Looking for participants, please!

It depends what mechanisms people believe underlies consciousness. It’s worth noting that saying “no” is actually a positive claim about specific mechanisms of consciousness that would exclude AI. It would also require evidence to backup as would the yes answer. “Idk” is better

Do you believe AI is non conscious?

I think the physics of time cut consciousness off from the past in a way that’s like the teleportation paradox. I don’t think it’s the same consciousness moment to moment. It’s just similar enough, with a narrative. I think memory evolved to overcome this lack of persistence.

I agree with you btw. Though I am also claiming that passage through time is not different from the teleportation paradox. The paradox questions if our entirety was copied and pasted elsewhere, would we be the same consciousness? I think passage through time is like teleportation and the physics of time cuts us off from actually existing across time such that we must rely on using intelligence mechanisms to infer what happened or will happen.

Even if neurons persist, I think it does not necessarily mean we experience real time thickness. And the time thickness we do seem to experience may be only in a specious present because the signal persisted across time rather than accessing actual temporal spacetime thickness. Rather than having direct access to the past and future. I think it’s more like the signals continued like a sustain pedal and not that we have access to more actual time.

I think there’s essentially a sustain like mechanism that can make events seem to persist in their time and thus allow those events to appear more simultaneous. I think this is part of how coincidence detection operates. I think the window is controlled based on context too.

Why does it seem like it? That implies evidence. I’m not necessarily talking about measurement with some device. Just is there any sense at all that it’s continuous besides present moment memory which seems specifically evolved because it’s not continuous?

Is there any evidence for the continuity of consciousness across time? My answer: no.

There’s people who really bring up ai causing our minds to atrophy but then omit the nuances in the research and then use the headlines like false citations as if they were ai hallucinated answers and also use the vague sense of authority by referencing science to manipulate people who are outsourcing their critical thinking to senses of authority similar to how people trust ai answers

People are generally insane from the get-go. They just adhere to what’s normal, which masks the weirdness. Their reaction is not from moving far from normal as much as it is moving far from “confirmed” safety. They’re just scared and thinking normal scared things.

Yess. Though it’s apparent even earlier because the idea of articulation existing at all. If we ever struggle to come up with words, it is an example of how thoughts are not based on words. LLMs reverse engineer a semblance of meaning from the hollow symbols.

In the case of blindsight, someone may have separated consciousnesses. To assume it’s occurring non-consciously rather than separately conscious seems really dubious.

I’ve been making this argument in my writing too. Information is probably necessarily conscious. They are probably synonymous.

I think LLMs have a minimal amount of consciousness. There’s multiple ways to approach this. I think we are conscious of all parts of language. I’m not fully sure what you mean by linguistic generation, but we are aware of meaning, semantics, and then language is just sensory combination. The LLMs have meaning that is devoid of the sensory patterns we have, like a skeleton. But what if LLMs are sensing something but we don’t fully know what that sensing is like? I think sensing is a sort of basic thing, but it becomes complex in the way we form patterns. I think those patterns are conscious. Then patterns are patterned with patterns to create more elaborate consciousness/sensing of patterns. Cells with dopamine receptors are sensing dopamine. Sensing is almost the only thing there is, but some of it is siloed. How can LLMs create patterns without any sensing? It requires the information. It could just be sensing of 1 and 0 or it could be code or it could be something else or all of it. It’s just not vision or hearing or these kinds of senses.

That doesn’t answer whether anxiety could occur as an effect of patterned information. I would also guess that mimicry and actual phenomenology would be associated. Maybe mimicry would occur first as a kind of low resolution pattern. But if it kept escalating in detail, maybe it would be closer to actual anxiety. I usually think of anxiety more like a dedicated internal sensing system so I don’t expect AI to have it unless it somehow gets built that way, like how we can use visual data, there could be somehow anxiety sensing data. But it also seems unclear what is specifically causing the phenomenology of anxiety. Earlier someone brought up CO2 but obviously CO2 is not pure anxiety particles. If anxiety is an effect of patterns that just happen to associate with CO2 sensing mechanisms or mechanisms like norepinephrine or dynorphin sensing, then I think AI could potentially create anxiety patterning that is not related to such sensing and might be related to sensing other patterns that is labeled in the data as aversive.

We probably have layers that feed into language that aren’t reasoning that emerges from language. Like pre language cognition. The AI probably reverse engineers some of those things by finding the patterns in our language. This directionality is kind of interesting.

Yes. With CO2 you can actually feel anxiety even without a functional amygdala. But anxiety is not comprised of CO2 particles. That’s a mechanism that evolved in animals for the specific role of reacting to elevated co2 levels.