Viewing profile — f_klem

You can start by reading What Computers still can't do, by Hubert Dreyfus. Sorry to repeat myself: this books explains the assumptions the AI research programme is based on, and wh…

The books that I referenced at my first comment already contain an extensive explanation of why those assumptions are flawed, false, or ungrounded. I will not paste here parts of b…

> You say that "the community" derives facts or claims from unproved assumptions, yet at the same time you say that you "strongly tend to disagree" with those theories and that the…

I have the third edition, so I can only speak for it. Being the 3rd edition of the book, I assume that it is the 3rd time the text is revised, so I expect the other two editions (1…

True, any research programme requires assumptions. The problem lies when those assumptions are either false or theoretical (unproved), and the community derives facts or claims fro…

> Knowing what exact algorithm "thinking" is isn't a requirement. Automata class is enough to say "a Turing machine can implement it". I don't know what you are referring to by the…

I'm not trying to convince anyone. I am just baffled that a large part of the tech/software and AI research community do not question their own assumptions, when those assumptions …

> Your references that "back that claim", which are in "books you mentioned", which you "mentioned" who knows where. Yeah, no. I'm not walking that chain. If you want to, do it, bu…

The issue of consciousness appears when you think of the world in a mechanistic way: since all there is are laws of physics and materiality, then how could we explain our though pr…

I have that book at home and I'll check as soon as I get back from a trip. When Dreyfus' book appeared in 1972, it received really harsh criticism from the then AI community. Dreyf…

We know how LLMs learn at the fundamental level. What we do not know is the actual dynamic process of encoding embeddings and their distributions. Your analogies about the PC and w…

1) I think that is precisely the flaw: it is reductionist. 2) how do you actually measure if a rock has consciousness? if you redefine consciousness as simply some kind of physical…

> So why we call it subjective experience then? Probably it is irrelevant, and the reasons are purely historic... or maybe not. How about the idea of computers experiencing things,…

I am not an expert in panpsychism, but for what I know: 1) the idea that everything has a degree of consciousness proportional to its complexity, introduces the problem of compound…

I think the conversation derailed a bit. I see also a common pattern of jumping through different topics at different levels (from theoretical to concrete and back), and that is co…

There are two things here: one is how an LLM is fundamentally structured and designed, the other is how an LLM distributes and 'lays out' the relationship between inputs and output…

Dreyfus builds his arguments based on Heidegger's work. You expressed it correctly: for Heidegger, in order to experience the world, we need a body that is always present in the wo…

> It would be a valid argument if you could explain us what subjective experience and agency are. No one can explain this, so the arguments sounds like "AI doesn't have something I…

Again: don't be rude. Not nice. As 'not nice' as my bad formatting. Philosophy is there precisely to critique and analyze what we build and how we behave in the world. Without it, …

> By what definition? We have this definition from the history of western languages, the history of western philosophy, and works by Lewis Mumford and Franz Reuleaux, among others …

It has to do with words and how we evolve words throughout history and across geographic boundaries. The term 'machine' comes, after some modifications, from the greek word mekhano…

Agreed, formatting was kind of f , but there is no need to be rude. I wasn't saying there was any difference. All I'm saying is that the claimings the AI research field does are ba…

Yes. I read the spanish translation (with occasional reading of the german original). A lot is lost in translation (I do not regard english translations too high). So yes, it is a …

There is no way of dealing with these topics via a non-anthropomorphic perspective. That has been already (in my view) proved by Heidegger and then Derrida. Last time I read about …

As other commenters pointed out, I'm not getting into the mind/body problem. But that's what people normally do: you challenge the assumptions, and all of a sudden they assume you …