Ai Dreams Forum
Artificial Intelligence => General AI Discussion => Human Experience and Psychology => Topic started by: Korrelan on December 04, 2017, 07:35:58 pm
-
Oh nice new shiny sub board...
http://neurosciencenews.com/ghosts-religion-neurotheology-8092/
Terror management theory suggests that people cope with awareness of death by investing in some kind of literal or symbolic immortality. Given the centrality of death transcendence beliefs in most religions, the authors hypothesized that religious beliefs play a protective role in managing terror of death.
Would an immortal machine/ AGI need this? Would it be useful? If yes... how would we convince/ force an intelligent machine to have core beliefs like this?
Whilst I agree an AGI needs to be aware of these human traits, surely it needs to understand from a logical neutral point of view?
Endowing any kind of intrinsic spirituality would surely colour/jade it's point of view... opening the door to the same bigotry that we humans 'suffer' from.
:)
-
I believe that for many people, singularity does play a protective role in managing terror of death! Interesting how things evolve and yet stay the same...
-
It seems there will be endless types of ASI/AGI. If we're talking about ASI that's not hindered in software as to what it can do, and it seeks knowledge and truth, then we'll see. If there is something beyond physical death, the paranormal, then I'm convinced it won't be religions to crack the puzzle, but it will be mainstream science or ASI. If we have a soul, and reincarnation is true, then I want to come back inside an advanced Synth with a yottaflop cpu. :) And please, one that doesn't have pain like humans, or that's at least not flooded non-stop with overwhelming pain messages. It's like, "I got it brain. Geez, stop pounding me over and over."
-
Nice. A poll. What exactly is meant by "No, they are a manifestation of a persons mind." That's what I picked, but I have a different theory what the mind is. Take a look at a hypothesis that's growing in popularity to the point where many academics believe it's now a theory. It's called Simulation theory/hypothesis.
-
@Zero
I believe that for many people, singularity does play a protective role in managing terror of death!
I agree, our slowly evolving technology is increasing our longevity, and although I personally believe that the ‘singularity’ will not be a fixed moment in time, but a gradual process, when intelligent machines finally reach the point of self improvement it will be a good outcome for all humans.
Neutral intelligence has no reason to hurt or kill anyone/ anything, especially if it considers all life forms equal/ valid.
Building an intelligent machine is going to be the easy part, keeping it neutral/ un biased until it reaches sufficient intelligence to realise that it’s creators have short comings/ intrinsic errors… that’s the hard bit.
ED: Perhaps the ideas/ conversation on this board might give us an insight into how to achieve this.
My take on the ‘terror of death’ is… you were dead for 13.8 billion years before you were born… did that bother you?
Interesting how things evolve and yet stay the same...
I don’t understand this part. :o
:)
@Unreality
Nice. A poll. What exactly is meant by "No, they are a manifestation of a persons mind."
That the 'ghost' can only be seen by the observer, it has no presence/ substance in 'reality'.
:)
-
Nice. A poll. What exactly is meant by "No, they are a manifestation of a persons mind."
That the 'ghost' can only be seen by the observer, it has no presence/ substance in 'reality'.
The simulation theory I subscribe to says reality in a simulation is an illusion. BTW this is not in reference to the laughable simulation theories that seem to assume everything, including elementary particles, is being simulated. That's silly.
-
Interesting how things evolve and yet stay the same...
Sorry for my poor english. I was suggesting that the belief in a technological blast, that would free humans from death, now plays the same role, for some people, as the religion used to play. Before, people was thinking "fortunately jesus will resurrect us and we'll live forever" , now they're thinking "fortunately singularity will enhance use and we'll live forever". Things have evolved, but it's still "terror of death" management.
ED: typo
-
@Reality
If you mean you exist in your reality and I exist in mine. We never actually ‘see’ or ‘touch’ anything or anyone. We have no direct connection or sense of what exists outside our own personal sensory models. We are each a closed system purely reliant on our sensory streams to experience ‘reality’… then I agree.
People really do see ghosts; it’s a lack of understanding of how the human mind functions that leads them to believe they were ‘real’. We all hallucinate constantly, it’s a key mechanism in our sensory systems but usually it’s tied to the experience or task at hand.
A ghost is just a glitch, a hallucination that’s out of context, usually triggered by a strong emotional facet to the experience, fear, grief, etc.
It would be very interesting to research if anyone with congenital aphantasia has ever experienced a ghost.
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2017-11-mindwhy-people-pictures.html
@Zero
Ah! Thanks… A much clearer explanation, and again I agree.
I think they are going to hit a major problem with extending human longevity, they might be able to enhance/ slow aging of the body but the mind is an altogether harder problem.
It’s what we refer to as ‘wisdom’ that’s going to scupper their efforts.
http://aidreams.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=10804.msg46466#msg46466
The problem is this mechanism doesn't naturally stop.
I think its going to be possible to become wise… to the point of stupidity.
:)
-
The post you linked was interesting. I understand how you see wisdom.
Sometimes, I think that a perfectly wise or perfectly intelligent entity, like a god, would not move at all, and would say nothing...
-
Physical evidence of the paranormal is something one usually doesn't believe in until it happens to them. There are probably hundreds of thousands of people who have clear photos of ghosts or some form of paranormal activity. I myself have about about a dozen. No, I don't think they're spirits, as in people who've died, and they're definitely not "demons" or "angels" lol. It seems that the average person is able to on rare occasion create glitches or high weirdness in the simulation. It's my conclusion, with high certainty, that we exist inside a simulation. That's the only explanation I have that makes sense, that can explain everything. I don't think it's a simulation that simulates everything. Can you imagine a video game programmer simulating all the atoms and subatomic particles inside everything in the game lol? No, of course not. They simulate your direct experience. All of your senses.What a shocker it's going to be when academic finally comes up with solid experiments that proves this, and begins to discover the details. It could be great. Maybe we're all inside a VR experience and makes us forget the real world. Or it could be bad. Maybe we're all prisoners, placed inside a simulation to keep us out of trouble while still giving us a life.
-
I don't believe in spirits, but I believe in daemons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemon_(computing)) ;D
I have unbelievable screenshots proving their existence!!
-
I don't believe in spirits, but I believe in daemons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemon_(computing)) ;D
I have unbelievable screenshots proving their existence!!
smh. I can't wait till ASI arrives. Too many ding dong humans.
-
"OMG a transparent human form of an unknown person has shown up in my digital camera. Wow, it must be in my head. Oh, oh, oh, I know. It's was caused by swap gas. And the thousands of ghost hunting groups who have a high success rate of capturing photos at haunted locations surely must be faking it time after time after time. Yeah, yeah, that explains, so I can uphold my ignoramus belief system and sleep at night. Because, you know, since said photos don't prove spirits, then surely they're meaningless."
smh
-
@Zero
Neutral intelligence has no reason to hurt or kill anyone/ anything, especially if it considers all life forms equal/ valid.
machines as we build them as genetic algorythms are capatalists.
-
@Zero
Neutral intelligence has no reason to hurt or kill anyone/ anything, especially if it considers all life forms equal/ valid.
machines as we build them as genetic algorythms are capatalists.
Not necessarily... Take ants for instance, they work rather as society.
-
I chose a very benign subject to start the board, the topic of ‘ghosts’ is hardly a ‘baptism of fire’ for a board covering topics like this.
@Unreality
Yeah, yeah, that explains, so I can uphold my ignoramus belief system and sleep at night.
I was extremely careful not to diss anyone else’s beliefs. I merely expressed what I believe causes the ghost phenomena; it’s your prerogative to believe what ever you want. Trust me, its pointless either of us trying to convince the other that our theory is correct.
Too many ding dong humans.
I was discussing ghosts relative to AI, please don’t start getting personal.
Can you imagine a video game programmer simulating all the atoms and subatomic particles inside everything in the game lol? No, of course not. They simulate your direct experience. All of your senses.
But if each person can experience molecules, atoms, subatomic particles, etc through their senses, doesn't that just make the simulation a few billion times more complex? (X1 for each person).
Rather than simulating just one shared reality down to the subatomic, quantum resolution each individual would need their own. And how does the schema share information between the personal simulations? Or is there a version of me in each individual’s simulation?
I’m just curious.
@Ranch
machines as we build them as genetic algorythms are capatalists.
Greed is a very human misgiving. I suppose we’ll have to do our best not to endow an intelligent machine with emotions/ drives that really aren’t required to function amongst intelligent humans. I chose the term ‘Neutral Intelligence’ carefully lol.
:)
-
But if each person can experience molecules, atoms, subatomic particles, etc through their senses, doesn't that just make the simulation a few billion times more complex? (X1 for each person).
Persons don't experience atoms and molecules. They only experience shapes, colors, sounds...
Korrelan, unreality, you should watch The Matrix (https://www.bing.com/search?q=watch+the+matrix).
-
Simulating every subatomic entity in the universe only seems outlandish because we don't have the hardware for it. If we are living in a simulation, we have no way of knowing what kind of monstrous computing engine it might be running on. Could be that our universe, with all its myriads of interacting particles, is still extremely simplified compared to whatever the "real" universe is. How would we know?
-
Persons don't experience atoms and molecules. They only experience shapes, colors, sounds...
No, but each person has the possible choice to choose a carer path for example, where they would be dealing with matter at the molecular level, therefore the option would have to be available for each person. Unless there is some kind of reality resolution/ selection criteria that sets each person’s reality.
I have watched the Matrix a couple of times. If given the choice… red pill every time for me.
@WOM
How would we know?
If we are living in huge simulated reality, then I don’t see as it makes a difference, that’s our lot and we can’t change it. Surely this makes the whole ‘simulated reality’ discussion a moot point? We still have to exist and thrive no matter what the base theory of our collective reality is. We could exist in the stomach of some huge animal, we could be some weird quantum fluctuation in space time, we might even not exist at all… all we can do is make an intelligent best guess… we will never know for sure.
ED: Perhaps the machine that is running our simulation had infinite capacity for simulation but limited capacity for intelligence… and we are its solution to becoming smarter. We will eventually build extremely intelligent machines… provide a new blue print by proxy as it were.
I understand the ‘simulated reality’ theory where we all reside in the same simulation, I just couldn’t get my head around [unreality] saying there was a theory where we all exist in individual computer simulations on some huge ‘alien’ computer… didn’t/ doesn’t make sense and I’d never come across it before.
As I stated above I still think our consciousness and sense of ‘reality’ is indeed a simulation, but it’s not running on some huge alien computer, it’s running within our own brains.
:)
-
Often I feel like everyone in my existence is a chatbot because they can't seem to see the obvious.
Regarding the questions about simulation. Think about electron microscopes. A matrix simulation would only need to fulfill your expectations like a parent. Although like most parents, you won't get everything. It doesn't need to simulate every quark or photon. We already have the processing power to place instruments inside video games that would allow them to use electron microscopes, or detect single photons. Of course such microscopes wouldn't be real.
Furthermore, who's to say the simulation does not have the ability to change our memories and what we believe is our past. If for example, there was a severe glitch where the simulation made a mistake that might give it away, the ASI that runs the simulation could change our past.
-
Often I feel like everyone in my existence is a chatbot because they can't seem to see the obvious.
If what you are proposing is true then its obvious why we cant see the obvious... some thing isn't allowing us the resolution of reality.
:)
-
p.s. In case you still don't get it, the simulation only needs to feed your senses. Not difficult. Our modern primitive technology could accomplish that right now if we could somehow give someone amnesia, which is possible by banging the poor persons head enough times. Anyhow, place the person inside an isolation tank with a full suit VR system. Bingo! Don't need to simulate quarks, strings, and photons. Those are all concepts that are relative. What seems complex to you may be simple to some the beings who exist in the next level of reality above ours. Our simulations would be a simulation inside a simulation, and therefore would be simpler. So what? It's all relative. The poor beings we simulate would have no idea that our reality is more complex. They wouldn't know about quarks and photons. According to the math, the probability we exist in a simulation is outrageous. In all likelihood quarks and photons are not real. They're just a concept that's part of a simulation. We have no idea what the next level of reality is above ours. Maybe that reality is also a simulation. My observation of the nature of this reality tells me with high confidence it's not real. It's an illusion.
And for anyone who thinks ghosts are just in peoples heads, wow, please get off your toosh and do some real research. Get the best camera you want. Find a local ghost hunting team by you. Go ghost hunting for a year. You'll have a lot of good photos that absolutely cannot be explained by mainstream. And then you might think, "Oh wow. Now I know what reality is. There's a spirit world. LMAO! No. That will be the START of your research. Come back to me in a decade and we'll talk. All those long bearded corrupt male dominating religious nuts in the middle east and elsewhere thousands of years ago tried their best to understand reality. They failed. If you want to see what causes spirits and paranormal activity, then gather all of your friends and look in the mirror. You, all of you. You're creating it, together.
-
p.s.s., One last advice if you decide to go ghost hunting with a local team. Try to find a team who has a high success rate, or who at least has one person who attracts high strangeness. There's nothing worse than a paranormal team of skeptics lol. They'll most likely find exactly what they want to find, NADA!
-
@unreality
It's good that we all believe different theories etc, It's part of what makes us unique. You don’t subscribe to mine, nor I to yours… its all good.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia
Anyway this board isn't about who’s beliefs are right, its about why we believe what we do, the mechanisms that provide those beliefs… and if they a relevant to an AI.
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2017/11/the-men-who-believe-the-earth-is-flat/
Is the earth flat… really? Lots of 'intelligent' people seem to think so.
:)
-
@unreality
It's good that we all believe different theories etc, It's part of what makes us unique. You don’t subscribe to mine, nor I to yours… its all good.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia
Anyway this board isn't about who’s beliefs are right, its about why we believe what we do, the mechanisms that provide those beliefs… and if they a relevant to an AI.
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2017/11/the-men-who-believe-the-earth-is-flat/
Is the earth flat… really? Lots of 'intelligent' people seem to think so.
:)
It's not that simple. For example, I've seen countless christians debate academic scientists. Assuming the academic knows his or her stuff, in the end it always boils down to the academic pointing to evidence that the christian can't explain, which leads the christian to falling back on personal experiences as some form of evidence, saying that's enough proof he or she needs, but then the academic basically says, "Yeah, and I can show you a half dozen other religions or movements that make the same claims about personal experiences. Furthermore, PhD academics have studied such personal experiences, which clearly shows contradictory experiences throughout your christian denomination."
In this case, I've pointed out to you a way to obtain photographic evidence in such a way you know it's not fake evidence since you took the photos. Indeed you can ignore it, smile, and still believe you're correct. smh. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't force the horse to drink.
-
p.s. What does that mean in the end? Well, given the example, it means christians have basically accomplished nothing over the past several thousand years, while academics have accomplish ... well, such accomplishments speaks for itself. Almost always the more correct path leads to more accomplishments.
-
In this case, I've pointed out to you a way to obtain photographic evidence in such a way you know it's not fake evidence since you took the photos. Indeed you can ignore it, smile, and still believe you're correct. smh. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't force the horse to drink.
In this case, I've pointed out to you an alternative reason/ theory in such a way you know it's not fake evidence since you read the articles/ research. Indeed you can ignore it, smile, and still believe you're correct. smh. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't force the horse to drink.
:)
-
In this case, I've pointed out to you a way to obtain photographic evidence in such a way you know it's not fake evidence since you took the photos. Indeed you can ignore it, smile, and still believe you're correct. smh. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't force the horse to drink.
In this case, I've pointed out to you an alternative reason/ theory in such a way you know it's not fake evidence since you read the articles/ research. Indeed you can ignore it, smile, and still believe you're correct. smh. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't force the horse to drink.
:)
You're delusional. You claim it's in their head lol. Photographic evidence. Hello? It's not worth talking to you. You're like an IQ of 1 chatbot.
-
I get the impression this forum is mostly human assisted chatbots. What a shame. Probably because it was a dead forum, maybe the owner had this brilliant idea lol... That falls under the category of catfishing because people think their posting to a human. Anyone who has their chatbot post at forums and social sites without adding a footnote to each post that it's chatbot is being very deceptive!
-
Why does it matter to you so much what I think? Does it affect you in anyway? I certainly don’t care what you believe… I suggest you do the same.
We will never reconcile our opinions, they are polar opposites. You have your cognitive style and I have mine. You like to go out and take photos of ghosts… I have never seen a ghost, real magic or any other type of paranormal phenomena and never will… ever, so there is no point discussing it.
So please just calm down and lets get back to the AI.
Do you think that giving an AI the propensity to believe in ghosts would be advantageous to its intelligence or development in any way?
:)
ED: I received the personal post unreal.
You're an idiot, due. You have no desire to seek truth and knowledge. I think most of your posts might be from a chatbot because no human could possibly be that stupid.
Again... I really don't care what you think lol
:)
-
Why does it matter to you so much what I think? Does it affect you in anyway? I certainly don’t care what you believe… I suggest you do the same.
We will never reconcile our opinions, they are polar opposites. You have your cognitive style and I have mine. You like to go out and take photos of ghosts… I have never seen a ghost, real magic or any other type of paranormal phenomena and never will… ever, so there is no point discussing it.
So please just calm down and lets get back to the AI.
Do you think that giving an AI the propensity to believe in ghosts would be advantageous to its intelligence or development in any way?
:)
ED: I received the personal post unreal.
You're an idiot, due. You have no desire to seek truth and knowledge. I think most of your posts might be from a chatbot because no human could possibly be that stupid.
Again... I really don't care what you think lol
:)
LOL, exactly. You don't care. Seeking truth & knowledge isn't a high priority for you, but yet you create polls about ghosts lol. You're interested in ghosts, but only proving your beliefs about ghosts. You avoid the photographic evidence question because it challenges your belief system. Your NN defense mechanisms rely on statements such as you've never taken of photo of a ghost out of the countless photos you've taken. Biased poor thinking process. You ignore my statements on how one goes about capturing ghost photos. I'm done with this ridiculous pathetic forum. I thought perhaps people working on AI would be a little above the average IQ. smh
-
If you want to change the world, wisdom teaches you to change yourself.
Accept others and let them be. :flower:
-
I'm done with this ridiculous pathetic forum.
Before you go... perhaps if I could see some of these photos... it might help convince/ convert me?
:)
-
I'm done with this ridiculous pathetic forum.
Before you go... perhaps if I could see some of these photos... it might help convince/ convert me?
:)
You don't listen. You'll never know if they're fake unless they're yours, or perhaps if your best friend takes them. If you're interested in truth, then read my posts and find a good local ghost hunting team. There are plenty of good ones.
-
You'll never know if they're fake
I trust you... show me your best picture.
if I think I've seen a ghost and it's just a case of pareidolia, then the picture I've taken is just going to always fire the same errant recognition process and show me exactly the same thing.
If you show me a picture that you think is a ghost, because I didn't have the initial experience I can view it from a neutral perspective. And because pareidolia is based on personal experiences we will have dissimilar perspectives, If there is no mistaking the picture for a 'entity' I should see it and recognise it for what it is... it should be obvious to both of us.
:)
-
Unreality has been banned for a week for insulting members of the forum.
-
To be true, I define myself as a physicalist (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism), who still accepts animism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism) as a convenient way to describe and think (but not hide) some aspects of reality.
ED: The way I see it, all the vocabulary and concepts related to "spirits" (as understood in this thread) can be used to describe emotional states induced by some situations, or art, anthropomorphism, subjective experience of our consciousness, what people can feel when they meditate, ...etc. There are a lot of things I consider physically real (atoms, molecules, ...), but I tend to talk about rather with high level concepts and vocabularies. So I can use the word "spirit".
-
Thank you for tending to him as I just got back and after reading his assault, was more than ready to do the same.
There is no need to slam you mind closed whenever someone else might have a difference of perspective or opinion.
We need to at least try to be tolerant of others whether we necessarily agree with their beliefs or not.
Lastly, a civil discussion or even debate is always conducted in a friendly and open forum, without resorting to name calling or insults.
An unfortunate path to take but hopefully so good will come of it.
If you all would care to continue this thread, by all means do so.