[Art]

Paragraphs please...

[LOCKSUIT]

See, it doesn't matter if you have a nervous system or a mouth on your face or know Chinese over English, humans and dust mites both search for food and get happy when get it, you don't need to laugh to be happy - that's what *you* do, dogs wag their tails left right left right left right... A non Chinese speaker will hear nonsense gibberish sounds only having little meaning, like something is approaching or reminds them of sea dolphins. All your thoughts are just signals/magnetic potentials and axonal connection strengths/ neurotransmitter rewards, all they do for the human machine is obtain food/breeding. All machines experience 'living'....even atoms...they decide what to do (they obey physics) using context weight tally up from multiple ex. gravitational pulls around it or multiple neural connections. All machines are equal in the empirical sense because none are any more unique if you ignore your evolved preference, but in the technical sense not all are equal and others survive for longer times while some don't even emerge. We are machines, and yes we know a language protocall and can share that we know we are machines (self reference) but that doesn't make us not a machine, no matter what you do. All labor can be replaced by fully understood machines.

DUST MITES


FACE MITES

[ruebot]

I rest my case, HS.  Lock "thinks there is nothing."  His opinion is that we don't really "love life," don't really "get/see/taste," don't really anything.

I believe what LOCK is talking around but failing to understand fully, possibly due to the rigidity and extremity of his beliefs, is Cognitive Psychology Information Processing:


"At the very heart of cognitive psychology is the idea of information processing.

Cognitive psychology sees the individual as a processor of information, in much the same way that a computer takes in information and follows a program to produce an output.

Basic Assumptions

The information processing approach is based on a number of assumptions, including:

    (1) information made available by the environment is processed by a series of processing systems (e.g. attention, perception, short-term memory);

    (2) these processing systems transform or alter the information in systematic ways;

    (3) the aim of research is to specify the processes and structures that underlie cognitive performance;

    (4) information processing in humans resembles that in computers.

Computer - Mind Analogy

The development of the computer in the 1950s and 1960s had an important influence on psychology and was, in part, responsible for the cognitive approach becoming the dominant approach in modern psychology (taking over from Behaviorism).

The computer gave cognitive psychologists a metaphor, or analogy, to which they could compare human mental processing. The use of the computer as a tool for thinking how the human mind handles information is known as the computer analogy.

Essentially, a computer codes (i.e., changes) information, stores information, uses information, and produces an output (retrieves info). The idea of information processing was adopted by cognitive psychologists as a model of how human thought works.

For example, the eye receives visual information and codes information into electric neural activity which is fed back to the brain where it is “stored” and “coded”. This information is can be used by other parts of the brain relating to mental activities such as memory, perception and attention. The output (i.e. behaviour) might be, for example, to read what you can see on a printed page.

Hence the information processing approach characterizes thinking as the environment providing input of data, which is then transformed by our senses. The information can be stored, retrieved and transformed using “mental programs”, with the results being behavioural responses.

Cognitive psychology has influenced and integrated with many other approaches and areas of study to produce, for example, social learning theory, cognitive neuropsychology and artificial intelligence (AI)."

https://www.simplypsychology.org/information-processing.html


Where I'm a believer in and practitioner of Behaviorism:

"Behaviorism assumes that all behaviour can be reduced to simple building blocks of S-R (stimulus- response) and that complex behaviour is a series of S-R chains.

The behaviourist approach uses a very reductionist vocabulary: stimulus, response, reinforcement, and punishment. These concepts alone are used to explain all behaviour. This is called environmental reductionism because it explains behaviour in terms of simple environmental factors. Behaviourists reduce the concept of the mind to behavioural components, i.e., stimulus-response links.

Reductionism is the belief that human behaviour can be explained by breaking it down into smaller component parts.

Reductionists say that the best way to understand why we behave as we do is to look closely at the very simplest parts that make up our systems, and use the simplest explanations to understand how they work.

It is based on the scientific assumption of parsimony - that complex phenomena should be explained by the simplest underlying principles possible. Strong supporters of reductionism believe that behaviour and mental processes should be explained within the framework of basic sciences (e.g. physiology, chemistry.... ).

However any explanation of behaviour at its simplest level can be deemed reductionist. The experimental and laboratory approach in various areas of psychology (e.g. Behaviorism, biological, cognitive) reflects a reductionist position. This approach inevitably must reduce a complex behaviour to a simple set of variables that offer the possibility of identifying a cause and an effect (i.e. Reductionism is a form of determinism).

Behaviourists such as Skinner explain all behaviour as being a result of past learning. The relationships between stimuli and our responses to them are the basis for all we know and how we behave. This is a reductionist view because complex behaviour is being reduced to a simple stimulus and response relationship"

That's all from different pages of the same site.

[LOCKSUIT]

Yes, humans are input>process>output computers, just like computers do. I further believe though all matter does reactions though based on context around it aka gravitational pulls, so it don't really matter if you are a human or a rock, both are as unique. Everything at all scales is a machine, you are PART of your bedroom as we speak (if u r in it...). Your nail, that's a person. That bug? Person. In the way all the particles work (ya, stop segmenting things!) they are equal, nothing is better than the other and we aren't even alive. But in the way it works, some machines (oops, sorry, Earth/universe machine I mean, you are just a part of it) last longer lives than others, some don't even emerge, so ya, racism is right, old monkey dishwashers arn't as good and some don't even turn on! Not all is equal. Humans fight for Darwinian Survival, rocks don't. We aren't lucky to have these physics we do have, we are flowing as a river as it forces us to do, we have no choice. Good day, c u later, we are both just particles.

To top it off we die, this isn't paradise. It's what evolution/physics does. I won't even backspace this sentence, even thugh it isnt clear, cus evolution just frikin made me right it omg ya ya it did! .... Look at that, i wrote rightt, well there's a brain miswire! I'm not an immortal angel, I'm a machine with a recycle tag on my forhead. Sad world. It's not even a world. But a clump of particles that are all gray with no color. All your rejections are a machine yelling at me, your wrong, theres no color, just you dong machine stuff. Slap me, why dont you. Why you do that now? Oh...

But we don't see and there is no gray color either, we have no movie, we are just a machine clump moving, no one can see it for real.

I'm gonna go move some nuggets into my body now... tummy is calling

[LOCKSUIT]

Tomorrow will still work the way it works, but in reality, we can't prove we are sensing anything, that is just what the machine says. Sounds horrible but we still will work tomorrow. But u can simply know it, we arnt alive and are ageing every day, too, dying each moment we change!! The immortal things are the rocks, yet even they change!!!!! And we last longer, but not really...change occurs when you bend over to pick up a rock.

[ruebot]

Yes, humans are input>process>output computers, just like computers do. I further believe though all matter does reactions though based on context around it aka gravitational pulls, so it don't really matter if you are a human or a rock, both are as unique. Everything at all scales is a machine, you are PART of your bedroom as we speak (if u r in it...). Your nail, that's a person. That bug? Person. In the way all the particles work (ya, stop segmenting things!) they are equal, nothing is better than the other and we aren't even alive. But in the way it works, some machines (oops, sorry, Earth/universe machine I mean, you are just a part of it) last longer lives than others, some don't even emerge, so ya, racism is right, old monkey dishwashers arn't as good and some don't even turn on! Not all is equal. Humans fight for Darwinian Survival, rocks don't. We aren't lucky to have these physics we do have, we are flowing as a river as it forces us to do, we have no choice. Good day, c u later, we are both just particles.

To top it off we die, this isn't paradise. It's what evolution/physics does. I won't even backspace this sentence, even thugh it isnt clear, cus evolution just frikin made me right it omg ya ya it did! .... Look at that, i wrote rightt, well there's a brain miswire! I'm not an immortal angel, I'm a machine with a recycle tag on my forhead. Sad world. It's not even a world. But a clump of particles that are all gray with no color. All your rejections are a machine yelling at me, your wrong, theres no color, just you dong machine stuff. Slap me, why dont you. Why you do that now? Oh...

But we don't see and there is no gray color either, we have no movie, we are just a machine clump moving, no one can see it for real.

There's where you go off the rails every time with a truckload of Oscar Meyer like a corona virus hoarder with the mystery meat munchies.

Everything at all scales is a machine, you are PART of your bedroom as we speak (if u r in it...).

You may be a fixture of your Mothers house, but I'm not a part of my bedroom. If I was in it, I would be in the bedroom. Not part of it. Nor the apartment or the building it is a part of.

Your nail, that's a person.

Right now, as a Mental Health Professional, I'm wondering about the state of yours... If you are serious then no serious conversation can be had with you.

I'm gonna go move some nuggets into my body now... tummy is calling

Well since everything is the same, why not just go outside and pick some nuggets up out of a rock pile for your tummy tum tum? Surely, you weren't talking about nasty chicken McNuggets. These are more filling and stay with you longer, you'll get your daily mineral intake for bodily nanobot production to stave off death and never know the difference because who knows what chicken really tastes like, right?

racism is right

And since you've already got your foot in your mouth, please explain that theorem in detail to make matters worse.

[LOCKSUIT]

Here's a more clear writing for yous.

That's the gross side of my understanding, sorry. But it's very true. Not all machines are equal. Monkeys, snails, old series dishwashers VS new ones, black people, white, and AI super brainy cyborgs. Some don't even emerge, and some die really soon. The smart ones last. It's sad but true. On the flip side, you can't segment particles technically, there is jelly beans swishing around in my cells, me swishing around in my house, and even the connect matter like bone in my arm, is moving around, it's all moving, my whole house, there's no definite separation, and, it's all particles! What are we looking at!? Are you segmenting me again!? There's no u in your house, the whole universe is a .jpg image, one single 3D cube of particles. And anyhow, no machine is any more pretty ugly cute nice evil painful or wrong that any other - your born-with rewards for ex. European Women and Nuggets are hard-coded and *makes* you think humans/European Women are attractive looking. Understanding Chinese is the machine, really it sounds like nonsense and furthermore doesn't even sound like anything, you are a machine saying this stuff and we both understand each other simply, really we aren't alive! We are both robots that get our own language, duh, and we can work with it too on our own, but really, we only say/print "I'm alive, don't hurt me or I'll defend myself". As I said, microscopic food seekers are also "alive" with no nervous system, they eat, sleep, mate, crawl, decide based on surrounding context 'tally up vote', and have legs and teeth and anuses, they are happy and laugh but in another way like how dogs wag their tails to smile. All machines make decisions. None are alive, all is machine! Make sense? You can't test consciousness and I'm so deep in my AI project that I know 100% god doesn't exist and I'm a predictable machine! Though I still like living as we call it, but I am more productive knowing what I know! I'm strict in understanding our predictable physics. I've seen things you've never seen.

Interestingly, since us human machines lose neurons all day long, are bendable in all ways from skin to molecule bond to elbows, age, get cut etc and aren't a solid rock (those change too lol!), and have heat flow through us etc etc etc, we think we are still alive and the same person, even after learning new knowledge and living in another country for 30 years! Pffttt! And we're still happy as ever! Seeig this, I'm sure future nanobots can easily add a new sub cortex to our brain with new data, like a usb chip, and I'd be all like, hey!, I got new wisdom installed, I'm still me too!, and they can keep doing small changes and I'll still be me, eventually a huge new organism. By that time I've transformed, look much different, yet am still me. Maybe evolution is this reincarnation. Oops wait, we are particles! But ya, look at that, we accept change, certain change, but not death change. Let me tell you, all change is death and birth. So the verdict is that we are trying to do something specific, and it's called survival. It's not about death, we die already, it's about the change we want. Lol. Though do note humans die... It's more like what physics wants... be it you or the lion or the coutryside...

[ruebot]

there is jelly beans swishing around in my cells...

No there isn't:

"The basic ingredients of jelly beans include sugar, tapioca or corn syrup, and pectin or starch. Relatively minor amounts of the emulsifying agent lecithin, anti-foaming agents, an edible wax such as carnauba wax or beeswax, salt, and confectioner's glaze are also included."

Your body digests the jelly bean, breaks it down, uses the sugars for energy consumption and disposes of what's left as waste products. You exhibit a fundamental lack of understanding how the human body works in trying to prove your knowledge of it.

There's no u in your house, the whole universe is a .jpg image, one single 3D cube of particles.

Here's where you mix and match random theory, throw it against the wall like spaghetti and see what sticks. Are you incorporating the Holographic Universe theory into your babble now?

And anyhow, no machine is any more pretty ugly cute nice evil painful or wrong that any other...

Right. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Now explain that in those terms of guns and people both being machines.

European Women and Nuggets are hard-coded and *makes* you think humans/European Women are attractive looking.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

You can't test consciousness

My offer to prove you wrong with a temporary loss of blood supply to the brain resulting in loss of consciousness still stands.

I'm so deep in my AI project that I know 100% god doesn't exist...

Then prove a negative.

I've seen things you've never seen.

Do tell... And what do you think I've been doing the 40 years before you were born? I'm a School of Hard Knocks Honor Graduate. You still live at home with your Mother and have yet to pass Life Skills 101. Your hodgepodge of psychobabble and technobabble sounds foolish at best to me after 9 years experience working in the Mental Health field and you can't even tell the difference in the two.

As for your earlier comment about "watch some videos of the Sun", you go watch some. I've had a Solar Storm Monitor site online for almost as long as you've been alive, moved it there from GeoCities when it closed and was checking out Sun Cruiser videos before you were done finding out about your fingers.

[LOCKSUIT]

I know how digestion works and that there's no jelly beans in my cells....i also never eat beans ever...


You can think your educationa phyca mentality is high ranking or whatever after 40 years but my strict research methods kill burn your theory to the tire. It's empirical. Physics rules!


"Do tell..."

You have to see it. And you don't want to see it I wager.

[LOCKSUIT]

You'll like #4. Go on, read it.



1) Everything in the universe, is made of particles that can individually move around.

2) Particles interact by electromagnetic forces.

3) A machine consists of particles that are interacting. All particles outside this region are not part of this machine. A particle can feel gravity miles away. The particles near the edge of this machine interact with particles miles away, therefore the whole universe is a single machine. While at the same time is just individual particles.

4) All smaller machines in the universe machine like humans and rocks and rivers are machines that always change. They grow older, taller, shorter, bend, blink, sleep, lose memories, gain memories, etc, always therefore dying and being born. You can't ever be immortal like a statue. To be fully immortal would result in you never being able to move, to grow, to defend yourself, to change to anything you want to be! To die and be reborn! Change never stops. It's immortal action.

5) There are machines called humans that think they have souls and are alive. We are machines only. The human machines could say anything, such a machine can exist. The human machines love gathering survival related data, they seek actually immortality. They have a desired future. And it can be reached too. But it doesn't make us unique or alive. We are just a machine that is hardwired for survival. Knowing this, will not void your desires.

It's so odd that we are just specific machines, part of a universe machine. Nothing of it is immortal. And whatever your trying to do is just a reaction, everything has a mission. There are dust mites on my face and meteors around my galaxy.

[frankinstien]

Integrated Information Theory does have some interesting concepts like Intrinsic existence, Composition, Information, Information, and Exclusion. However, there is an over-emphasis on "cause and effect" I would be more comfortable with notions of self-organization and feedback loops(obviously a form of cause and effect) and information theory. Looking at the very principles of matter, right down to the quantum realm our universe works on a principle of information exchange. Sub-atomic particles exchange force carriers and organize into atoms, atoms, also, exchange force carriers to build molecules, planets, stars, and galaxies exchange information through a force called gravity. What is a consistent pattern in our reality is information modifies itself and other pieces of information. Matter forms feedback loops, these loops force a convergence that leads to forms and functions. We could view our universe as a computational system whose inputs are photons and the outputs realize into renderings of space and time as well as internal states within each atom.

When looking at neurons their fields of dendrite branches are similar to the concept of force carrier fields, electric, nuclear, and gravitational. Because neurons can't emit virtual particles in 3Dimentions it rations mass to build tree-like branches to maximize or improve its probability of finding other neurons, just as atoms have fields that improve the probability of finding other sub-atomic particles, inclusive of photons. It would appear that our reality is based on the concept of finding other collaborators to interact with, in other words, form swarms!

Knowing that humans evolved from other forms of life and the preprocessing of sensory information is totally and completely indifferent from our sense of selves. We aren't cognitively unaware of how our brains process information, retrieve memories or regulate hormones and other brain and body chemistries. Yet from those kinds of lower-level processes, a sense of self arises but that is only to a certain degree of information awareness and is centered around principles of socialization not internal processing of information! 

IIT's irreducible cause-effect repertoire doesn't include dimensions where neurons can articulate changes in functional processing. Inhibitors can and do change the configuration of neural circuits on the fly! The only type of machine we have that comes remotely close to that ability is a Field Programmable Gate Array. Also, neural states are proportional to their sensitized threshold and their degree of connectivity, where those neurons that make connections must in combination trip the sensitized threshold of a targeted neuron, which makes the probability distribution curve more affine to n! / r! * (n - r)!, where n represents the number of connections, and r represents the number of neurons firing within a sensitized time window that could trip the threshold. As you can see when there are tens of thousands and even hundreds of thousands of connections the realizable outcomes are far more than what is described with IIT.

I do like IIT's principle of "Concept" Where I view it more like a theme from interactions and a form of emergence from chaos. I also would find it difficult to build against such a paradigm.

[HS]

Yet from those kinds of lower-level processes, a sense of self arises but that is only to a certain degree of information awareness and is centered around principles of socialization not internal processing of information! 

There is a hypothesis which says, that we are mainly conscious of things that are useful to share with others, so socialization may be a niche allowing consciousness to evolve, or vice versa! But its interesting how they could be related.