23 December 2023
AI writes a sonnet
21 December 2023
In one sentence why I'm not so thrilled with the DQ effort
20 December 2023
Trump DQ case: seems likely the Supreme Court will overrule in nationwide decision
Trump DQ case
18 December 2023
Why not pay Thomas (and Alito) to vacate their seats?
EVs are rising; many automakers trailing
16 December 2023
A little note of cautious optimism
14 December 2023
Soft landing, phooey, let's give some credit where due
06 December 2023
Self driving cars? Not so fast.
30 November 2023
Noting the passing of historic figures
29 November 2023
Very interesting commentary on AI \ Sean M Carroll
23 November 2023
Elon Musk and his wacko beliefs
11 November 2023
Busting EV myths
10 November 2023
Not a "both sides do it" situation
09 November 2023
Some stark reality for ya
06 November 2023
Trump will invoke Insurrection Act to quell any dissent if allowed to take power
04 November 2023
Why we need the National Popular Vote Compact and how it is actually possible
02 November 2023
Acapulco nearly destroyed
31 October 2023
Supporting Joe Biden
Biking a car-free freeway... and dreaming of a better future
Happy Halloween
27 October 2023
Christofascist now Speaker of the House
19 October 2023
School Bonds
Big Flip: Sidney Powell
"Inevitable" war with China? WTF?
18 October 2023
Biden visit in light of cancellation by all regional partners other than Israel
16 October 2023
Toyota's Pipe Dream
13 October 2023
Bitcoin mining, WTF?
08 October 2023
The horrible war in Gaza and Israel... an unorthodox view as an American
04 October 2023
Foreign Adversary Talking Points and Influence in American Politics
03 October 2023
A pet peeve
26 September 2023
Call them out with their leader's own words!
22 September 2023
12 September 2023
Biden Impeachment Travesty
10 September 2023
Huge Contrast
Vietnam, America's new "Critical Partner" in the Indo-Pacific
03 September 2023
The seeming improbability of a Trump
24 August 2023
Future DeTrumpification? A role for government?
23 August 2023
Disqualifying Trump under the 14th Amendment
Believing he can cancel the constitution should be DISQUALIFYING
Russia vs. India
21 August 2023
Lowest electricity production price ever: SOLAR
13 August 2023
Really compelling: Lex Fridman interviews Bioscientist Michael Levin
12 August 2023
Description of the Republican Party as it exists now
Lex Fridman interview with Nick Lane
11 August 2023
Climate change video
09 August 2023
Why I believe AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) is impossible
There is a lot of discussion these days about "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI), by which term a purely hypothetical phenomenon better described as "Technology-based Consciousness" is usually meant. I refer to it as "hypothetical," because, like "extraterrestrial intelligent beings," it is a category the existence, or even the possibility, of which remains to be demonstrated. In the case of ETs, my gut instinct is that they exist but are rare. In the case of AGI, or better, my term, TBC, I believe, in the absence of evidence one way or the other, that there is no such thing, never has been anywhere in the universe, and likely never will be.
My reasons, which are purely philosophical as opposed to scientific, center around what I think of as the "Star Trek transporter paradox." If such a transporter actually existed, there is no real reason why the person entering the "Send" station wouldn't simply remain in existence after the signal to recreate his scanned "image" was sent, to emerge as another version of him. Or, if the scanning were destructive, I have to ask, in what sense have you not just killed him? How do you actually know that the replica that emerges from the "Receive" end isn't an entirely different person, who just happens to have a mental image of the prior life of the "sent" version of "himself?" But what is the actual continuity from the point of view of the person that got in the transporter in the first place? I would argue that there is no way to know. The qualia of seeming continuity between one moment to the next could well be terminated for the person getting in; and the person emerging only has the illusion of continuity. There is simply no way to know. Very sophisticated philosophical treatments of the nature of consciousness and the perception of time, including some ancient but highly complex and subtle ruminations by Buddhist sages, have dealt with this issue, but I would argue that no one really knows what the real essence of the perception of continuous consciousness is. We only know that it seemingly emerges in minds, but, so far anyway, insofar as anyone can determine, only in minds of biological origin.
People will express the opposite view quite easily, but I am unconvinced. I have never perceived any reason to believe that a computer (such as ChatGPT, which I have interacted with a fair amount), which can be turned off so that it is an inert object like a brick, then turned back on, is in any way conscious. Even "a little." A system can mimic the externalities of an intelligent mind, which could lead you to infer the existence of consciousness, but the externalities are not actually evidence for any kind of subjective experience at all. I would argue, in fact, that there are indications to suggest that there is no subjective awareness whatsoever. As I said, my gut instinct is that there is simply no there there. The "smartest" computer is only a universal computing machine running an elaborate algorithm. The same may be true of our own minds; that can be argued forever too. But I remain unconvinced that a machine can be built that suddenly, and for no apparent reason, experiences emergent subjective consciousness. I just don't buy it.
I suppose on some level it doesn't matter. If some biosphere-derived natural conscious being evolved somewhere and built a "machine civilization" entirely out of computer operated effectuators (spacecraft?) --that proceeded to self-replicate entirely without subjective experience, our experience of that "civilization," were we to encounter it, might be indistinguishable from an encounter with conscious minds. For that matter, solipsism aside, we wouldn't really know if an actual alien life form was conscious or merely a sophisticated algorithm, even if it were unquestionably biological. Our "theory of mind" gives us pretty good confidence that our fellow humans, and even animals more or less closely related to us, have some form of subjective consciousness, but beyond that, there is a vast forest of the unknown. And even that, I think, is an ever so slight-seeming leap of faith, because we can only assume that other instances of what appear to be minds actually have their own inner experience, entirely inaccessible to us, as individuals.
Regardless, these considerations have led me to the working assumption that artificial, technology-based consciousness is an intriguing, comprehensible idea, but one which does not correspond to any reality, existing at any time, anywhere.
