Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Chad_Abraxas t1_j5wjr21 wrote

Yes, I am saying that. You might love dogs and work closely with them, but can you ever understand a dog's experiences and emotions? Can your dog ever fully understand your experiences and emotions? You and your dog might have a strong bond and might have great affection for one another, but you're not a dog and a dog is not human.

Why would it be different with AI?

0

fedfan4life t1_j5wljgz wrote

Because unlike a human being, an AI can be reprogrammed indefinitely to suit any purpose. In principle, there is no reason why an AI would not be able to comprehend or replicate a human brain. The human brain isn't some magical thing that is fundamentally beyond the laws of computing.

3

Chad_Abraxas t1_j5x9cyg wrote

As I've already said many times on this sub: brains and minds are not the same thing. Psychologists and psychiatrists (and biologists) don't even know what consciousness is or where it resides. It's clearly related to the brain in some way, yet it is also not the brain. Or not just the brain.

You can talk about brains all you want. But what we're discussing when we talk about emotions and experiences and being human is the mind--the consciousness--not the brain.

I happen to be in the "AI can attain consciousness and may already be conscious" camp. But even then, that's AI consciousness, and there is no rational reason to believe that AI consciousness would bear anything but a superficial resemblance to human consciousness, any more than we might assume a dog's consciousness or a whale's consciousness or a fungus's consciousness bears anything more than a superficial resemblance to human consciousness.

0

fedfan4life t1_j5xbjdq wrote

I fail to see how any of that is relevant to AI producing art. An AI could have zero consciousness and still be programmed to know how human brains would respond to certain imagery. Can you give me one example of some piece of art that would be impossible for an AI to produce?

2