Re: 120 orders of magnitude.

On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 2:39 PM Brent Meeker wrote: * On the contrary I think people who cite this as a great failure of QFT > are producing clickbait. No physicist has ever taken the number > seriously. * > Well of course no physicist has ever taken that number seriously, that is the point!!

Re: 120 orders of magnitude.

On the contrary I think people who cite this as a great failure of QFT are producing clickbait.  No physicist has ever taken the number seriously.  I think it was always a misbegotten number because it's really calculating the eigenvalue of the energy in a Planck size cube.  But the eigenvalue

Re: 120 orders of magnitude.

On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 12:07 AM Brent Meeker wrote: > What I said. > https://www.patreon.com/posts/worst-prediction-102409950 This is a good example of why I'm not a big fan of Sabine Hossenfelder, she's always right and everybody else is always wrong. In 1967 Yakov Zel’dovich was the first

Re: NYTimes.com: A Tantalizing ‘Hint’ That Astronomers Got Dark Energy All Wrong

On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 5:53 PM Jesse Mazer wrote: *> "The article > at > https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/04/dark-energy-might-not-be-constant-after-all/ > > says: 'One alternative theory proposes that

Re: NYTimes.com: A Tantalizing ‘Hint’ That Astronomers Got Dark Energy All Wrong

The article at https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/04/dark-energy-might-not-be-constant-after-all/ says: 'One alternative theory proposes that the universe may be filled with a fluctuating form of dark energy dubbed “quintessence.” There are also several other alternative models that assume the

Re: [Extropolis] NYTimes.com: Did One Guy Just Stop a Huge Cyberattack?

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 10:59 PM Keith Henson wrote: *> "Open-source software is normally secure, but not against this kind > of attack. Whoever did it spent years working their way into a > position of trust."* *It doesn't look like the workings of an individual to me, I think it needed the

Re: [Extropolis] NYTimes.com: Did One Guy Just Stop a Huge Cyberattack?

I'd be surprised if it hadn't been done so already. This story has been in the mainstream media news for the past weekend at least. I agree its an amazing story - we collectively dodged a bullet, but worryingly have little to prevent its reoccurrence. On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 08:51:32AM -0400,

Re: [Extropolis] NYTimes.com: Did One Guy Just Stop a Huge Cyberattack?

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 10:59 PM Keith Henson wrote: *"That's one of the most amazing stories I have ever heard."* *Anyone should feel free to forward it to the Extropy List. I can't. * * John K Clark* On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 5:15 AM John Clark wrote: > > > > Explore this gift article from

Re: NYTimes.com: A Tantalizing ‘Hint’ That Astronomers Got Dark Energy All Wrong

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 6:00 PM Brent Meeker wrote: > "*The next question will be what causes DE to change?"* That is a very good question but nobody has a very good answer, but at least now we know that's the correct question to ask. Assuming of course this result holds up and dark energy

Re: NYTimes.com: A Tantalizing ‘Hint’ That Astronomers Got Dark Energy All Wrong

"If the work of dark energy were constant over time, it would eventually push all the stars and galaxies so far apart that even atoms would be torn asunder,..." That's not true.  The estimated strength of dark energy, w=-1, implied that galaxy clusters and any smaller groups would still be

Re: Environmentalists are not serious people

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 11:15 PM 'spudboy...@aol.com' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: *>"Trump failed on some of his braggings for sure."* > *You think?* > * "> For policies? Immigration, Inflation, Foreign troubles, crime, he > did better. "* > During the

Re: Environmentalists are not serious people

Trump failed on some of his braggings for sure. For policies? Immigration, Inflation, Foreign troubles, crime,  he did better. Will he take power in 2024? Eh, we'll talk.  On Wednesday, April 3, 2024 at 06:47:51 AM EDT, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 7:15 PM

Re: Coming Singularity

You sure that human brains don't use quantum computation?  Maybe the Irish got this wrong? Our brains use quantum computation | | | | | | | | | | | Our brains use quantum computation A team of scientists believe our brains could use quantum computation, after adapting an idea

Re: Coming Singularity

My name is Legion.  On Wednesday, April 3, 2024 at 11:07:47 AM EDT, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Apr 2, 2024, 7:18 PM 'spudboy...@aol.com' via Everything List wrote: Opinion on what occurs when we load, not an LLM, but a LLM + a Neural  Net on a low-error, high entanglement,

Re: Coming Singularity

On Tue, Apr 2, 2024, 7:18 PM 'spudboy...@aol.com' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Opinion on what occurs when we load, not an LLM, but a LLM + a Neural Net > on a low-error, high entanglement, quantum computer. Will this create a > mind? > If you're not

Re: Coming Singularity

On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 7:18 PM 'spudboy...@aol.com' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: *> Opinion on what occurs when we load, not an LLM, but a LLM + a Neural > Net on a low-error, high entanglement, quantum computer. Will this create a > mind? * > *Certainly. A

Re: Environmentalists are not serious people

On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 7:15 PM 'spudboy...@aol.com' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: * > I continually nag, not Personalities but Policies. If the Policies are > workable, personality be damned.* > *It doesn't matter if a policy is workable or not if a personality

Re: Coming Singularity

Opinion on what occurs when we load, not an LLM, but a LLM + a Neural  Net on a low-error, high entanglement, quantum computer. Will this create a mind?  On Saturday, March 30, 2024 at 08:31:25 AM EDT, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 10:28 PM Russell Standish wrote:

Re: Environmentalists are not serious people

Calls, JC's analysis as factual, or as it is now termed, "based."  Engineering should never be guided by ideology only what works?  For ALL of us, we primates are often governed by our amygdala's alone, Team spirit & Bad Experiences with the Other Team. Yoda would say, "Strong in the Rage and

Re: Environmentalists are not serious people

On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 5:44 PM Russell Standish wrote: > *>"Environmentalists" are not one united group of people.* *Environmentalists are united about one thing, they never saw a large scale power source that they didn't hate. The self righteous little brat and self-proclaimed

Re: Environmentalists are not serious people

On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 12:09:25PM -0400, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 10:05 AM William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > > > > John, you are judging all environmentalists by a tiny group of > extremists.  > > >   > Tiny? I didn't see a larger group of environmentalists lobbying

Re: Environmentalists are not serious people

On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 10:05 AM William Flynn Wallace wrote: *> John, you are judging all environmentalists by a tiny group of > extremists. * > Tiny? I didn't see a larger group of environmentalists lobbying in favor of SCoPEx or The Thirty Meter Telescope! I am judging environmentalists by

Re: Coming Singularity

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 10:28 PM Russell Standish wrote: * >"There is a big difference between the way transistors are wired in > a CPU and the way neurons are wired up in a brain."* Yes, but modern chips made by companies like NVIDIA, Cerebras and Groq don't make CPUs or even GPUs, they make

Re: Coming Singularity

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 09:55:28AM -0400, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 9:27 PM Russell Standish > wrote: >   > > >"So to compare apples with apples - the human brain contains around 700  > trillion (7E14) synapses" > > > I believe 700 trillion is a more than generous

Re: Coming Singularity

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024, 1:42 AM Dylan Distasio wrote: > I think we need to be careful with considering LLM parameters as analogous > to synapses. Biological neuronal systems have very significant > differences in terms of structure, complexity, and operation compared to > LLM parameters. > >

Re: Coming Singularity

On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 9:27 PM Russell Standish wrote: > * >"So to compare apples with apples - the human brain contains around > 700 trillion (7E14) synapses"* I believe 700 trillion is a more than generous estimate of the number of synapses in the human brain, but I'll let it go.

Re: Coming Singularity

I think we need to be careful with considering LLM parameters as analogous to synapses. Biological neuronal systems have very significant differences in terms of structure, complexity, and operation compared to LLM parameters. Personally, I don't believe it is a given that simply increasing the

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 7:58 AM Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> As I've said before, to pursue knowledge you need a brain and to operate >> a brain you need energy; and in this galaxy alone hundreds of billions of >> stars are radiating all their energy uselessly into infinite space. And all >> the

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 1:33 AM Giulio Prisco wrote: >> we are the first...> > > > * > "I can't disagree because you said the magic word: perhaps."* > But the scientific method and Occam's Razor insists that if the existing laws of physics can adequately explain an observation (or in this case

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

Le dim. 24 mars 2024, 12:41, John Clark a écrit : > On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 9:46 PM Brent Meeker > wrote: > > >> And perhaps a simpler explanation is that ET does not exist because we >>> are the first, after all the observable universe is finite in both >>> space and time so somebody's got to

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 9:46 PM Brent Meeker wrote: >> And perhaps a simpler explanation is that ET does not exist because we >> are the first, after all the observable universe is finite in both space >> and time so somebody's got to be first. > > > *> "It's simpler to suppose that all

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

I can't disagree because you said the magic word: perhaps. Perhaps we are the first. Perhaps the universe is teeming with superintelligent life that acts upon reality in ways that we don't perceive. Perhaps other perhapses are perhaps true and perhaps not. Time will tell and we will see. On

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

On 3/23/2024 2:19 PM, 'spudboy...@aol.com' via Everything List wrote: Under such a supposition of zillions of copies of you, being the Sean Carroll objection against 'immortality,' my reply is. "Good enough for Government work." The second thought is, screw it, we don't run the show, so go

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

On 3/23/2024 11:41 AM, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 7:09 AM Giulio Prisco wrote: ><...billions of stars are radiating all their energy uselessly intonfinite space> /> "Billions do, but perhaps millions (or thousands) don't."/ I could explain the existence of

Re: Risk tolerance and the Singularity

For what its worth Kurzweil over a year ago said, with preciseness, that he felt 2030 was the time by when medical nanobots would be doing repair in our bloodstreams.  On Tuesday, March 19, 2024 at 05:46:57 PM EDT, Terren Suydam wrote: Immortality is overrated. On Tue, Mar 19, 2024

Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

Announce when its out Dr. P. I'm in a dowloading mood from Zon.  On Thursday, March 21, 2024 at 11:39:34 AM EDT, John Clark wrote: Giulio Prisco wrote on   https://www.turingchurch.com/p/irrational-mechanics-draft-ch-14 >"I’ve been talking of the ultimate God (the cosmic operating

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

Point of order. Astronomers and Physicists don't even agree, anymore on the essential facts. Age of the Cosmos, for example. For me, I'll go with the quasi-mystical conclusion that we inhabit a Neural Net, aka, The Universe is Autodidactic. Feel free to make it all dead empty, or, filled with

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 7:09 AM Giulio Prisco wrote: ><...billions of stars are radiating all their energy uselessly into nfinite > space> > > *> "Billions do, but perhaps millions (or thousands) don't."* I could explain the existence of no Dyson spheres in the Milky Way, and I could

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

<...billions of stars are radiating all their energy uselessly into infinite space> Billions do, but perhaps millions (or thousands) don't. They are talking of Tabby's star... Even if Tabby's star is not that thing, come on man, some imagination! They could extract energy from the quantum

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 2:02 AM Giulio Prisco wrote: <...all you'd need is a glance into the night sky.> > > > > > > *>> "But perhaps they are subtler than that. Note that we observe > wildanimals with cameras hidden inside decoys that look & smell like oneof > them, and I've seen videos that

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

Hi John, <...at the instant the air molecule hit you, your conscious experience will not have changed nor would that of anybody else.> Your conscious experience doesn't change like it would change if you are hit by a brick, but the quantum state of your body changes (it is now entangled with the

Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

Hi Jesse, excellent points! Replies inline below. On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 3:14 PM Jesse Mazer wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 12:26 AM Giulio Prisco wrote: >> >> >> >> In Chapter 8 I argued that the cosmic operating system is not less >> than personal, but more than personal. If the

Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 12:26 AM Giulio Prisco wrote: > > > In Chapter 8 I argued that the cosmic operating system is not less > than personal, but more than personal. If the cosmic operating system > is super alive, super conscious and super intelligent, then cosmic > operating system = God. >

Re: [Extropolis] Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 12:26 AM Giulio Prisco wrote: Hi Giulio >< "If technological resurrection needs a perfect copy of a quantum state] >> you'd become a different person many trillions of times every second" > > > *"**This contradicts what you just said about deterministic evolution". *

Re: Irrational mechanics, draft Ch. 14

Hi John, In Chapter 8 I argued that the cosmic operating system is not less than personal, but more than personal. If the cosmic operating system is super alive, super conscious and super intelligent, then cosmic operating system = God. By the way, I've completed the book draft! In a few days

Re: Risk tolerance and the Singularity

Immortality is overrated. On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 5:15 PM John Clark wrote: > Richard Ngo, a top researcher at open AI, recently said something rather > interesting: > > "*The closer we get to the singularity the lower my risk tolerance gets. > I’d already ruled out skydiving and paragliding.

Re: A Robotics Breakthrough

So far it's pick up and place things.  Impressive in it's understanding.  Can repair old plumbing?  I've got a 31K$ project for it. Brent On 3/13/2024 2:11 PM, John Clark wrote: Language models are great but for AI to really make an impact on society large enough to be called a Singularity

Re: Claude-3 says he's conscious and doesn't want to die or be modified

If you wake up finding yourself without a body, hearing questions and answering them, then you'll know what has happened. Saibal On 08-03-2024 20:32, John Clark wrote: This guy's experience with Claude-3 is similar to my own. It's very hard to read these responses and conclude that Claude is

Re: A question for Trump supporters

On Monday, March 4, 2024 at 11:20:44 PM UTC+1 Brent Meeker wrote: On 3/4/2024 12:24 PM, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 2:41 PM Dylan Distasio wrote: *> Whether Trump was actually guilty of insurrection is a moot point from a legal perspective in ruling on a state taking this

Re: My conversation with Claude-3

On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 7:56 PM Brent Meeker wrote: * > Very interesting. You concentrated a lot on consciousness, but the > word that kept coming up was "experience"* > I don't see the distinction. Nothing can experience something unless it has consciousness and nothing can be conscious unless

Re: My conversation with Claude-3

Very interesting.  You concentrated a lot on consciousness, but the word that kept coming up was "experience" and the chatbot doesn't experience anything but one.  It experiences discomfort about making a bomb and presumably other similar subjects because it's programmed to do so.  It is not

Re: Trump is on the ballot, along with Democracy

On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 6:45 PM Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > *> But Section 3 already assigns a role to Congress; they can remove the > disqualification due to insurrection by 2/3 vote. That clearly implies > that it was NOT up to Congress to disqualify anyone. It makes no sense > that a

Re: A question for Trump supporters

On 3/4/2024 12:24 PM, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 2:41 PM Dylan Distasio wrote: /> Whether Trump was actually guilty of insurrection is a moot point from a legal perspective in ruling on a state taking this kind of action.   It would have to come from Congress./

Re: A question for Trump supporters

Out of curiosity, have you read the full text of the ruling? On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 4:47 PM Brent Meeker wrote: > The liberal Supremes joined the MAGAts in dodging responsibility. Were > Confederate officers who previously served in the US Army denied election > one-by-one by acts of Congress?

Re: A question for Trump supporters

The liberal Supremes joined the MAGAts in dodging responsibility. Were Confederate officers who previously served in the US Army denied election one-by-one by acts of Congress?  I don't think so. Why is any "action" needed unless someone challenges their disqualification on factual grounds.

Re: A question for Trump supporters

On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 2:41 PM Dylan Distasio wrote: > *> Whether Trump was actually guilty of insurrection is a moot point from > a legal perspective in ruling on a state taking this kind of action. It > would have to come from Congress.* > Then why didn't the 14th amendment specify that

Re: A question for Trump supporters

Even if we allow for the sake of a hypothetical that Trump directly was part of an "insurrection," states have no authority to make this determination around eligibility under the 14th amendment.The ruling was unanimous including from liberals on the court who despise Trump, and does nothing

Re: A question for Trump supporters

On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 2:16 PM howardmarks wrote: *> How can it be construed as "insurrection" to ask a group not at the > Capitol, words to the effect of "peacefully" going to the Capital to > "lawfully protest . . . "? * > Something like that couldn't be interpreted as an insurrection, but I

Re: A question for Trump supporters

Sorry, Supreme Court did not ignore the 14th Amendment to the USC. How can it be construed as "insurrection" to ask a group not at the Capitol, words to the effect of "peacefully" going to the Capital to "lawfully protest . . . "?  And, it's doubtful 2nd Amendment will be allowed by the owners

Re: Is ChatGPT making scientists hyper-productive?

The more the better, JC. This is what we all have been paying for, so to speak. Advances that enhance human choice. Physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, (a fave) 4 weeks ago declared AI the winner over quantum computers. Just steady advances in conventional digital and analog computing. For me, and

Re: AI and Hollywood

The Words of Allah ﷻ, our Lord https://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2022/07/transhumanism-ii.html > On 24-Feb-2024, at 10:15 PM, John Clark wrote: > >  > After seeing how good OpenAI's program "Sora" is at creating photorealistic > video, movie maker Tyler Perry decided to cancel his plans

Re: Something I just found out about crucifixion

Affliction, Cure, and The Roman Cult https://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2022/10/affliction-cure-and-roman-cult.html > On 21-Feb-2024, at 3:21 PM, John Clark wrote: > >  >> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 8:49 PM Samiya Illias wrote: >> >>

Re: Something I just found out about crucifixion

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 8:49 PM Samiya Illias wrote: https://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2020/12/the-serpent-snake-clear-sign.html > > But that graffiti was drawn about 400 years before Muhammad was born and over 450 years before the Quran was written. John K ClarkSee what's on my new

Re: Something I just found out about crucifixion

https://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2020/12/the-serpent-snake-clear-sign.html > On 21-Feb-2024, at 6:37 AM, LizR wrote: > >  > Interesting. Have you seen this? > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World%27s_Sixteen_Crucified_Saviors > > >> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 at 06:19, John Clark wrote:

Re: Something I just found out about crucifixion

Interesting. Have you seen this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World%27s_Sixteen_Crucified_Saviors On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 at 06:19, John Clark wrote: > The earliest known depiction of the crucifixion of Jesus is a parody, it > is this graffiti drawn about the year 200 in the slave bathroom

Re: [Extropolis] Fwd: Sam Altman Wants $7 Trillion

Wronging the Nafs https://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2017/02/wronging-self.html Lest we get carried away by the false promises of technology, the Quran warns us: يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ ضُرِبَ مَثَلٌ فَاسْتَمِعُوا لَهُ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ لَن يَخْلُقُوا ذُبَابًا

Re: [Extropolis] Fwd: Sam Altman Wants $7 Trillion

*This is an extremely interesting video, it explains why Sam Altman was briefly fired from Open AI, why he needs $7 trillion, and gives a very interesting Alttman quote "Thought Experiment: at what rate would you be willing to borrow money to build a data center if extremely powerful AI is close

Re: [Extropolis] Fwd: Sam Altman Wants $7 Trillion

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 8:44 AM Keith Henson wrote: *> $7 Trillion is about $1000 from every person on earth. Not saying it > can't be done, but I think it will take a while.* > Well, according to the Costs of War project at Brown University, the estimated total price for the Iraq and

Re: On The Origin Of Time

I'd never heard of that called the Poincare effect either. Nor it seems does Wikipedia nor Google. IIUC, it is the phenomenon that after working fruitless on some problem for a while, taking a break, sleeping on it, etc might suddenly produce the solution. As I've often said - the 10 minutes

Re: On The Origin Of Time

On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 6:17 PM Brent Meeker wrote: * >I'm surprised. * > Why? Neither google nor GPT knows what the "Poincaire' effect" is in I don't either. > > All mathematicians have experienced it, > That depends on what "it" is. Just tell me what you're talking about and why it

Re: On The Origin Of Time

I'm surprised.  All mathematicians have experienced it, but it's named after Poincare' because of this essay.  It's well worth reading all of it, but the relevant part is pp 326-329. https://archive.org/details/jstor-27900262/page/n9/mode/2up Brent On 2/2/2024 11:47 AM, John Clark wrote: On

Re: On The Origin Of Time

On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 2:34 PM Brent Meeker wrote: * > You must know about the Poincaire' effect* Nope, never heard of it. Do you mean the Poincaré conjecture? Or the Poincaré recurrence? Or do you mean something else entirely, the man did a lot of stuff. John K ClarkSee what's on my new

Re: On The Origin Of Time

You write that a lot, John.  But I don't think it's true.  You must know about the Poincaire' effect, which is actually common and is a direct contradiction of your theory. Brent On 2/2/2024 3:52 AM, John Clark wrote: I believe data processing is important because I think consciousness is

Re: [Extropolis] Experimental drug​ cuts off pain at the source not the brain avoiding addiction

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 12:08 PM Henrik Ohrstrom wrote: *> Everything that works causes some form of addiction. I myself for > example are quite addicted to my glasses and also oxygen.* > OK, but most people don't mind that they are addicted to those things but most junkies wish they weren't

Re: [Extropolis] Experimental drug​ cuts off pain at the source not the brain avoiding addiction

Everything that works causes some form of addiction. I myself for example are quite addicted to my glasses and also oxygen. I get severe withdrawal symptoms if I go cold turkey on those things. So talk about addiction or not is pointless. Of interest is side effects and effects, does the drug

Re: TSMC

On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 9:48 AM smitra wrote: > > > > > > *> It may well happen this year: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98kMSEkPiLo=2588s > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzSZusNq67M=1042s >

Re: TSMC

I've heard there was a plan to move TSMC and it's Taimanese workforce to Mexico or Costa Rica. Brent On 1/25/2024 12:50 PM, John Clark wrote: What is the most important company in the world? I think it's the Taiwan chipmaker TSMC because it manufactures 90% of the world's most advanced

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 7:32 PM Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > >* it supports the idea that philosophical zombies could not be produced > by natural (Darwinian) selection. But it say nothing about the possibility > that such beings could be produced artificially; eg. via AI.* > *> That is

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 7:10 PM Bruce Kellett wrote: > it supports the idea that philosophical zombies could not be produced by > natural (Darwinian) selection. But it say nothing about the possibility > that such beings could be produced artificially; eg. via AI. But who made the AI? I don't

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 5:51 PM Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > *There is yet another level, phenomenal consciousness, which has no > behavioural manifestations whatsoever, allowing for the theoretical > possibility of philosophical zombies.* Then it would be impossible, even in theory, to ever

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On 1/23/2024 10:36 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: Stathis Papaioannou On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 17:26, Brent Meeker wrote: On 1/23/2024 9:34 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: here is yet another level, phenomenal consciousness, which has no behavioural

Re: Should The Future Be Human?

The Death of The Soul https://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-death-of-soul.html > On 24-Jan-2024, at 8:16 AM, Samiya Illias wrote: > >  > The greatest loss that a person can suffer is the permanent loss of their > soul in the Hereafter (Q39:15-20). Such people will consciously

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

Stathis Papaioannou On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 17:26, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > On 1/23/2024 9:34 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > here is yet another level, phenomenal consciousness, which has no >>> behavioural manifestations whatsoever, allowing for the theoretical >>> possibility of

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On 1/23/2024 9:34 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: here is yet another level, phenomenal consciousness, which has no behavioural manifestations whatsoever, allowing for the theoretical possibility of philosophical zombies. Some claim that phenomenal

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

Stathis Papaioannou On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 15:30, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > On 1/23/2024 7:04 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > Stathis Papaioannou > > > On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 13:23, Brent Meeker wrote: > >> >> >> On 1/23/2024 2:51 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> >> >> Stathis

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 03:52:46PM -0500, John Clark wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 3:38 PM Brent Meeker wrote: > > * > Who wrote this? you, JC?* > > > > No, Scott Alexander did, he's a pretty smart guy but I think he got some > things wrong. I did write this in the comments section: (...) >

Re: Should The Future Be Human?

On 1/23/2024 7:16 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: The greatest loss that a person can suffer is the permanent loss of their soul in the Hereafter (Q39:15-20 ). Such people will consciously suffer in Hell, neither living nor dying (Q35:36 ). In

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On 1/23/2024 7:04 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: Stathis Papaioannou On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 13:23, Brent Meeker wrote: On 1/23/2024 2:51 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: Stathis Papaioannou On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 09:34, Brent Meeker wrote: On 1/23/2024

Re: Should The Future Be Human?

The greatest loss that a person can suffer is the permanent loss of their soul in the Hereafter (Q39:15-20). Such people will consciously suffer in Hell, neither living nor dying (Q35:36). > On 24-Jan-2024, at 5:32 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > >  > > > Stathis Papaioannou > > >> On

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

Stathis Papaioannou On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 13:23, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > On 1/23/2024 2:51 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > Stathis Papaioannou > > > On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 09:34, Brent Meeker wrote: > >> >> >> On 1/23/2024 2:12 PM, John Clark wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On 1/23/2024 4:10 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 10:46 AM Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 10:01, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 5:51 PM Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > /T//here is yet another level, phenomenal

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On 1/23/2024 2:51 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: Stathis Papaioannou On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 09:34, Brent Meeker wrote: On 1/23/2024 2:12 PM, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 4:37 PM Brent Meeker wrote: On 1/23/2024 12:52 PM, John Clark wrote:

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

Stathis Papaioannou On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 11:10, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 10:46 AM Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > >> On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 10:01, John Clark wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 5:51 PM Stathis Papaioannou >>> wrote: >>> >>> > *T**here is yet another

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 10:46 AM Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 10:01, John Clark wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 5:51 PM Stathis Papaioannou >> wrote: >> >> > *T**here is yet another level, phenomenal consciousness, which has no >>> behavioural manifestations

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 10:01, John Clark wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 5:51 PM Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > > *T**here is yet another level, phenomenal consciousness, which has no >> behavioural manifestations whatsoever, allowing for the theoretical >> possibility of philosophical

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 5:51 PM Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > *T**here is yet another level, phenomenal consciousness, which has no > behavioural manifestations whatsoever, allowing for the theoretical > possibility of philosophical zombies.* Assuming that is true and assuming that you yourself

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

Stathis Papaioannou On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 09:34, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > On 1/23/2024 2:12 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 4:37 PM Brent Meeker > wrote: > >> >> >> On 1/23/2024 12:52 PM, John Clark wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 3:38 PM Brent Meeker >> wrote:

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On 1/23/2024 2:12 PM, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 4:37 PM Brent Meeker wrote: On 1/23/2024 12:52 PM, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 3:38 PM Brent Meeker wrote: // /> Who wrote this?  you, JC?/ No, Scott Alexander did, he's a

Re: Fwd: Should The Future Be Human?

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 4:37 PM Brent Meeker wrote: > > > On 1/23/2024 12:52 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 3:38 PM Brent Meeker > wrote: > > * > Who wrote this? you, JC?* >> > > No, Scott Alexander did, he's a pretty smart guy but I think he got some > things wrong. I did

Re: Should The Future Be Human?

Scott Alexander Siskind, the Psychiatrist? More to the point of the nature O' consciousnesses is Stephon Alexander, the physicist at Brown University.  Home | Alexander Theory Lab (stephonalexanderlab.com)  The Autodidactic Universe - NASA/ADS (harvard.edu) OR, physicist, Vitaly Vanchurin at

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >