• Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s almost like we can’t make a machine conscious until we know what makes a human conscious, and it’s obvious Emergentism is bullshit because making machines smarter doesn’t make them conscious

    Time to start listening to Roger Penrose’s Orch-OR theory as the evidence piles up - https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936

    • decivex@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Throwing out emergentism because some linear algebra failed to replicate it is a pretty bad take.

    • blakestacey@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      The given link contains exactly zero evidence in favor of Orchestrated Objective Reduction — “something interesting observed in vitro using UV spectroscopy” is a far cry from anything having biological relevance, let alone significance for understanding consciousness. And it’s not like Orch-OR deserves the lofty label of theory, anyway; it’s an ill-defined, under-specified, ad hoc proposal to throw out quantum mechanics and replace it with something else.

      The fact that programs built to do spicy autocomplete turn out to do spicy autocomplete has, as far as I can tell, zero implications for any theory of consciousness one way or the other.

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Bro the main objection to Orch-OR is that the brain is too warm for Quatnum stuff to happen there, and then they found Quantum stuff in the brain.

        • self@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          it’s very important to me that you don’t type the words “Blake Stacey” into a search engine while explaining quote unquote Quatnum stuff to them

          • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Oh I see… I didn’t realize you were trying to tell me I was talking to Blake Stacey or that he was respected in Quantum Mechanics. I completely misinterpreted what you were trying to tell me. I blame it on the inability of text to properly convey sarcasm.

              • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                I had mis-interpreted the comment to along the lines of something like “You’re just copying and pasting what you heard of Spirit Science aren’t you?”

                My most humble apologizes. Maybe I just wasn’t paying hard enough attention.

          • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            I don’t know anything about a Blake Stacey, but from context clues I’m assuming she’s one of those Quantum Mysticism nut jobs. Naw I don’t go for that sort of thing, and neither should anybody with even a single crumb of common sense.

            Free Advice: If anyone says they’re going to heal you with “Quantum Healing”, it’s code for “I have no medical training, and if you listen to me, you’re going to die horribly.”

            I get claims about Quantum Mechanics being involved with consciousness are a little sus, but given Penrose’s pedigree, history, and reputation and how much the science seems to check out I trust him. I know many have their doubts about the Orch-OR theory, but after doing a lot of reading up on it I think it reasonable to conclude that the reason it hasn’t been more widely embraced is due to quacks like Deepak Chopra and his ilk poisoning the well with his talk of “Quantum Consciousness”

        • blakestacey@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Kludging an “objective reduction” process into the dynamics is throwing out quantum mechanics and replacing it with something else. And because Orch-OR is not quantum mechanics, every observation that a quantum effect might be biologically important somewhere is irrelevant. Orch-OR isn’t “quantum biology”, it’s pixie-dust biology.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      You’re right that consciousness and intelligence are not the same. Our language tends to conflate the two.

      However, evolution created consciousness over billions of years by emergent factors and no source of specific direction besides being more successful at reproduction. We can likely get there orders of magnitude faster than evolution could. The big problem would be recognizing it for what it is when it’s here.

    • V0ldek@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      and it’s obvious Emergentism is bullshit because making machines smarter doesn’t make them conscious

      This is like 101 of bad logic, “this sentence is false because I failed to prove it just now”.

    • V0ldek@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Orch-OR

      Never heard of this thing but just reading through the wiki

      An essential feature of Penrose’s theory is that the choice of states when objective reduction occurs is selected neither randomly (as are choices following wave function collapse) nor algorithmically. Rather, states are selected by a “non-computable” influence embedded in the Planck scale of spacetime geometry.

      Neither randomly nor alorithmically, rather magically. Like really, what the fuck else could you mean by “non-computable” in there that would be distinguishable from magic?

      Penrose claimed that such information is Platonic, representing pure mathematical truths, which relates to Penrose’s ideas concerning the three worlds: the physical, the mental, and the Platonic mathematical world. In Shadows of the Mind (1994), Penrose briefly indicates that this Platonic world could also include aesthetic and ethical values, but he does not commit to this further hypothesis.

      And this is just crankery with absolutely no mathematical meaning. Also pure mathematical truths are not outside of the physical world, what the fuck would that even mean bro.

      I thought Penrose was a smart physicist, the hell is he doing peddling this.