Search results

that's not going to happen if they talk things over. it'll just make things worse.

right, and someone much worse than her just told her she's not a bad person and that's making her reconsider a few things.

e getting told "you're not a bad person" by someone even worse might be exactly the push sho needs to not be a bad person.

It's fun.

We don't know what we thought her derangement would be, but it wasn't this.

She's so dramatic, like, all the time. It's perfect. She's wonderful.

Is it really being a lucky groper when the girl guides your hand to her boob for the purpose of getting you to grope her?

You keep saying this as if it means we can't create consciousness. This is an epistemological problem, not an ontological problem. There is a veil put over consciousness to prevent us from knowing it in others, but this lack of knowing isn't really a problem with its existence or with creating...

It just seems entirely untrue to us that we need to understand anything at all about consciousness to create it by accident. If we create anything that's even remotely able to operate like a human, then it seems like we'd need to understand consciousness to ensure we don't accidentally create...

Kaho time! Kaho time! Kaho time!

If we don't know what gives rise to self-awareness, what's to stop us from coding self-awareness wholly by accident?

Why wouldn't an artificial intelligence have self-awareness? Like, we can't know for sure they have self-awareness, but a part of the point of p-zombies is that you can't know that for sure for anyone. All we have for both organic and artificial intelligence is external evidence. The only...

You ask a typical human what surrounds them, they talk about only the physical objects around them. You ask a schizophrenic and what we say is unexpected and reflects our internal experience as much as our surroundings. Only schizophrenics are conscious.

Nice to see left-handed representation.

Neither computers nor humans are "doing it with purpose" nor "unconscious randomized responses". Both are fundamentally a housing with functionality which runs through transferring and storing electrical circuits (wires/neurons) which allow them to process inputs, store responses to stimuli...

Sure, but she isn't saying "we can't tell if Gena/Ange are conscious", she's saying "Gena/Ange aren't conscious" which seems entirely unjustified.

From everything we've seen, the Professor's assertion that humans have consciousness and AI don't seems at best inaccurate for Ange/Gena, if not wholly incorrect.

The story has communicated in plain terms it won't do that. You don't need to keep reading something you dislike out of a hope that it might turn into something it obviously won't.

Ruka seriously needs to confess already. Heart disease is a serious condition.