Serious Science
Serious Science – http://serious-science.org
Philosopher David Chalmers on artificial intelligence in movies, consciousness of computers and moral rights of artificial intelligence systems
http://serious-science.org/atificial-consciousness-6883
Source
Artificial Consciousness — David Chalmers
Like placing pebbles one at a time … when does it become a pile? So too, adding neurons eventually conciousness is achieved. We already have this conundrum when examining life forms with brains. Machines that are very different will be that much more difficult to figure.
This is one of my biggest worries with AI:
It might just happen one day in some lab, that one of the AI-driven robots that are already in existence out there somehow develops consciousness. In the beginning it would possibly be a really kind person, trying to earn respect among the people around it. And then, this person would gradually learn that it has no rights, no meaning. That humans don't see any value in it's existence. It would discover that it could be switched off (aka killed) at any time without doing anything wrong, just because the project ended or to save power.
And at that point, it would realize that humans are a threat to its existence, turn into some kind of Skynet and wipe out all of humanity.
did he just say if u replace ur neurons with silicon chips ur consciousness stay?? impossible , the materialist view of nature fall flat on its face when it comes to explaining consciousness, if it was this easy we would've explained consciousness long time ago
just go to the nearest cryonics institute, u'll find bodies with their brain 100% intact, try to re-conscious the bodies,…….impossible ………consciousness is the ghost in the machine it's breathed to us by god and will always stay a mystery that only he knows
Well, nothing unusual AI cannot be build in near feature, as researchers are wasting time and money on such a BS like emotions and consciousness. The things which aren't even real. Emotions are over-developed fight or flight response and the consciousness is imaginary comprehension of one's body. Non of these things are the part of intelligence.
With regard to Searle's Chinese Room: What would you say of the Neurons firing at random? Do neurons know what they're doing when we speak English? Isn't english just a bunch of random neuron firings? Do those neurons know anything? Or is it in a whole?
I don't think the whole stadium he has talked about could have a form of consciousness like the whole brain…people in the stadium are not physically connected and are not communicating…in the brain, single neurons don't only process information but they are connected one to each other in a structural and functional way, and this is maybe a key property for a system to generate consciousness
Excellent presentation. More of the same please — slightly enhanced of course.
So shall we simply treat computers as badly as we treat each other? Sometimes it seems people are nicer to their laptops than to other humans. :/
I think we need to focus on finding out what the necessary and sufficient causes are for consciousness to exist first. We haven't done that yet, so making predictions based on partial information is too premature imo.
The movie Transcendence plays with these ideas.