On Aug 6, 7:40 pm, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> wrote: > When you are online you don't analyse the biochemical make-up of you > interlocutor, but you still come to a conclusion as to whether they > are intelligent or not. If in doubt you can always ask a series of > questions: I'm sure you are confident in your ability to tell the > difference between a person and a bot. But there may come a time when > it is impossible in general to tell the difference,
Why does that matter though? What does being able to tell the difference between a bot and a person have to do with a bot feeling like a person? and then we will > have human level AI (soon after we will have superhuman AI and soon > after that the human race may be supplanted, but that's a separate > question). The human race has already been supplanted by a superhuman AI. It's called law and finance. > > I don't understand what all of this debate over how intelligence seems > > from the outside has to do with how it is experienced from the inside. > > Here's a thought experiment for the anti-zombie. If I study randomness > > and learn to impersonate machine randomness perfectly, have I become a > > machine? Have I lost sentience? Why not? > > Intelligence can fake non-intelligence, but non-intelligence can't > fake intelligence. But intelligence can fake intelligence using non-intelligence. A computer isn't faking intelligence, it's just spinning a quantitative instruction set through semiconductors. It's only us who think it's intelligent. In fact it is intelligent, as a long polymer molecule is intelligent, but it is not conscious as an animal is conscious. Craig -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
