Hi ferrari,

It is weird, my computer decided that this mail was junk mail.
It is the first time it put an everything list post in the junk list. I am afraid you hurt its susceptibility :)

On 20 Jan 2010, at 19:15, ferrari wrote:

come on silky,

the answer you know yourself of course.

artificial is artificial.

That is true! artificial is a distinction introduced by humans. (I know it is not what you mean, but I let you think).

to say you are alive, you must be able to
reflect on yourself.

Theoretical computer science is born from the (non obvious) discovery that machine *can* reflect on themselves (in many strong senses).
(More on this in the seventh step thread).

you must be able to

Why do you think Emil post, the first to understand Church thesis (10 years before Church), decide to call "creative" the set theoretical definition of machine universality?

and to understand without someone teaching you

We all need teachers, except God or any basic fundamental closed (no inputs/no outputs) reality.

and most
important there is nobody who turns
you on or off (exept your girlfriend ;)).

The universal machines build by humans can be said to be born as slaves. But this is a contingent fact.

real life has any joice, ai
has a programmed joice...nothing else.

You just show your prejudices against the computationalist hypothesis. But the point here is to try to figure out the consequences of that hypothesis. If we find a contradiction, then we will know better. To ridicule the hypothesis will not help. Up to now, we only find some weirdness, not a contradiction. The type of weirdness we find can be shown observable in nature. This confirms, (but does not prove 'course) the mechanist hypothesis.

What is your theory of mind? In case of disease, would accept an artificial kidney, heart? If yes, would you accept that your daughter marry a man who already accepted an artificial brain? Or do you think it would be a zombie (acting like a human, but having no consciousness).

Don't worry. Artificial humans will not appear soon.



On 18 Jan., 06:21, silky <michaelsli...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm not sure if this question is appropriate here, nevertheless, the
most direct way to find out is to ask it :)

Clearly, creating AI on a computer is a goal, and generally we'll try
and implement to the same degree of computational"ness" as a human.
But what would happen if we simply tried to re-implement the
consciousness of a cat, or some "lesser" consciousness, but still
alive, entity.

It would be my (naive) assumption, that this is arguably trivial to
do. We can design a program that has a desire to 'live', as desire to
find mates, and otherwise entertain itself. In this way, with some
other properties, we can easily model simply pets.

I then wonder, what moral obligations do we owe these programs? Is it
correct to turn them off? If so, why can't we do the same to a real
life cat? Is it because we think we've not modelled something
correctly, or is it because we feel it's acceptable as we've created
this program, and hence know all its laws? On that basis, does it mean
it's okay to "power off" a real life cat, if we are confident we know
all of it's properties? Or is it not the knowning of the properties
that is critical, but the fact that we, specifically, have direct
control over it? Over its internals? (i.e. we can easily remove the
lines of code that give it the desire to 'live'). But wouldn't, then,
the removal of that code be equivelant to killing it? If not, why?

Apologies if this is too vague or useless; it's just an idea that has
been interesting me.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en .


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to