Penrose’s book really got me thinking, he made it very clear that all algorithms are the same, qualitatively the same and that the human mind appeared to be able to perform feats that were not algorithmic, this for me is fundamental.
So (if Penrose is actually correct) a computer can never do what a mind can because a mind has some “non algorithmic” aspects to it and a computer can never do anything that is non-algorithmic.
Try it, really try to write a non-algorithmic algorithm, if you think about this you’ll eventually begin to see that there’s more to the human mind than blind mechansim.
A computer cannot be conscious because a computer cannot do more than manipulate symbols, that’s all it can ever do no matter how complex the software it is qualitatively the same, adding single digit numbers and dividing 10 digit numbers are qualitatively the same, because of this there can be no basis for an “conscious computer” differing from a “not conscious” computer.Does a human brain function in binary fashion, or is brain function based on sets of data., What Anil Seth calls "controlled hallucinations". When I watched the "text" based GPT3 process questions it was not using binary language, it's answers were based on "language" (sets of data) .
Penrose’s book really got me thinking, he made it very clear that all algorithms are the same, qualitatively the same and that the human mind appeared to be able to perform feats that were not algorithmic, this for me is fundamental.But what is it about the physical brain that allows it to function in a non-algorithmical fashion. And if it doesn't how does it makes logical decisions?
So (if Penrose is actually correct) a computer can never do what a mind can because a mind has some “non algorithmic” aspects to it and a computer can never do anything that is non-algorithmic.I don't disagree with that, but if the human brain can have non algorithmic properties , what prevents us from building a computer with non algorithmic properties?
This where I believe Tegmark is onto something. He believes that some physical patterns ARE conscious and if that’s true can we copy a conscious neural pattern.
Try it, really try to write a non-algorithmic algorithm, if you think about this you’ll eventually begin to see that there’s more to the human mind than blind mechansim.But we are already past pure mechanism. We know that we are talking about an emergent non-physical phenomenon (mind) from neural activity in all brained organisms
Maybe we don’t need to write logarithms. Perhaps certain AI neural patterns don’t need algorithms, but can have patterns similar to humans (or ants) which are are intrinsically able to process data sets in a non-algorithmic fashion.
Once we figure out human consciousness, we can build artificial consciousness. There is no magic sauce. Conscious intelligence MUST be an emergent property of physical patterns and/or functions.
The mathematical part is already a property of spacetime. (Tegmark’s “Mathematical Universe”)
p.s. a little musing; Instead of linear “binary” bit processes, perhaps there is such a thing as rectilinear “superposition” qubit processes.
This is what Penrose is interested in as potential quantum processors.
1. The building blocks of microtubules are alpha (α) and beta (β) tubulin monomers, which assemble as heterodimers. 2. These tubulin heterodimers then form linear protofilaments. 3. Protofilaments assemble into a hollow cylinders to form microtubules. The motor proteins kinesin and dynein transport vesicles, organelles, and substances along microtubules. Figure 1 PRC1 Controls Microtubule AssemblyHide caption(A) Protein regulator of cytokinesis 1 (PRC1) can initiate crosslinking of dynamic microtubules (MT) that interact in an antiparallel fashion (top). Kinesin-4 is a molecular motor directed at the plus ends of microtubules; it accumulates in the region where microtubules crosslink as their plus ends grow (middle). The interaction of kinesin-4 with PRC1 increases the dwell time of kinesin-4 on microtubules, which in turn limits the length of the overlap region by blocking microtubule growth at the plus ends (bottom) (Bieling et al., 2010
).
(B) Kinesin-5 is also a molecular motor directed at the plus ends of microtubules, but kinesin-5 can slide microtubules past each other (top). When kinesin-5 is added to crosslinked microtubules (middle), PRC1 can maintain the crosslinks despite the sliding action (bottom) (Subramanian et al., 2010
).
(C) PRC1 forms a homodimer that interacts through its central spectrin domains with two microtubules to crosslinks the antiparallel filaments. Although PRC1 is shown to associate predominantly with α-tubulin, the current resolution of the structures presented by Subramanian et al., 2010
is not sufficient to distinguish between binding to α- or β-tubulin.
I see this website is still plagued by bugs and weaknesses, you’d think people advocating “critical thinking” and “scientific inquiry” would have the skills to get a simple little web forum site up and running, it really doesn’t help to be advocating all this lofty intellectual stuff when your users can’t even post reliably.
I’ve sent an email to a staff member about the forum being abysmal quality, as I said in my email CFI look rather incompetent when they appoint well known intellectuals to their board, espouse lofty intellectual ideals and encourage lively communication etc using communication software that scares people off, the number of regular members here hardly grows each year, its just the same old small core of people it was years ago.
@hugo, your recent comments belong in “Issues and Complaints”. My rights are just slightly above any regular user. I can’t do anything about the software.
I emailed the President seen here:
I doubt she or any other member of staff cares though and I doubt they ever review or ask about issues in the “Issues and Complaints” section.
encourage lively communication etc using communication software that scares people off, the number of regular members here hardly grows each year, its just the same old small core of people it was years ago
Looking back at archives this seems very true. Maybe the quality and ability of the moderators over last couple of years have played a part ?
(6) Users may express their disagreements with the decisions or actions of Moderators, but disagreements, criticisms and the like may be discussed in the Issues & Complaints Forum ONLY. (You must read the instructions at the top of that Forum before making complaints there). Any such discussions not taking place within the I & C Forum are considered off-topic, and as such are subject to moving, locking or deletion, at the discretion of Moderators.
@johncitizen1 ...Looking back at archives this seems very true. Maybe the quality and ability of the moderators over last couple of years have played a part ?
The lack of quality among participants can also be blamed.
Your idiotic baiting being an excellent example of what dooms dialogue.
Calm down Lausten, I - at least - did not disagree with your actions.
I remarked that I’d emailed the “president” of the CFI - her contact information is public.
I also speculated that neither she nor anyone else really pays much attention to the “Issues and Complaint” thread.
Is there any evidence that anyone at CFI gives a sh!t about the quality of the forum?
#342763
I also speculated that neither she nor anyone else really pays much attention to the “Issues and Complaint” thread.Is there any evidence that anyone at CFI gives a sh!t about the quality of the forum?
Management, or is it Hugo who believes no one gives a sh!t about the quality of this forum so let’s devolve it into an half-assed format?
The path to doom lies in confusion!
Remarkable the word “shit” is unacceptable language, but the word “sh!t” is. The difference being between “i” and “!”… 
p.s. Hugo, you do realize that in your response you did not avail yourself of the quotation feature, as shown here? Can we start there with improving the ease of presentation ? Perhaps the quality may improve along with the proper of tools which are provided?
I am a long time member and have always posted with intent to make a positive contribution to the discussions. And I am not stupid, nor careless!
I am not impressed with your expressed disdain for your fellow posters.
note: closing the blank space at the bottom of the post requires only use of the “delete” key after the last word.
The quotation “feature” is poor, in any modern forum “reply” will or can, automatically incorporate the text of the post one is replying to, here there’s no such concept.
The forum also forgets my credentials randomly, no rhyme or reason.
An example of a good quality forum (and this is typical of most modern forums) is https://debatepolitics.com
“Like a loser always looking to find blame in others and incapable of a little self-examination.”
Apparently the Mods allow ad hominem attacks here. No repercussions no rules broken.
"A loser always looking to find blame in others and is incapable of a little self-examination.”Sorry. Is this better?
PS. I always find it rather curious how bullies, hate being bullied.
Calm down Lausten, -- HugoDoes telling someone to calm down ever work ? Unless you have a weapon pointed at them?
If you want to discuss issues with the forum, the rules state there is a place for that. We have rules.
JohnC;
FYI, we don’t read every word and when we do read, we don’t worry about everyone’s feelings over a word like “loser”. Again, “Issues and Complaints” forum. Or click the moderation flag. But you, you have to make everything public, and not ask for something but complain about it within 8 hours.
For your information, I got up early today and did some writing for a book I’m working on, then went kayaking on a river that only has the right conditions a few weeks out of the year. You were the last thing on my mind and when I’m done with this comment, that’s where you will return. The mods here are not your servants.
Does telling someone to calm down ever work ? Unless you have a weapon pointed at them?I just found your initial reaction odd, an over reaction that's all.
If you want to discuss issues with the forum, the rules state there is a place for that. We have rules.I said I don't disagree with what you said, I agreed!
FYI, we don’t read every word and when we do read, we don’t worry about everyone’s feelings over a word like “loser”. Again, “Issues and Complaints” forum. Or click the moderation flag. But you, you have to make everything public, and not ask for something but complain about it within 8 hours.I don't recall asking anything of you and I made no part of my email to the President of CFI public, all that I said is that I have reached out to her because logging problems in "CFI Forums Feedback" is a complete waste of time and complaining about that in yet another are "Issues & Complaints" is also a total waste of time, the site is abysmal and nobody has done anything do rectify it.
For your information, I got up early today and did some writing for a book I’m working on, then went kayaking on a river that only has the right conditions a few weeks out of the year. You were the last thing on my mind and when I’m done with this comment, that’s where you will return. The mods here are not your servants.Again I have not suggested anybody is my servant, I have not asked anything of you, I have agreed with your initial remarks even.
The bottom line is the site is in bad shape, there are ongoing comments about this, it either is of relevance or it is not, since you are just a moderator and have no control, authority or influence over policy or budgeting you have no role to play in this other than to act as a self-important busy body.
If however you want to actually be useful then why not use what influence you do have to get the forum problems addressed, it is laughable that a site claiming to be dedicated to science and reason has left these forum problems to simply fester for year after year.
I can think of no more appropriate people to escalate and push for change here than the moderators but given that absolutely nothing ever happens I have no confidence in the moderators to get anything done.
Why even moderate a site that’s broken? why moderate a site who’s activity is low? why pretend this is anything other than a neglected part of the CFI?
If you have nothing whatsoever to offer, to contribute, to getting the forum improved then just butt-out.
