You know, when I watch interviews like this with the professionals explaining why their model should be the best model for consciousness, you do get a sense that a lot of what we learn is heavily influenced by the news. As Hameroff explains, his and Penrose's theory was almost simultaneously attacked and ridiculed by top scientists in the field and when I think about most articles I have read which attempt to explain their theory, it's often met with highlighting the bad criticism it has received as though this means something. Actually, Hameroff makes not a bad attempt at explaining his theory, especially 10 mins + in when he talks about why the mechanisms was rational in the framework of quantum mechanics. I never knew enough to make an honest opinion but I was never fond of it in my heart. After watching this, he's given me a better insight and I am far more open minded on their model now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpUVot-4GPM
Look at the statement about how computers have advanced so much, is that not evidence that consciousness will emerge? Hameroff says ''no'' and he's absolutely correct. You might be able to find some ''secret code'' that somehow programs a supernet of computers to experience some birth of consciousness... but the fact computers in general are getting more complex isn't evidence in itself that consciousness will eventually emerge. Consciousness is more than just the sum of it's part, it's what it does, it's how it's responds to the programming rather than it simply being a series of complex quantum computations. Also, Penrose has forwarded the idea that the collapse in the wave function causes the consciousness for many years... instead of consciousness causing the collapse. I completely agree with this quantum interpretation of consciousness: we cannot be outside the laws of physics in such a way that the wave function has no function over the matter inside our heads responsible for consciousness.
Also, if you could actually ''download'' consciousness and put it into a computer, as Hameroff explains (1) then you could say whether you where consciousness when you where inside the computer. This I kind of disagree with... if we are able to download a consciousness onto a computer, then we will know already the mechanism which makes a computer consciousness... You can't take something so ethereal like consciousness and say you are testing whether a computer can be conscious. If you know how consciousness works to such a precision, it's likely by then you will already have created a conscious computer. (1)... and actually Tipler for many years advocated that we could do this.
