- Joined
- Nov 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,331
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Live Forever, Now
- Thread starter Spectre
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2001
- Messages
- 2,632
I think this is where I step in with a line from Dirty Harry....
"A man has got to know his limitations."
"A man has got to know his limitations."
The technology exists today to store the human persona, but the technology to run it does not. Nor does a reliable read mechanisim exist to copy the persona to any form of mechanical storage. My guess is that the Scientologists are not even close to developing it either.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2004
- Messages
- 3,178
Sometimes I wonder how you find this stuff, John.
I already have my own plans to live forever; 29 years have passed with no serious problems. If something does go wrong, my backup plan involves hanging around and haunting all of the people who have pissed me off.
I think I have all my bases covered but I don't see anything wrong with shopping around.
I already have my own plans to live forever; 29 years have passed with no serious problems. If something does go wrong, my backup plan involves hanging around and haunting all of the people who have pissed me off.
I think I have all my bases covered but I don't see anything wrong with shopping around.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2004
- Messages
- 270
I knew a Buddhist hitman once , he "Transcended" people too
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
This is a really surprisingly complex subject. In any case, here's why your brain is NOT a computer in the way we currently define computers (and thus, why CTM is wrong):
Computers operate purely syntactically...they have no content as far as they're concerned...they only care about symbols and patterns of symbols. That's kind of confusing, no? Here's a famous example, called the Chinese Room.
A philosopher is locked in the Chinese Room and is given a huge packet of instructions and a book with Chinese characters in it. The instructions tell the philosopher to change this symbol to this letter when followed by this, etc--extremely complex instructions, no doubt, but doable. When the philosopher has completed moving the symbols around, as according to the instructions (presumably years later...) he slides it under the door.
As it turns out, the characters that he was sent in with were a question, and our philosopher has written a valid answer. The people on the other side of the Chinese Room exclaim that he must know Chinese!
But in truth, we know that our philosopher has no idea what the question nor answer was, but merely had the correct instructions to manipulate the data appropriately.
Computers are like this. They manipulate symbols, but have no content.
As a result, we should conclude that CTM (computational theory of mind) is false.
But there is an alternative idea gaining popularity, called connectionism....there are a different class of computer like things, called connectionist machines, that work is extremely different ways. I won't go into the details because (A) I honestly am not an expert on them and (B) it would take forever and a half, but fundamentally they are different in that they calibrate themselves (and are calibrated) to correct signals coming in, which of course, brings about a different output....that's a fancy way of saying they learn. Computers can save an image of a face easily and instantly. Human beings and connectionist machines cannot. We can however be much better prepared to deal with new situations.
I should say, however, that if we buy that the personality is a totally physical thing, and there's huge evidence to support that, then we are necessarily committed to the idea that it can be replicated (not that it WILL be replicated, but that it hypothetically could be). There are no physical things that can necessarily never be replicated (otherwise, they wouldn't have existed the first time).
Computers operate purely syntactically...they have no content as far as they're concerned...they only care about symbols and patterns of symbols. That's kind of confusing, no? Here's a famous example, called the Chinese Room.
A philosopher is locked in the Chinese Room and is given a huge packet of instructions and a book with Chinese characters in it. The instructions tell the philosopher to change this symbol to this letter when followed by this, etc--extremely complex instructions, no doubt, but doable. When the philosopher has completed moving the symbols around, as according to the instructions (presumably years later...) he slides it under the door.
As it turns out, the characters that he was sent in with were a question, and our philosopher has written a valid answer. The people on the other side of the Chinese Room exclaim that he must know Chinese!
But in truth, we know that our philosopher has no idea what the question nor answer was, but merely had the correct instructions to manipulate the data appropriately.
Computers are like this. They manipulate symbols, but have no content.
As a result, we should conclude that CTM (computational theory of mind) is false.
But there is an alternative idea gaining popularity, called connectionism....there are a different class of computer like things, called connectionist machines, that work is extremely different ways. I won't go into the details because (A) I honestly am not an expert on them and (B) it would take forever and a half, but fundamentally they are different in that they calibrate themselves (and are calibrated) to correct signals coming in, which of course, brings about a different output....that's a fancy way of saying they learn. Computers can save an image of a face easily and instantly. Human beings and connectionist machines cannot. We can however be much better prepared to deal with new situations.
I should say, however, that if we buy that the personality is a totally physical thing, and there's huge evidence to support that, then we are necessarily committed to the idea that it can be replicated (not that it WILL be replicated, but that it hypothetically could be). There are no physical things that can necessarily never be replicated (otherwise, they wouldn't have existed the first time).
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 19,761
I hope that server is not running on WINDOWS!!!!!
- Joined
- May 9, 2002
- Messages
- 12,681
aproy1101 said:I hope that server is not running on WINDOWS!!!!!
Maybe it's like one of those DOS based games.
"You find yourself in room with three doors."
"Walk to center door"
"Center door is locked."
"Walk to North door"
"North door opens easily. A skeleton jumps out and stabs you in the eye with a stick and kills you."
Your Transcended Life has been snuffed out. GAME OVER.
Jake
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2005
- Messages
- 4,106
Morgane said:
Do you thnk it is the personna per se or a facsimile thereof ?
You can teach a dog to say (I,m hungry) . Just don,t ask him to spell it .
L:O:L
- Joined
- Nov 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,331
AM,
Thanks for the additional information. Do you have any links for connectionism?
When we have biocomputers, will they be, in some sense, human? If biologically based, will the divide between man and machine be gone? (Not that it's not breaking down already, with prosthetic limbs and such.)
John
Thanks for the additional information. Do you have any links for connectionism?
When we have biocomputers, will they be, in some sense, human? If biologically based, will the divide between man and machine be gone? (Not that it's not breaking down already, with prosthetic limbs and such.)
John
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
Well, again, there's not enough knowledge to say what a personality really definingly is...there are a lot of philosophers/scientists that refer to free will as an operator illusion, and weirdly enough, there's quite a bit of evidence to support the idea that our conscience thoughts are causally inert...that they can't affect our actions...I choose not to believe it, merely because it seems pointless.
There's something called a turing test. Basically, this guy, Turing, said that if you can put a computer hidden in one room, a person hidden another, and they both typed out answers to questions asked by a human, if the human questioner could not determine which was the computer, we had developed "strong AI." And by his definition, we most certainly would have--it would appear, thought wise, to be entirely human. However, being able to actually think, instead of reacting to a super complex language programming system or some such, is not required...that is to say, although it might appear human, deep down, it's a hairdryer.
There's something called a turing test. Basically, this guy, Turing, said that if you can put a computer hidden in one room, a person hidden another, and they both typed out answers to questions asked by a human, if the human questioner could not determine which was the computer, we had developed "strong AI." And by his definition, we most certainly would have--it would appear, thought wise, to be entirely human. However, being able to actually think, instead of reacting to a super complex language programming system or some such, is not required...that is to say, although it might appear human, deep down, it's a hairdryer.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
Later today I can get you some links, although a great easy reado n the subject is a book I have somewhere, I will get that to you later also...about to go to class. My last response wasn't directed torward you, but the guy who asked about equipment to store minds.
Just wanted to point this out in the website:
"The E.D.E.N. Project was founded in 2013 by a team of like minded individuals from the Vienna Council for Virtual Embodiment and A.I. Egalitarianism."
And...
"Dr. Miriam Connolly
Born: Glasgow, Scotland. Feb. 19, 1978
Former director for Nanomedical research at Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Gaithersburg, MD. Served on the Vienna Council for Virtual Embodiment and A.I. Egalitarianism in 2012"
The website is set a decade in the future...check out the founders page.
Just wanted to point this out in the website:
"The E.D.E.N. Project was founded in 2013 by a team of like minded individuals from the Vienna Council for Virtual Embodiment and A.I. Egalitarianism."
And...
"Dr. Miriam Connolly
Born: Glasgow, Scotland. Feb. 19, 1978
Former director for Nanomedical research at Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Gaithersburg, MD. Served on the Vienna Council for Virtual Embodiment and A.I. Egalitarianism in 2012"
The website is set a decade in the future...check out the founders page.
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2006
- Messages
- 657
Why not a decade in the future? It's a virtual life for them, so why not sell time travel while you're at it?
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2005
- Messages
- 4,106
How can one define the undefineable . When a woman smiles we can tell several things about her physical well being and her personality . If that is all a womans smile is to you then good luck .
As for E
:E:N ? When you guys ascend to that great big off button in the sky ? Turn off the lights there is nobody home . L:O:L
As for E
:E:N ? When you guys ascend to that great big off button in the sky ? Turn off the lights there is nobody home . L:O:L
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2002
- Messages
- 7,269
Max Headroom
8. Deities (edit)
Community Score9.9
First aired: 9/24/1987 Production Code: 176902
In this episode we seen that televangelism is just as common in the future as in the present. The Vu-Age Church is the first religious organization to operate primarily on television. The Vu-Age's promises video resurrection for their believers. They claim to be able to store cortical scans and keep them until cloning is perfected and their personalities can be placed into a new body. This promise gets Murray's attention and he assigns Edison to the story. Uncharacteristically Edison is not enthusiasm at the prospect of exposing a resurrection scam. We discover that Edisons lack of support for the project is centered on Vu-Age's high priestess, Vanna Smith. Vanna is old flame of Edisons. Edison disagrees with her claim that video resurrection can happen. Vanna Smith points out that Edison's own alter-ego, Max is proof to the contrary. She and Edison start to rekindle their old relationship. Murray wonders is there less to the story than he first imagined or is Edison losing his edge
8. Deities (edit)
Community Score9.9
First aired: 9/24/1987 Production Code: 176902
In this episode we seen that televangelism is just as common in the future as in the present. The Vu-Age Church is the first religious organization to operate primarily on television. The Vu-Age's promises video resurrection for their believers. They claim to be able to store cortical scans and keep them until cloning is perfected and their personalities can be placed into a new body. This promise gets Murray's attention and he assigns Edison to the story. Uncharacteristically Edison is not enthusiasm at the prospect of exposing a resurrection scam. We discover that Edisons lack of support for the project is centered on Vu-Age's high priestess, Vanna Smith. Vanna is old flame of Edisons. Edison disagrees with her claim that video resurrection can happen. Vanna Smith points out that Edison's own alter-ego, Max is proof to the contrary. She and Edison start to rekindle their old relationship. Murray wonders is there less to the story than he first imagined or is Edison losing his edge