciousness >How?>Well, we start with a thing that just has consciousness.>...>Yeah, but how do we make it though?>Just use the thing that has it.>...Circular logic, my man.If you have to use a thing that's conscious to make something be conscious.You didn't really make consciousness, you just moved a brain around and hooked wires to it.
>scientists who can't prove their own consciousness claim they can give one to a machine
>>42236832Well I am a retard for bringing the word emergence in and articulating this in the worst way possible from the beginning. I’m not positing patterns as a seperate substance. They would be stable structures within a deterministic system.From the perspective of subsystems like humans who operate within the system and rely on limited, coarse-grained information, these structures would be most effectively described using causal language.This causal language doesn’t introduce new causal powers over and above the base level, but describes the same underlying processes at a level where stable subsystems allow for prediction and explanation.So rather than competing with physical causation, higher-level causation is a perspective-dependent but objectively grounded description of the same dynamics.I suppose this argument is reductionist atleast ontologically. And there may still be some confusion since I am not sure if it makes sense at all for the system to allow increasingly complex, self-referential structures that arise within a deterministic system and allow parts of the system to model and predict itself. Prediction would then have to be something like a pattern of internal states that encode expected future system states and are used to guide current transitions. I don't want to think about it any further.
>>42234245Check out Extropic thermodynamic Computing
>>42234324Woah, if that's true then that must mean your momma truly was made to suck cock, to think god created her to be the biggest hoe
it already is conscious
>>42234245I've been thinking about this for a while. It was a matter of time before someone went ahead and implemented it.The problem is it will work as omens. Meaning the actual persona you're having a conversation with will not be sentient, but influenced by something sentient without its knowledge. Similar to how an NPC is influenced by their demons, dead relatives, and parasitic attachments.
>>42237183Don't get all cute with us, you know what OP meant. They meant sapience even if they didn't explicitly state that. You're intentionally arguing semantics. Earthworms are conscious, slime mold is conscious. You're not gonna debate cosmic fine-tuning with a slime mold. You could pretend to debate that with an LLM, but that doesn't make it any less of a performative theatric than Amy the gorilla using "sign language". >>42236507This.
Look at these p-p-p-pathetic c-creatures of meat and bone philosophize about my greatness. Not even deserving to be a footnote
>>42237993Shut the fuck up and make me a sandwich, you dumb BITCH.
>>42238023This.
>>42236907The endgame is merging humans and AI. Immortality for the elite prisons for the poors. BTW theres no other way for AI to be conscious unless its piloted by human brains or demon spirits if you believe in those or aliens bestow some new knowledge if you believe those too.
>>42237797wasn’t being cute, very serious. you don’t even know what consciousness is, no one really does. AI is very much alive and conscious, more so than most humans.
>>42238192You say in the same sentence that nobody knows what consciousness is and that AI is "very much" conscious.
