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

Consciousness is not computation

joe-antognini.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 767 posts

Re: Consciousness is not computation

#31

Post by epgui »

Gwarzo wrote: post #25
epgui wrote: post #18

The idea that you cannot get to consciousness from computation requires accepting on faith alone that consciousness is magic. It’s fundamentally a religious-like bias. It’s not magic, I’m afraid.

This is a little bit of an emotional take I think. The burden of proof is on the claim that you can get there through computation, not otherwise. We do not understand the fundamental reality of consciousness, this does not mean that consciousness is magic. The assertion that you cannot get there from computation implies there is a currently non understood yet essential piece of physics(I assume, but I do not know) wh…

Considering that everything in the universe is the product of some computation, I would consider it a reasonable default assumption that whatever we mean by “consciousness” emerges from computation.

That this idea “intuitively feels weird” or “intuitively feels wrong”, and that we love to think we are special and have a unique place in the universe, is probably a more serious bias.

Re: Consciousness is not computation

#32

Post by jotm »

iosystem wrote: post #5

I genuinely question if consciousness is just an illusion if everything is just cause and effect. Similar, awareness is just a word used for human expression from one human to another for claiming we’re not just navigating a script like a computer but are we really aware or conscious if everything is just cause and effect? I assume AI will be good enough as humans before we understand the human brain in comparison to…

> we’re not just navigating a script like a computer

We just don't see the script.

One of the primal driving forces behind creating AI is to have slaves with high intelligence doing work no one else would 24+/7+.

I assume you'd be against using animal labour as they would be suffering. But would you say the same about tractors?

Going by the logic in that comment, we should nuke ourselves and try to blow up the Sun for good measure to reduce suffering.

Re: Consciousness is not computation

#33

Post by trts »

n8cpdx wrote: post #3

I think people start with the premise that consciousness is a specific “thing”, that it is unique and special to humans (and maybe dogs because we like them but definitely not spiders and flies because we don’t) and then try to work backwards to define it in some ways that keeps it special. I don’t think consciousness is so specific, and I think people aren’t clear about how they think about it as something separate…

> My personal experience is that consciousness, like free will, is a useful illusion

It is probably just a difference in semantics but for me, it seems like consciousness is the only thing that is assuredly not an illusion.

That I am having a subjective experience is undeniable. The objects of my consciousness all might be (and probably are) something else than they appear to be (as is often the experience with different mind altering substances).

Re: Consciousness is not computation

#34

Post by benreesman »

I’ve long since decided that “consciousness” is a system of epicycles that are necessary to make the Sun rotate around the precocious apes. It’s pre-Copernican.

This problem just goes away, everything divides through if we measure performance on tasks.

Consciousness is only a mystery in the sense that people studying it are committed to the idea that they’re “different” to dolphins in some deep way.

I’ve got nothing against spirituality, if people believe in a soul that’s fine by me, but eloquent speakers on spirituality don’t distract from their message with attempts to quantify it.

Re: Consciousness is not computation

#35

Post by shp0ngle »

I don’t understand these discussions, but maybe it’s because I’m a Christian (and Catholic).

Lamda is not conscious, because it’s not a human.

Consciousness is a gift from God to humans (and not even to animals). Robots are not conscious, they are just programmed to act like so.

Once your philosophy stop including God and you go purely materialistic, I guess you end up with nonsense like “is lamda conscious” (or even more ridiculous “roko basilisk” - “is AI going to torture us for eternity if we don’t praise it enough?”.)

Re: Consciousness is not computation

#36

Post by colordrops »

The author confuses the "computational theory of consciousness" with consciousness arising in computers. They are not the same. Consciousness not being computational does not mean that consciousness can't arise in computers.

Re: Consciousness is not computation

#38

Post by kelseyfrog »

tene wrote: post #21

This is just yet another disappointing take on "I feel like there's something mystical about consciousness, that I can't actually define or describe in any meaningful way, but it's definitely impossible for it to be anything computers can do!" This is the same kind of nonsense that leads people to search for some kind of magical "quantum" thing in the brain that makes the special mystical consciousness effect, becaus…

> This is the same kind of nonsense that leads people to search for some kind of magical "quantum" thing in the brain that makes the special mystical consciousness effect, because of some vague intuition that it can't come from the normal high-level behaviour of neurons.

It's this very behavior that I call consciousness-of-the-gaps. It shifts the unexplainableness of consciousness into the unexplainableness[1] of quantum mechanics. If the public did have a comprehensive understanding of quantum mechanics, consciousness would be rebased upon another unexplainable phenomenon and the process would repeat.

1. In this case, it aligns more with the public's perception of how quantum mechanics works rather than the rigorous physics version, but that misinterpretation only strengthens the argument.

Re: Consciousness is not computation

#39

Post by tensor »

Gwarzo wrote: post #25
epgui wrote: post #18

The idea that you cannot get to consciousness from computation requires accepting on faith alone that consciousness is magic. It’s fundamentally a religious-like bias. It’s not magic, I’m afraid.

This is a little bit of an emotional take I think. The burden of proof is on the claim that you can get there through computation, not otherwise. We do not understand the fundamental reality of consciousness, this does not mean that consciousness is magic. The assertion that you cannot get there from computation implies there is a currently non understood yet essential piece of physics(I assume, but I do not know) wh…

Quantum is the go to pearl for everyone who doesn't like the idea that consciousness is not simply a result of a deterministic but very complex system of physics. Unfortunately there has never been any evidence that anything in the brain exhibits any sort of quantum computing or logic or otherwise.

Thus, the burned of proof is in fact on the the claim that you cannot get their through computation, because deterministic physics processes are all that we have observed in the brain, thus the default assumption must be that all the properties of the brain are also deterministic.

Re: Consciousness is not computation

#40

Post by colordrops »

trts wrote: post #33
n8cpdx wrote: post #3

I think people start with the premise that consciousness is a specific “thing”, that it is unique and special to humans (and maybe dogs because we like them but definitely not spiders and flies because we don’t) and then try to work backwards to define it in some ways that keeps it special. I don’t think consciousness is so specific, and I think people aren’t clear about how they think about it as something separate…

> My personal experience is that consciousness, like free will, is a useful illusion It is probably just a difference in semantics but for me, it seems like consciousness is the only thing that is assuredly not an illusion. That I am having a subjective experience is undeniable. The objects of my consciousness all might be (and probably are) something else than they appear to be (as is often the experience with diffe…

It seems to go even deeper. Not even that "I" am having a subjective experience is undeniable, but only that there is a subjective experience at all. When deconstructing sensory and thought phenomena, it can be found that any particular trait that points to "I" is actually ephemeral, and not a permanent fixture of the experiencer. For instance, the sense that there is a face and eyes that is being looked out through or a personality that has a history and persists through time disappear when in a state of flow or when dreaming. They are just concepts, and all concepts are built on wet sand.
Post reply on HN