Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 189 posts

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#21

Post by dejb »

drcode wrote: post #7

I am dead certain that it would NOT be possible to achieve consciousness in a computer program. On the other hand, I know if I ever had to debate this question with Daniel Dennett or Eliezer Yudkowsky or any other capable person who believes there's nothing special about "consciousness" I would lose the debate. Attributing a special meaning to consciousness, on the surface, is just as illogical as believing in religi…

OK here's an argument for why you could be right.

Whatever it is that distinguishes consciousness for what computers can possible do is also the thing that makes you realise that computers can't be conscious. If you could logically write the reason down to 'prove it' then it would also be something that you could implement in a computer. So the reason, whatever it is, has lie somewhat outside of specifiable logic.

Just in case this is somehow original. I'm designating this 'thing' as a 'dejb' and calling the whole thing "dejb's theory/proposition/whatever". Although it actually probably just a restatement of Godel's incompleteness theorem. Also I actually believe that computers can be concsious.

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#22

Post by byoung2 »

reynolds wrote: post #15
byoung2 wrote: post #9

which "new lead" in computation do you think will allow it? I don't know if hardware is holding back progress in AI, especially with distributed computing; it is more likely a question of software and programming. I think in order for a computer to exhibit a reasonable facsimile of human intelligence, it will have to do more than just run programs written by humans. It would have to have the ability to write and rewr…

Are humans at a place where we can write and rewrite our own DNA?

The computer equivalent of human DNA would have more to do with hardware than code. When I talk about computers rewriting code, I'm talking more about rewriting patterns of thought processing. While humans can't rewrite DNA on the fly, we can definitely teach ourselves new ways of approaching problems.

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#23

Post by chrischen »

rabidsnail wrote: post #12

We have no definition of consciousness, so it's impossible to say whether machine consciousness is possible, or whether we have it already.

I think the definition of consciousness is implied as whatever we humans are experiencing right now. So for a computer to be truly realizing its own existence, it would have to be modeled after ourselves.

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#24

Post by zoba »

gruseom wrote: post #11

Let's address the easy part: Do you think the Church-Turing thesis (anything that is computable is computable by a Turing machine) indicates that machine consciousness is possible? Only if you assume that consciousness is a computation, which is assuming everything. I normally try to resist this topic, but what you're saying here tugs at my heart-strings: I'm now a little concerned that it may all be a waste. I'd pre…

I've thought of it several times, but it wasn't until recently that it actually kind of scared me. It was just a surprise thought that arose as I was once again thinking about the topic.

It probably scared me this time and not others because I'm very stressed over the GRE, and grad school applications (namely: where the heck should I apply), and how me telling grad schools "Oh, I'd like to study machine consciousness" will go over. I could be wrong, but I'm concerned they wont take me seriously...so I've been trying to think of something that sounds more acceptable.

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#25

Post by nev »

Try this thought experiment. Imagine there was a replicator that could take an exact copy of your current atom states and replicate them somewhere else while keeping you perfectly intact. Doesn't have to be physical - could be replicated by a computer program.

Now here's the thing - you would still feel like you, looking out of your eyes. The other versions of you would be distinctly separate to you - not you.

That bit that makes you feel you are you - that's what some would call consciousness and others would call a soul.

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#26

Post by amalcon »

kevinpet wrote: post #8

If we assume that humans are conscious, then yes, it is possible for a machine to be conscious. The only arguments categorically differentiating humans from electronic machines are religious in nature. I define consciousness as having an internal model of the world that includes yourself, as well as your own though processes (at a lower degree of fidelity). This says how you compute things, not what you are computing…

There is one nonreligious factor that significantly differentiates humans from machines: that humans evolved, while machines were built by humans. There's an argument to be made that humans cannot understand consciousness well enough to build it, because consciousness is our only tool for doing that.

Of course, this only applies to intentional creation of consciousness. It says nothing about the distinct possibility that we could create a consciousness by accident.

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#27

Post by dbul »

Where did you go to school? It sounds very much like you have a symbolic background. There are many approaches and people are attacking them from different angles. Here are just a couple of resources worth looking at off the top of my head:

Christof Koch at CalTech (hi, virgil) http://www.klab.caltech.edu/~koch/

Larry Yaeger & John Beggs http://www.indiana.edu/~rcapub/v30n2/mindmade.shtml

Of course, Douglas Hofstadter http://www.cogsci.indiana.edu/

Koch, Churchland, etc. speak on consciousness: http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/342

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#28

Post by kevbin »

drcode wrote: post #16
kevinpet wrote: post #8

If we assume that humans are conscious, then yes, it is possible for a machine to be conscious. The only arguments categorically differentiating humans from electronic machines are religious in nature. I define consciousness as having an internal model of the world that includes yourself, as well as your own though processes (at a lower degree of fidelity). This says how you compute things, not what you are computing…

Wouldn't you agree that it feels awfully "weird" to be a living, breathing human? Doesn't it seem to be beyond what can be expressed by mere computer algorithms? I realize it is not a defensible argument to say that the human experience is just to "weird" to be computable- I wish I had a better argument for defending my position... Nonetheless, I find it hard to understand people, such as yourself, that are probably…

Weird compared to what? I have no experience being anything other than a living, breathing human. Thomas Nagle wrote up the classic "qualia" argument you're making as "What is it like to be a Bat?" (here: http://www.clarku.edu/students/philosophyclub/docs/nagel.pdf..., it seems persuasive: that there is a certain subjective quality to consciousness & conscious experience— it must feel like something to be a bat, or a person, or whatever? Hofstadter's and Dennett's book, The Mind's I (http://www.amazon.com/Minds-Fantasies-Reflections-Self-Soul/...) is an interesting introduction to this kind of stuff, the authors have a lot of fun @ qualia's expense.

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#29

Post by codexon »

kevinpet wrote: post #8

If we assume that humans are conscious, then yes, it is possible for a machine to be conscious. The only arguments categorically differentiating humans from electronic machines are religious in nature. I define consciousness as having an internal model of the world that includes yourself, as well as your own though processes (at a lower degree of fidelity). This says how you compute things, not what you are computing…

You are assuming that there is no innate quality of human organic compounds and processes that differentiates us from electrical components.

It may very well be the case that this is either true or false. We simply don't have enough evidence.

And given the fact that we are discovering new properties of matter and organic reactions all the time, there is a bias towards this being false.

Re: Ask HN: Do you think machine consciousness is possible?

#30

Post by zoba »

dbul wrote: post #27

Where did you go to school? It sounds very much like you have a symbolic background. There are many approaches and people are attacking them from different angles. Here are just a couple of resources worth looking at off the top of my head: Christof Koch at CalTech (hi, virgil) http://www.klab.caltech.edu/~koch/ Larry Yaeger & John Beggs http://www.indiana.edu/~rcapub/v30n2/mindmade.shtml Of course, Douglas Hofstadte…

I am at NC State (graduating in May), and my research adviser does have a symbolic background (I'm pretty sure)...very good read on your part!

Thanks very much for the links. I am stressing over where to apply, hopefully these will help some.

Post reply on HN