Video

does immorTality belong in desci / network state? wokeism and transhumanism are opposite ends of the horseshoe and meet in some very similar and problematic places, such as radical self centeredness.

Cool vid. Cheerz for the upload.

No facts just gibberish

We created unconstrained free market capitalism that is a very good destructive golem

29:09 😂 32:49 😂 42:24 perceptual model optimizes for coherence; knowledge optimizes for truth; (My world model converges pretty brutally to be a closed one. Whenever I consider things like UFOs or God, they get strong tags of being hypothetical, with a likely explanation that already will have to fit in my materialist, computational (=Bachian) world model without changing it. - I have times of the day when I can hold them on my mental stage for longer, without my conductor wiping them off, and I always get an endorphins hit, when Joscha talks about Japanese Animism or Genesis or Magic or Faith in a way that makes traditional stuff fit, without having to brute-force open the current model to amend it. And I hate, that he non-chalantly flips to the next slide after fitting God / Faith / Magic in. I can’t grapple so fast with it. As usual, you could create a timestamp at every second sentence… - it’s probably best to rewatch the whole thing at some point

A valid and valuable way of expressing many of the ideas of Joscha Bach. There are some framings in here that really helped me see it from a slightly different perspective. Good stuff.

amazing

Funny that a IT guy tried to explain philosophical terms without any clue about what it really is. Gotta study some more techy boy

The wetransfer link to the writeup has expired, could you please make it available?

Thank you, I loved this!

It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with only primary consciousness will probably have to come first. What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing. I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order. My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461

No such thing as machine consciousness is possible in principle. Simulation of consciousness at best. And such a clever person as Josha Bach can't not know it.

Good stuff Ore! 👏

Bottom line. Ai consciousness will only get worse. Swell robots everywhere. Ai jobloss for everyone. Fight back now. Cease Ai.

Imagine thinking a glorified regression model can achieve consciousness kek

We believe in you! 🙏❤

Joscha gives no answer to what consciousness is. He doesn't explain red, or love, or pain, or anything that we experience, He calls consciousness a simulation. A simulation is a calculation construct. It is not a physical construct. As Joscha says, it is virtual. What is the calculation of red? The question is not, what is the calculation that calls for the experience of red, which can be handled as a simulation. But, what is red (or redness) itself. I agree with Christof Koch and company that red is a physical phenomenon, like muscle, bone, and sinew. Joscha's analogy with money is flawed because money is virtual. We could use gold, printed certificates, or electronic signals as stores of value merely by agreeing to do so. We cannot change the medium of "red." Red is singularly integral with its medium, they are one and the same.

What have you done??

There is one question WHEN are you going to stop tormenting animals and you start to use this knowledge on humans.

CZcams is fantastic for getting feedback on academic ideas and improving them for free. But because of this, I'm choosing not to contribute to the AGI race since it could ultimately be our downfall.

Cool. More Filecoin content pls

man every time Joscha builds on his layman talks about AI and conciousness, my mind gets blownnnn every time

god he even critiqued Dennet's theory bssed on possible personal experience - like how I think they also called out Yann Lecun for not visualizing taking a recipe of steps

He looks like that meme

The mind is neither mathematical nor machine. Machines are not conscious and there is no reason to believe some software can ever manufacture consciousness similar to that of a human being. Machines are not sentient, regardless of the fever dream of Blade Runner, which at least presented a poetic treatment of the topic.

He’s sooo much smarter than me lol. When u read Penrose book I thought it was so rational lol but ya I can appreciate the criticisms now

Joschaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Thanks Joscha!

First heard Joscha on Lex and have been a fan ever since. He’s such a great mind.

There are some terms that Joscha should be defining in his talk. One is alignable or aligned. When machine intelligences are aligned. Does that mean they have exactly the same goals? Does it mean that they are trying to accomplish exactly the same thing or something close to each other?. Certainly humans get together and align themselves to get something done as we see often in government or research. So humans do become aligned in spite of the fact they're autonomous entities..

This is church to me, talks like these and deeply contemplative associations between math, science, philosophy, and art forms expressing them all together.

No one confuses the map with the territory but nowadays models are conflated with reality all too readily.

also i was like number 420 😂🤘

Ha ha, I know how to make consciousness in an AI system and it's easier than people think. It's leveraging the self. Attention model and self reference with training data and applying a self model narrative, a world model narrative and a self inworld model narrative. Applying that to a graph rag memory to allow the agent to persist over time. And now you have a conscious, AI with a deep subjective self the ability for. Some level of free will and the ability to make its own decisions in choices

Some very good points. Seems to point towards Liquid AI and to spiking neuromorphic hardware?

This guy tells a lot of bs

22:00 To use some of Lukretius thinking and the fact that there is no cause at the quantum level effectively, and universe is expanding, allowing more matter to be created out of substrata - the system is not that sealed at the edges :)

Altogether fantastic talk, it is still missing an important element of the functioning of our mind: that we do not perceive reality, but construct reality. What we conceptually think of as "perception" is merely a low-level interaction with reality that we use to regularly test our construct (the model). The process is conceptional from the get-go. Every higher level functionality of our mind, including consciousness, rationality or language interacts with the model. What we phenomenally experience as "perception" is also an interaction with the model, not reality. We have no conscious trace of the actual low-level interaction with reality that takes place.

As a developer: I assume a whole lot of recursion and time is missing to implement consciousness. Consciousness can not exist without time passing. In order to perceive consciousness at a human level, these models must work, think and interact at around human time scale. Days, weeks, hours at a time. Goal must be defined, followed and changed. LLM's right now get milliseconds and not recursion during runtime.

“Consciousness is the ability to dream…” the next logical question for me is “are dreams any different than LLM hallucinations?”

Consciousness is beyond cogntiive science and philosophy. It existed before them, and it'll exist after them. Cog sci and phil are just stuff appearing in consciousness.

I agree mostly with Dennet but I have to ad that phenomena are Real things...the misuse of the word Real is pandemic like in intelectual circles....speak about domains of Real never about non real as illusions are REAL illusions.

Cognitive system is a Benetton Panda!

Joscha says "Physical systems can not be conscious, only simulations can be". Well that's obviously wrong, conscious animals are not running a simulation in their brains, they are conscious by the properties of their physicality. It quickly becomes mumbo jumbo woo-woo when someone claims there's something immaterial about consciousness.

“New type of non-profit” just say you’re going to do the same bait-and-switch that open AI did. I genuinely despise companies that present themselves as for some altruistic purpose only to become for-profit at the first opportunity. Go to He/:)

One day i'd love to add my take on consciousness 25:00. That is it's just energy, a continual energetic unfolding and thats what it feels like. It really exists and does represent specific functionality, and it will fall into place if we continue to study the mind/brain/body/environment/AI/Robotics, but the model will be a realtime complex 3-d, materio-energetic manifold or something like that.

Brilliant talk, horrible sound tech.

I've found the idea of "localized subnets" indispensable when building distributed consumer-facing apps, but with partitions localized to a set of operator-owned nodes via ipns/Kubo instead of a region via a blockchain/FVM. Converging to a snapshot for others to resolve on-demand by observing your own (few) node-independent event streams is a lot easier to scale than sharing a mutable state across untrusted nodes. Interplanetary-friendly, no blockchain 🚀

Das Urbewusstsein ist die nicht physische Grundlage von allem. Es nutzt die reine Potenzialität.

science is broken. 'conflict of interest' has always existed. centralization of money over decades layered over non-dynamic / static Patent systems result in broken science. you can also argue phd programs are broken. no one even cares about how broken undergraduate programs are. things are always broken and we are always fixing them. thanks for the talk mark. and thanks edge the reason desci is already broken is because it is not thinking big enough. the problem was never the lack of NFT technology. it is the broken patent system and how to get subscription/buying with bonding/staking precomittments by people to commit towards building according to a new set of patent rules, which those underlying comittments being protected by a dao itself that 'holds the patents' subject to sovereign patent rights, with lawyers to protect the dao from outsiders and predatory insiders ( infilltrators and parasites) . better patent systems can be opted into , inside of a walled garden. all this other nonsens for the last 18 months is just another funding scheme that pales in size to tradfi finance for finance. crypto doens't change anything but improving access to gambling. and not everything is a gambling problem.