Why computers will never be conscious

Discussion in 'Intelligence & Machines' started by Fen, Apr 3, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Fen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    292
    Consciousness, obviously, is the nonquantized storage of previous quantized input. No digital system will ever have nonquantized storage, and thus no digital system will be conscious. I'm just curious if this is a well known fact. It seems quite obvious to me. And those "AI" folks seem quite silly to even debate when digital machines will be conscious. But maybe they are just stupid.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. spacemanspiff czar of things Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    823
    "Consciousness, obviously, is the nonquantized storage of previous quantized input"

    ????:bugeye:
    i think i missed when this became obvious fact.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. hlreed Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    245
    A computer is a linear machine that cannot be conscios. However, with the correct architecture, computers can be used to make machines that could become consious. What is required is an algebra where every equation is a computer. From this you can make anything by adding sensors and motors.
    I think consciousness is simply feedback. Sensor read nature and send information to brain. Brain digests it and sends data to motors that perform actions.
    Take the data from the motors and feed it back to brain and I think you have consciousness.
    That is still to be proved. Proof will probably be, ask the machine.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. spookz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    6,390
    fen
    are you thinkit
    it is not obvious to me either. explain your self
     
  8. Fen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    292
    That's not all of it. There are clearly feedback loops in the brain, but what you describe could be something as simple as a theromstat.
     
  9. Fen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    292
    Well you have these conscious entities sitting in a quantized universe. They input and output quantized information, but store in a nonquantized fasion. They also have true randomness (free will), which completes the requirements for consciousness. Now this is the part of the brain that must remain intact in order for "you" to be there. I have it mainly in outline form (as you can see by the other link), and need to get it more into essay.
     
  10. Blindman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    All right to the person that used the words (Free Will). Unproven religious dogma.

    ..

    Until we can prove that someone else is conscious, or even if your pet is conscious, don’t start saying what we are required to have to be conscious.

    I believe that understanding consciousness is completely beyond human understanding.

    Yet I live in hope.. (Just as I hope we can go faster then the max speed of light).

    We must start to dissect the construct of consciousness.

    I think there for I am..

    Is that because I can hear it in my head?? Does consciousness require the ability to be deluded?? Can many conscious systems form a higher consciousness (The mob)?? Where is the boundary between me and all else???

    There are no answers to any of these questions.

    For all we know every single thing in existence is conscious.. We are all made of the same stuff. Why should we be different??


    Ohh..... What the hell is
    ????
     
  11. MFrobotH43D Registered Member

    Messages:
    28
    First, thanks Fen for that outline at the other site. It's quite well thought out. I ask for a bit of room to stear this topic... well, off topic:

    I dissagree with the following assertion (from that other link ):

    It is the "seats" as you call them that are separate and finite. This is all we know for sure. The Entity in my view (which is intuited, and without basis in provable facts) is singular and only becomes separated when manifested in the physical, seated form.

    In my view, the seat acts as a tuning mechanism that "folds" or "focuses" consciousness into it's physically manifest form. I hold that all things, or rather, the only thing: Universe, is conscious. Of course, it only becomes meaningful in human terms when a brain folds this consciousness into system that is capable of action.

    Separations into distinct physical entities like ants and us, happen at the "seat" level, with sensory input and information storage as the localizing force.

    I don't hold that your description is wrong, I just prefer mine (predictably).

    Can this be modeled in a computer? I don't know. I believe it is possible with some kind of networking of processing units.

    The creation, or rather "taming" of consciousness is possible by creating a physical seat. the universe did it once, I don't see why we can't do the same, eventually.
     
  12. Fen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    292
    So I guess you have your own theory? Mine is still in outline, the latest at http://groups.google.com/groups?sel...rnsc52.ops.asp.att.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain .

    There's nothing essentially different with saying there is just one consciousness--I do say that each "instance" is exactly the same except for storage. But I would argue that the storage can never be shared except through physical means--so the arms of this "Entity" can never interact directly.

     
  13. MFrobotH43D Registered Member

    Messages:
    28
    I probably agree, but I wouldn't totally rule it out. My "theory" is really just a regurgitation of my limited understanding of David Bohm's Wholeness and Implicate order.

    Still, I don't see how its impossible to simulate this process with some kind of machine... or did you only mean it's impossibe using a "computer" similar to the ones we know today? In the latter case, I agree.

     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2003
  14. Capibara GrandfatherOfAllKnowledge Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    39
    well , actually I'm surprised at how many people think there is something "special" about consciousness ...

    I could bring many of arguments against the most facts said here but It's 3 am here and I really need some sleep ... all I have to say is that you need to doubt everything and work your way up from virtually nothing in order to begin to understand (not KNOW) things like life , consciousness and basically every other ...hmm... MAIN concept you can think of

    and one more thing ... although this site says "the place where intelligent people talk" (not really a quote , more of a paraphrase) I have seen way too many really really silly errors ...
     
  15. streety Registered Member

    Messages:
    24
    I'm not sure either and we still don't have an answer.



    In true randomness, every possibility is equally likely. That means you are equally likely to throw yourself off a cliff as not. Are you?
     
  16. Fen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    292
    Non quantized storage is infinite storage that cannot be retrieved in a quantized dependable fashion. As for randomness, free will is capable of it, but it is not just randomness--it seeks love and music. Simple.
     
  17. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,188
    fen,

    It is not obvious. What is your justfication for this claim? For reference to music simply doesn't do anything for such a claim.
     
  18. Fen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    292
    I should note that consciousness must have nonquantized storage of previous quantized input. It's actually a necessary but not sufficient item. My justification is that it's clear.
     
  19. one_raven God is a Chinese Whisper Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,406
    I feel lost.
    I consider myself a reasonably intelligent logical person.
    Maybe the way you are explaining it to me is just not connecting with me.

    As far as I understand it, you are saying that the definition of a conscious entity is one that has fallible memory due to the fact that external stimuli is not stored as a "photographic" depiction, rather an ammalgamation of intertwined and ethereal notions and ideas.

    Am I way off base here?
     
  20. one_raven God is a Chinese Whisper Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,406
    I think I understand the point you are trying to make...

    When we look out the window, although out eyes "see" billions of pixels of light in varying ferquencies and intensities, our brain recognizes it as a sunset, whereas a computer will simply see those billions of pixels?

    Are you saying that our ability to appreciate Bach as more than a collection of harmonic frequencies is what makes us conscious and a computer will never have that ability?
     
  21. Capibara GrandfatherOfAllKnowledge Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    39
    - BOOLSHEET -

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    who says computers won't be able to do that? - the topic reads "Why computers will never be conscious" not "Why computers are not conscious"
     
  22. mouse can't sing, can't dance Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    671
    Please, explain to me how any storage can be infinite.

    It is not clear. I for one do not understand it. Why is it necessary for our conciousness to have a nonquantized storage (of previous quantized input)?

    On the topic of randomness: it can be very well introduced to a computer. Make it respond to a very sensitive geigerteller. The flux in the background radiation alone is quite a good random generator, i would say.
     
  23. streety Registered Member

    Messages:
    24


    It sounds a lot like a file compression program of a computer to me!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page