ZDoggMD
The physicist responsible for the world’s first commercial microprocessor knows something about artificial intelligence, and he thinks we have it all wrong 🤯
His new book, Silicon: https://amzn.to/3dFXhYy
Links, audio podcast, and more: https://zdoggmd.com/federico-faggin
Your support keeps us independent and mild-to-moderately awesome: https://zdoggmd.com/supporters
Show, podcast, music, support, shop, social media, and email: https://lnk.bio/zdoggmd
Source
I'm just nodding and pretending I understand this genius
Faggin's central argument that consciousness cannot be reproduced due to quantum limitations bothered me. Basically, he's saying that copies can't be made because quantum forces are so unapproachable. And he seems to imply that because of this, nothing can be done. This struck me as a false dichotomy, an all or nothing argument with no other options. It's like saying that you can never copy a sheet of paper because it has a quantum nature to it (like everything in the universe does). But then, someone sticks it in a photo copier, and gets something that may not be an exact quantum duplicate, and by golly, it's *good enough*, anyway. It also didn't really address (well enough for me) the idea of making a mind from scratch, without needing to quantum copy anything, like your printer spitting out an original document. If the universe can do that through natural processes, why can't we through artificial ones? Oh, we'll never understand the mind well enough, or we'll never have mastery over quantum forces (if they're even relevant) enough? Just like we didn't understand how to make printers and photo copiers? (I'm oversimplifying it, but that's what an analogy is.)
I decided to research this idea of the quantum nature of consciousness to see if there was scientific merit to it. I immediately came upon this article on Wikipedia (admittedly not the best source) of "quantum mind" that summarizes the issue for me: "Assertions that consciousness is somehow quantum-mechanical can overlap with quantum mysticism, a *pseudoscientific* movement that assigns supernatural characteristics to various quantum phenomena such as nonlocality and the observer effect." That article's criticism section is quite relevant, too. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind
But having said all that, I do appreciate his desire to shift the pursuit of happiness to a sort of more inner, spiritual focus.
Machines will never be conscious? Tell that to Ray Kurzweil.
This doesn't stop at humans. Look at the creativity in nature, some nests that birds create are so creative and beautiful and something I could not do. Look at the beauty and intelligence of a spider web, incredible and symmetrical. Look at the beauty of diamonds. Look at a tree, a mushroom a blade of grass. People take this for granted but this consciousness that is fundamental to this reality is everywhere. Look at flowers, the stars, how did the trillions of atoms know how to work together to start nuclear fusion to create an incredible star? Gravity, yes but where does gravity come from? A dead universe? No, if we open our eyes we will see that this universe is infinitely creative and intelligent from the stars all the way down to the spider webs and its all connected.
Love this.
Keep it up with the profound guests and topics. You have a gift of making these topics very graspable and enjoyable and I think this is important for the paradigm shift the world needs. Most people think the world is already figured out and this is a terrible dogma which is causing terrible suffering. I get life is tough and fast paced, the system we are born into doesn't allow for us to stop and take a breathe and think about metaphysical topics, we are addicted to our phones, addicted to materials. Maybe these topics should be taught in schools from a young age to raise more conscious children and therefore more conscious adults?
This.
Great Interview which compliments the others.
Have this guy on again and again and again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Great interview. Thanks for this. I don't understand why he treats quantum as fundamental or having explanatory power rather than being just another expression of symbols interacting on the space-time desktop. Anyone here happens to know?
Thank you for such a delightful and engaging conversation. I hope you're able to schedule Federico again asap. 🙂 🙂 🙂 Please give my deep thanks to Federico as well.
Zubin, I first found you last year when you interviewed Donald Hoffman (who I follow regularly). Thank you for being such an engaging interviewer with Don. 🙂 And I also follow Bernardo Kastrup — again, thank you for having such a meaningful conversation with Bernardo. Your interviews are so on-point that I'm able to share them with friends who might get lost in other interviews of Don and Bernardo's.
And thank you for mentioning that you would be interviewing Federico in your Bernardo episode – I wasn't aware of Federico's work, but your effervescence alerted me to definitely tune in and I'm so glad I did today. I will listen to this episode over and over again.
I'm now looking forward to following you regularly too! Thank you, ZDoggMD 🙂 Thank you… Much love and big hug. <3
again thanks fellow beings for sharing awareness and insights out loud
A computer works at the atomic level. A brain works at the sub-atomic level.
I’m a new sub, and I’m only 26 minutes into this but I can tell you for sure… that you have peaked. I mean this in a good way, the best way. This is fantastic. Thank you for this.
This video is criminally underviewed. The video/audio quality are excellent. The guest is great. The host is great. The questions are great. If this was Joe Rogan or Lex Fridman this would have at least 100k views. The only thing I might suggest is that given how long it is, it might help to have timestamps like Lex Fridman does.
Esther Hicks has been talking about this for 40 years now. I discovered her at the lowest point in my life in my mid thirties. She goes into great detail and explains the relationship between the inner being and the physical being and how emotion is a communication from the inner being to the physical being.
dumb_algorithms have left the chat
You are blowing it out of the water.
Listened twice!
I disagree with the premise that machines will never become conscious but do agree that machines as they are now cannot achieve consciousness. There are many rising technologies that mimic organic behavior more than standard computers do and so I think that these technologies will allow machines to achieve a form of self awareness that is similar but not the exactly the same as ours.
From what I could gather about the thought of one's self being eternal or the conscious experience being eternal I disagree on that as well. The state of change of my mind when I was young to who I am now is different, there are memories that are still there from my childhood but comparing myself now to who I was then as a whole I'm an entirely different person physically and mentally. One could say that the child who I was then is now dead and I am remembering that child from a third party point of view because I can't directly emulate the thoughts and feelings I had then, only bits and pieces. So while I do agree that conservation laws apply to components of systems that are chemically assembled I disagree that the structures of those components achieve any form of permanence, which is really what biology is. I am also disappointed that the idea that consciousness is quantum wasn't really explored at the cellular level where it comes to the various structures of the brain. What patterns of neurons form those quantum algorithms that supposedly lead to consciousness? how is it that internal brain chemistry translates to consciousness that can't be emulated by a complex machine? What physical constraints exist that do not allow for consciousness to be possibly emulated on a non organic system? If human cells supposedly have consciousness and there is permanence to qualia does that mean that earthworms and other organisms that have brains also transcend into some higher existence?
It's becoming clearer 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 primary consciousness will probably have to come first.
Great interview. I am buying book. Digital binary and quantum bits. We are the algorithm the slave in all systems. Thank you✊✊✊🤩🤩🤩. Downey California
Your shows keep getting better and better. This is so amazing! And crazy! It’s helping me remember. 😎
This was a stimulating conversation. On the far side of middle age now, I've intuited that the experience of meaning is fundamental in a way that our reality generally does not acknowledge (much less harness). Prevailing ontology and our Western social values both trivialize the experience of meaning in favor of materialistic busywork. The concept of "qualia" was new to me. I'll certainly follow up on this and will buy the Silicon book. Thanks for sharing this. (Question: Is quantum consciousness working toward an end state, or is it endless permutations? Maybe another way of asking it: If observation collapses the wave function, and quantum consciousness is in the process of knowing itself, can we theorize a point at which endless observation exhausts endless possible states?)
53:07 Yeah so umm Jesus was the "famous person" who said we are in this world but not of it. Jesus. The fact that neither of them knew that while they're sitting there rehashing scripture like it's some kind of newfound knowledge they dreamed up…smh. NIce to see folks finally thinking out of the box, but it would be more appropriate to humbly admit they were dead wrong and that myriads of spiritual teachers from ancient times down to present day were right. And that the fate of humanity's continued existence hinges on correcting this understanding immediately.
People who describe their DMT trips say that they enter a different world that feels more real than this world.
What about cloned animals that act exactly the same way as the original copy? The physical structure of the brain does affect personality.
The beauty of one.
We need the science, and, art. The art part has been woefully suppressed these last few years with corporate management. Use art with, the science.
As a highschooler, can I just say this is way better than any phycology or sociology class I've had.
Y’all should do the next one on entanglements!
Ok I confess, it’s been a few years, but I still watch your lab video and I laugh. Only a med tech would really get it! Thank you for that!
Why do people think they’re machines? I blame it all on Philip K Dick!