You know, those sorts of people have probably written about this somewhere online. They'll be more likely to have the answers you ask for than us randos here on Reddit.

I was at the park yesterday, and it was awesome to see how many people were out and about in nature, but so many of them were glued to their phones. Me too, part of the time. Turns out, a lot of those people were playing Pokemon Go lol.

Not to imply pokemon go in particular is better or worse than other phone uses, I just found it funny

Did your tough love involve taking away healthcare for someone with health problems? The other stuff seems like tough love to me.

The threat of taking away healthcare from someone who actively needs it and legally entitled to it is so extremely risky and, therefore, cruel. Medical care is a very different topic from everything else here. OP is at an age where her parents are legally required to provide health insurance coverage.

Are you in the US and under 25 (or 26 maybe)? If so, taking away your health insurance is illegal. I'm not sure how to go about enforcing that, but talking to a lawyer might help.

It could save you if they decide to deprive healthcare from you. Which, by the way, is morally wrong for you parents to do do you.

So there's no excuse for the ultra-rich CEOs to all do this sort of thing. They still get power from controlling companies, which is compensation enough for a billionaire. More money incrementally moved to the general payroll and out of billionaires pockets is pretty much always a good things.

You're so aggressive for literally no reason at all.

The thing you were talking about was developing deep and unique insights about the human experience, from the comment. Yes, you can do that with a generative model that does not have subjective experience. It can intelligently and creatively synthesize information from vast amounts of documented human experience. That is literally what generative LLMs are designed to do - learn from humans and talk about it.

I understood it. I think i get "incredulous," but I didn't google it.

I'm under the impression that our own cognition is like a chinese box. Sincerely, a physicalist.

>big things tend to be made up of...extent of their insight

Specifically, "swerve" being nondeterministic looks a little like quantum superposition/wave function collapse. That's the extent of my comment, and I do think it's notable.

No, obviously, he didn't observe quantum mechanics. Yes, I know early particle philosophy was guess work. I fully stand by my original comment.

Wow, didn't realized he guessed at quantum uncertainty. That does not affect human brains as far as we know (too big & hot for quantum behaviors), but still, he is prescient.

Maybe don't post your own comment next time

That's fair! I go on reddit too much when it's 1am

I will point out that you could have said that in your first comment, and most of us would probably have agreed it could be worded better. Instead, you said that the article was targeting the US government, which was an oblique and a bit aggressive way to get at it.

You're incorrect about how people tend to read text in English. "In US" gives away that US is a location in this context, not a group of people (government). Especially because "Iran regime prof." is not a position in the US government.

Google "prepositional phrase" and that will fix you right up. "Covered up" modifies "prof", not "US" in that sentence.

"Iran regime prof in US" is the Object and "covered up" is the Verb. You've got nothing to worry about: there was absolutely no implication at all that the US government is involved at all.

Google "prepositional phrase"

>true AI

What do you mean by that? Consciousness? We certainly have true artificial intelligence right now. Consciousness is a different story.

You are referring to a completely different concept. Determinism has absolutely nothing at all to do with the economic policies that are used to oppress people; those things would still happen in a world with free will so long as someone in power wills it. Workers' rights have to be addressed on a physical/social/political level.

Gotta say, our thoughts are complex but absolutely not random, nowhere near totally. We wouldn't have social structure or science if we didn't actually know and do things with intention. Not to say that the world isn't deterministic; it is, for the most part, as far as science knows (we haven't proven that something can act without causality, which the philosophy idea of free will requires to some degree)

Sure, but we don't have to use a binary computer to simulate it. We could use an analogue computer or whatever else. That said, I agree that this is outside of any practical application; it's science fiction. But I think that, in principle, there is no difference between a machine brain and a human brain if they do the same things. Of course, any consciousness would have to have an appropriate environment, artificial or not.

In the same way that a human is, sure. Consciousness is a product of the behavior of a brain. If the simulation allows the brain to make whatever choices a human would (it would have to have virtual senses or something), then I would say it's the same as human consciousness. I don't see a reason otherwise.

>would it ever be conscious?

With actual computers, that is a hard question and I'm not sure how to answer. But if you could simulate every cell in the human brain, you could definitely produce something that behaves exactly like a person that we'd call conscious - inside and out. There's no fundamental rule that says that matter we build machines out of cannot be conscious. I see consciousness as purely emergent, not primal like a dualist's idea of a soul. As such, I think of it as more of an information phenomenon than a material phenomenon (though, obviously, humans use physics to operate).

Yep. That's a much better way to get someone's personaliry than to copy their DNA.

Fortunately, the people who never listen to others' perspectives, by and large, fail and fall into obscurity because they choose not to learn or adapt to perspectives other than their own.