From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Sun Jun 10 2001 - 04:38:39 MDT
Mike Lorrey wrote:
>
> Anders Sandberg wrote:
>
> > onsdagen den 25 april 2001 05:46 Lee Corbin wrote:
> >
> > > It is now easy and instructive to visualize such "playback" on
> > > a Life Board. Rather than the next generation being actively
> > > computed, we may simply have an automatic arm reach into a
> > > sequenced table of gels, each with bright spots in fluorescent
> > > paint, and place the next gel in sequence on the Life Board.
> > > This gives every bit the appearance of a civilization developing,
> > > or of an entity having an experience, but in reality has no
> > > content. Indeed, the lights are on, but no one is home.
> >
> > Isn't this just the same thing as Hal's point that the address update in the
> > table lookup would constitute the evolution of a conscious mind? In this case
> > the automatic arm would have to be guided by something, and this something
> > needs to retain a representation of the complex state.
>
> Yes. Take humongous lookup tables, some versatile pattern matching and
> association programs, and a self teaching chatterbot, and you've got something
> with some sort of sentience.
No, you have a compicated chat machine. There is nothing in
the above construction that calls for or is likely to lead to
any sort of self-awareness. Without that, I would not grant it
has "sentience".
> Adding more pattern matching, associating, and
> learning programs gives it more sentience. Keep in mind that a cockroach has
> sentience dictated by less than a handful of pattern matching programs... our
> level of sentience requires a bit more than that...
I don't call unconscious pattern matching sentience.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:03 MST