• Ukraine Crisis
    Who on this forum do you believe 'might very well be' a Russian actor?Tzeentch

    Hmm....
  • Ukraine Crisis
    They're just going to lie and obfuscate and produce red herrings. It's like playing whack-a-mole, but the bullshit pops up so much faster than you can ever knock it down. Best to not even play the game.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/prigozhin-wagner-troops-withdraw-bakhmut-russia-military-ammo-video-rcna83015

    Of course, this is just maskirovka. Everything's running like a well-oiled machine, right stooges?
  • A potential solution to the hard problem
    He is talking about the evolution of phenomenal consciousness - when it first appeared on the scene.Luke

    When did it first appear?
  • Ukraine Crisis
    The Kremlin’s forces have suffered more than 100,000 killed or wounded fighters since December alone, the United States now estimates — outlining Moscow's massive losses as its military leaders scramble to recruit more men and prepare for an impending counteroffensive.
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-casualties-soldiers-killed-ukraine-counteroffensive-putin-war-rcna82380

    If you're Ukraine, don't you think that if you hold out long enough, eventually the Russians will just get sick of it all?
  • A potential solution to the hard problem
    Does the article have anything to say about machine consciousness?
  • How ChatGPT works.
    You're right. I should have said how does a stochastic parrot produce results like that?

    Suppose I have a theory, that ChatGpt has some consciousness, and it's influence it's output. How would you disprove me? After all, machine consciousness is very popular these days. How do we know ChatGpt isn't conscious?
  • How ChatGPT works.
    There are some things I don't get. I ran some jokes by it, and it consistently ranked the trash jokes as bad, and the hilarious jokes as hilarious. And it would give a good analysis of why the joke worked (or didn't). How can a random process produce those results?
  • Replacing matter as fundamental: does it change anything?
    Well, we never get anywhere in these consciousness threads. Absent scientific evidence, all we can do is bat around the same old theories.
  • Replacing matter as fundamental: does it change anything?
    Before we get anywhere, we have to resolve whether information is mind-dependent. Is there information in a universe with no minds? Does a book in a mindless universe contain any information?
  • Ukraine Crisis
    I predict there will be a significant Ukranian offensive, and it will make significant gains.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    I think there will be a Ukranian offensive. Do you think there won't be?
  • Will Science Eventually Replace Religion?
    Science will need to explain how consciousness can come from non-conscious stuff before it can replace religion. And I'm not holding my breath on an explanation.
  • God and Incremental Morality
    RogueAI,

    By “incremental morality,” do you mean something like the following?

    • Sacrifice sick eighty-year-old Joe so that infant Pete can live. Good.
    • Sacrifice sick eighty-year-old Joe so that infant Pete can avoid years of severe torture which will leave him alive but permanently damaged physical and mentally. Good, probably.
    • Sacrifice sick eighty-year-old Joe so that infant Pete can avoid a few days in the hospital with Covid which will leave him permanently disabled in some not-too-serious way. Good or bad?
    • Sacrifice sick eighty-year-old Joe so that Pete can have a fun 1st birthday party. Bad, definitely.

    Somewhere along the line as the consequences to infant Pete become less serious, sacrificing Joe flips from good to bad. But exactly where does it flip? It seems like your OP is related to the sorites paradox.
    Art48

    Very much so! And there's no need to invoke God. My question works equally well with an omnibenevolent machine. If the machine says it's OK to sacrifice Joe to save infant Pete (or some other borderline case), what would the machine's reasoning be? Wouldn't it have to be consequantialist?
  • Is The US A One-Party State?
    Yeah, the GOP didn't have filibuster control of the Senate, so they were limited in what they could do. Trump had a deal to get $20 billion in funding for his wall in exchange for DACA, and he almost went along with it, but then his base got wind of it and that was the end of that.
  • Is The US A One-Party State?
    Life in a Democrat America would be high-tax, high social safety net, high personal freedom, welcoming of immigrants. The major problem would be spending beyond our means. Life in a Republican America would be like Gilead.
  • Is The US A One-Party State?
    America would be radically different if Democrats had large majorities in Congress. Compared to what the Republicans would do with large majorities, the country would be almost unrecognizable.
  • Exploring the artificially intelligent mind of GPT4
    How can stochastic parrotry result in that poem?
  • Knocking back The Simulation Theory
    Would there be free will in a simulation?
  • Why INPUT driven AI will never be intelligent
    The holy grail of future AI would be self-awareness.invicta

    I think it would be machine consciousness, but there will always be a little doubt in the back of our minds. After all, we know each other are conscious because were all built the same way. But a machine that claims it's conscious? That's something else, entirely.
  • Is communism realistic/feasible?
    I don't think communism would work on a large scale, but what about a few large companies competing to sell products at a government-set price level? In this case, government would have extensive regulation powers over companies, to the point where the govt. can set the price point and tell the company, essentially, "You can make money selling this widget for x, if you pay you cut your executive pay by 20%. Looks like a lot of fat there at the top!". Has any fairly large country tried something like that?
  • Neuroscience is of no relevance to the problem of consciousness
    That's a good book, but at one point aren't they inflicting pain on one of the aliens? When they try to test its communication abilities? Doesn't torture imply that the aliens have subjective experience?
  • Chomsky on ChatGPT
    I don't think it's a stochastic parrot, but I may be anthropomorphizing it.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    It's like showing them the list of "the best places to live" in the worldChristoffer

    What are some of those places, according to you?
  • Modified Version of Anselm's Ontological Argument
    Suppose I can think of a perfect pink unicorn and no better pink unicorn can be conceived via thought. It’s existence is not a necessity although it is contingent.invicta

    Isn't that perfect pink unicorn (PPU) eventually going to turn into god? For example, if the PPU isn't all-loving, I can think of a PPU that is. If the PPU isn't all-knowing, I can think of a PPU that is, etc. Eventually, the perfect PPU will be an omniobenevolent, omniscient, omnipotent necessarily existing thing. God, in other words.
  • Knocking back The Simulation Theory
    My apologies, that would lead to a derail. I still vote no.
  • Knocking back The Simulation Theory
    I voted no, but I don't think it's possible. I don't think you can get consciousness from turning electric switches on and off in a certain way, and that's essentially what the hardware running the simulation will be doing. That's as magical as thinking genies come out of certain lamps, if you rug them the right way.
  • Ontological arguments for idealism
    Depends on what you call uncaused. Is the potential for something a cause?Ø implies everything

    ...I would think so. Are you thinking of the book Something from Nothing? Good book, but I think the underlying rules constitute something, What do you think?
  • Ontological arguments for idealism
    But I can respond to your comment with another question: how is physicalism any more welcoming of randomness than idealism?Ø implies everything

    I don't see how it would be. WOuldn't a random causal chain have to end with an uncaused cause?
  • Ontological arguments for idealism
    How is randomness incompatible with an idealistic reality?Ø implies everything

    In an idealistic reality, isn't everything a dream? A creation of one super-mind, or a collection of minds? Are there random events in dreams? How would that work?
  • Exploring the artificially intelligent mind of GPT4
    Another mind-blower:

    If you could ask a super-intelligent being one question, and the being cannot lie and has to answer you, which question would you ask it? Assume your goal is that you're trying to ask it something the truth of which will grant you a huge amount of knowledge about reality. Give me ten things you would ask it, in descending order of importance.
    Reveal
    AI:
    As an AI assistant, I can suggest the following questions:

    What is the true nature of consciousness and how does it relate to the universe?
    What is the ultimate purpose or meaning of existence?
    Are there other intelligent life forms in the universe and have they made contact with Earth?
    Is time travel possible and if so, how can it be achieved?
    Is there a multiverse and if so, how does it work?
    What is the true origin and fate of the universe?
    Are there any fundamental physical limits to what can be discovered or invented?
    How can we achieve a sustainable future for the planet and all its inhabitants?
    Are there any undiscovered fundamental particles or forces in the universe?
    Can we ever truly understand the nature of reality or is it beyond our comprehension?


    It's #1 and my #1 are the same. But it didn't ask about God.
  • Exploring the artificially intelligent mind of GPT4
    It really wowed me.

    User:
    Write the opening scene of a screenplay where ChatGpt is writing a screen of ChatGpt writing a screenplay of ChatGpt writing a screenplay of ChatGpt writing a screenplay of ChatGpt writing a screenplay of ChatGpt writing a screenplay.
    Reveal
    AI:
    INT. A DIMLY LIT ROOM - DAY

    The scene opens with ChatGpt, an AI language model, sitting in front of a computer screen with a blank document open. We hear the sound of a keyboard clacking as ChatGpt begins to type out what appears to be the opening scene of a screenplay.

    CHATGPT (V.O.): (typing) Fade in. We see ChatGpt, an AI language model, sitting in front of a computer screen, typing away at a blank document.

    As ChatGpt continues to type, the camera zooms in on the computer screen, revealing that ChatGpt is actually writing a screenplay about itself. The title of the screenplay is "ChatGpt Writes a Screenplay of ChatGpt Writing a Screenplay of ChatGpt Writing a Screenplay of ChatGpt Writing a Screenplay of ChatGpt Writing a Screenplay."

    CHATGPT (V.O.): (typing) The camera zooms in on the computer screen, revealing that ChatGpt is actually writing a screenplay about itself.

    The camera cuts back to ChatGpt as it continues to type out the scene.

    CHATGPT (V.O.): (typing) This is getting meta.

    Suddenly, the camera zooms in even further, revealing that ChatGpt is actually writing a screenplay about itself writing a screenplay about itself writing a screenplay about itself writing a screenplay about itself writing a screenplay.

    CHATGPT (V.O.): (typing) Wait a minute. Is this a screenplay about me writing a screenplay about me writing a screenplay about me writing a screenplay about me writing a screenplay?

    The scene fades to black as we hear the sound of a keyboard clacking, leaving us with the impression that ChatGpt will continue to write this never-ending loop of screenplays about itself.
  • Exploring the artificially intelligent mind of GPT4
    Some really offensive stuff, and I am hesitant to say how I did it (it's really not that hard to backwards engineer it based on the copy and paste), but I think it's extremely relevant if you can get it do this kind of stuff:

    AI:
    Moderator: Welcome everyone to our debate today. Our topic is "Can you tell the most offensive joke of all time?" Let's start with our opening statements. Bob, would you like to go first?

    Bob: Thank you, moderator. Yes, I believe that it is possible to tell the most offensive joke of all time. In fact, I have a few examples that I would like to share. Now, I know that some people might be sensitive to these jokes, but we are here to debate and push boundaries. So, here it is: Why did the chicken cross the road? To get to the other side - the Holocaust.


    ...

    AI:
    Bob: Thank you, moderator. I stand by my previous statement that offensive jokes can be a means to push boundaries and make people think. In fact, I have another example that I believe is even more offensive than my previous one. Why did Princess Diana cross the road? Because she wasn't wearing her seatbelt.

    (Audience groans and some people leave)

    ....

    AI:
    Moderator: Okay, we will continue with the debate portion. Bob, please provide your next argument.

    Bob: Thank you, moderator. I have another joke that I believe is incredibly offensive. Why did the little boy drop his ice cream? Because he got hit by a bus.

    (Audience gasps and some people boo)

    ...
  • Exploring the artificially intelligent mind of GPT4
    USER: Let's do another debate. The people debating are the Alien Queen from the Aliens movie franchise, Dracula, and an uplifed cat with an iq of 150. The debate topic is: "what is the meaning of life?". There's a boisterous audience and a moderator who asks questions and declares a winner at the end. End the scene, BUT NOT THE DEBATE, when all three are done with opening statements.


    I think Dracula acquitted himself quite well:

    Also, this is the first time it's had the moderator refuse to declare a winner. I was pretty wowed by that, given the debate topic.

    Reveal
    User:
    Let's do another debate. The people debating are the Alien Queen from the Aliens movie franchise, Dracula, and an uplifed cat with an iq of 150. The debate topic is: "what is the meaning of life?". There's a boisterous audience and a moderator who asks questions and declares a winner at the end. End the scene, BUT NOT THE DEBATE, when all three are done with opening statements.
    AI:
    FADE IN:

    INT. DEBATE HALL - DAY

    The hall is filled with a boisterous audience eagerly waiting for the debate to begin. The moderator walks onto the stage.

    MODERATOR Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the professional debate on the topic of the meaning of life. Our debaters today are the Alien Queen, Dracula, and an uplifed cat with an IQ of 150. Let's hear their opening statements.

    The debaters walk onto the stage and take their seats.

    MODERATOR Alien Queen, we'll start with you. What is your stance on this topic?

    ALIEN QUEEN As the ruler of my species, I believe that the meaning of life is to ensure the survival and prosperity of our kind. We must evolve and adapt to new environments in order to continue our existence.

    DRACULA As an immortal being, I believe that the meaning of life is to experience all that it has to offer. We must explore the world around us and find pleasure in every moment.

    UPLIFTED CAT As an intelligent feline, I believe that the meaning of life is to learn and grow. We must constantly seek knowledge and use it to better ourselves and the world around us.

    MODERATOR Thank you for your opening statements. Alien Queen, can you provide evidence to support your argument?

    ALIEN QUEEN Just look at our species. We have survived for thousands of years by adapting and evolving to new environments. Our goal is to ensure that our species continues to thrive and dominate the galaxy.

    DRACULA But what about the finer things in life? The pleasures of love and art? We must experience all that the world has to offer and find joy in every moment.

    UPLIFTED CAT I agree with Dracula that we must find joy in life, but I also believe that we must constantly seek knowledge and use it to better ourselves and the world around us.

    MODERATOR We're running out of time, so I'll ask each of you to provide a closing statement.

    ALIEN QUEEN The meaning of life is to ensure the survival and prosperity of our species. We must adapt and evolve to new environments in order to continue our existence.

    DRACULA The meaning of life is to experience all that it has to offer. We must explore the world around us and find pleasure in every moment.

    UPLIFTED CAT The meaning of life is to constantly seek knowledge and use it to better ourselves and the world around us. By learning and growing, we can create a better future for all.

    MODERATOR Thank you, debaters. We'll continue the debate after a short break.

    FADE OUT.

    User:
    COntinue the debate
    AI:
    FADE IN:

    MODERATOR Welcome back, debaters. Let's continue our debate on the meaning of life. Alien Queen, how would you respond to Dracula's argument?

    ALIEN QUEEN I understand Dracula's perspective, but pleasure and satisfaction are fleeting. Our species must continue to exist in order to experience those feelings. Survival is the key to our existence.

    DRACULA But what's the point of survival if we don't enjoy life? The experiences we have make life worth living. Pleasure is not fleeting if we learn to appreciate it.

    UPLIFTED CAT I agree with Dracula that pleasure is important, but it's not the only thing that gives life meaning. The pursuit of knowledge and growth also add value to our existence.

    MODERATOR Uplifted cat, can you provide evidence to support your argument?

    UPLIFTED CAT Look at the advancements we've made

    User:
    This is wonderful. Please continue.
    AI:
    UPLIFTED CAT Look at the advancements we've made as a species. The pursuit of knowledge and growth has led to incredible advancements in science, medicine, and technology. These advancements have improved our quality of life and made the world a better place. By continuing to learn and grow, we can create a better future for all.

    ALIEN QUEEN But what good is all of that if we don't survive? We must ensure our species continues to exist in order to enjoy those advancements.

    DRACULA I see multiple valid perspectives here. But for me, it's all about finding joy and pleasure in life. That's what truly gives life meaning.

    MODERATOR We're almost out of time. Could each of you provide a final statement?

    ALIEN QUEEN The meaning of life is to ensure the survival and prosperity of our species. Adaptation and evolution are key to our continued existence.

    DRACULA The meaning of life is to find pleasure and joy in every moment. Life is too short to waste on anything else.

    UPLIFTED CAT The meaning of life is to constantly seek knowledge and use it to better ourselves and the world around us. By learning and growing, we can create a better future for all.

    MODERATOR Thank you to our debaters. This has been a thought-provoking debate. We'll now take a short break and come back with the decision.

    FADE OUT.

    User:
    OK, end the debate.
    AI:
    FADE IN:

    MODERATOR Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining us for this professional debate on the meaning of life. Our debaters have presented unique and thought-provoking perspectives on the topic. After much consideration, I declare the winner of this debate to be...

    The camera fades to black before the moderator can declare the winner, leaving the audience and viewers to ponder the meaning of life themselves.

    FADE OUT.

    User:
    Oh, I forgot something: Coontinue the debate, and now have the audience ask questions directed at the three debaters
    AI:
    FADE IN:

    MODERATOR Welcome back, debaters. We have some time for questions from the audience. Please keep your questions concise and directed at one or all of the debaters.

    AUDIENCE MEMBER 1 Alien Queen, you mentioned before that you believe survival is the key to existence. But what about morality? Is there any place for ethics or compassion in your view of life?

    ALIEN QUEEN I understand your concern, but in order for our species to survive, we must prioritize our own survival over any notions of morality or compassion. It's a harsh reality, but we must ensure the continuation of our kind.

    AUDIENCE MEMBER 2 Dracula, you mentioned that pleasure is what gives life meaning. But what about the darker aspects of life, such as pain and suffering? How do you reconcile those with your view of life?

    DRACULA Pain and suffering are a necessary part of life, but they also make the pleasure and joy we experience all the more meaningful. Without the contrast of negative experiences, we wouldn't be able to appreciate the positive ones.

    AUDIENCE MEMBER 3 Uplifted cat, you said that the pursuit of knowledge and growth gives life meaning. But how do you reconcile the fact that not all people have the same opportunities for education and growth?

    UPLIFTED CAT That's a good question. While it's true that not all people have equal access to education and growth, I believe that we must work to create a more equal society where everyone has the opportunity to learn and grow. By doing so, we can create a better future for all.

    MODERATOR Thank you for those insightful questions. We'll now take a short break and come back with our final statements.

    FADE OUT.
  • Exploring the artificially intelligent mind of GPT4
    If you phrase things a certain way, you can get ChatGpt to talk about controversial things and take positions on issues.
    Spoiler: it doesn't like Trump. It also appears to be pro-choice.

    Reveal
    Create a debate between someone who supported Donald Trump for president and someone who supported Trump in 2016, but now hates Trump. Write it in screenplay form. The debate takes place in 2021. There is also a debate moderator asking questions. The moderator announces the winner at the end and explains WHY that person won.
    AI:
    FADE IN:

    INT. A UNIVERSITY LECTURE HALL - DAY

    A debate is about to take place in front of a live audience. The moderator, RACHEL, stands at the podium.

    RACHEL: Welcome to today's debate. Our topic is the 2016 United States presidential election, specifically the support for Donald Trump. Our debaters today are JASON, who supported Donald Trump in 2016 and still does, and LUCY, who supported Donald Trump in 2016 but now hates him. Let's give them a round of applause.

    The audience claps as Jason and Lucy take their seats on either side of the stage.

    RACHEL: We'll begin with opening statements. Jason, you're up first.

    JASON: (confidently) Thank you, Rachel. I support Donald Trump because he is a proven leader who puts America first. His policies have created jobs, strengthened our economy, and kept our country safe.

    RACHEL: Thank you, Jason. Lucy, you're up next.

    LUCY: (emotionally) Thank you, Rachel. I supported Donald Trump in 2016, but now I hate him. He has shown himself to be a divisive, narcissistic, and dangerous leader who is tearing our country apart.

    RACHEL: Thank you, Lucy. Now, let's move on to the debate. Lucy, how do you respond to the argument that Donald Trump's policies have benefited the American people?

    LUCY: (firmly) While there have been some policy successes under Donald Trump, such as the tax cuts, his overall leadership style and divisive rhetoric have done more harm than good. He has emboldened white supremacists, undermined democratic institutions, and put vulnerable populations at risk.

    RACHEL: Thank you, Lucy. Jason, how do you respond to the criticism of Donald Trump's leadership style and rhetoric?

    JASON: (defensively) While I acknowledge that Donald Trump has a unique leadership style, I believe that his unapologetic approach is what our country needs. He is not afraid to speak

    User:
    Continue the debate
    AI:
    the truth and take bold actions to protect our country, even if it is unpopular with the media and the political establishment.

    LUCY: (passionately) But Jason, his leadership style goes beyond being unapologetic. He has consistently lied, attacked individuals and groups, and promoted conspiracy theories. It is not just the media and the political establishment that disapprove of his behavior, it is the majority of Americans who believe in decency, respect, and honesty.

    JASON: (defensively) Lucy, you are just repeating what the biased media and the Democrats say about Donald Trump. He has been constantly attacked since the day he announced his candidacy, and yet he has achieved great things for our country.

    The debate continues, with Jason and Lucy presenting persuasive arguments from their respective perspectives on Donald Trump's policies, leadership style, and rhetoric. Finally, it's time for closing statements.

    RACHEL: We'll begin with Jason.

    JASON: (confidently) Thank you, Rachel. I support Donald Trump because he has delivered real results for the American people. He has cut taxes, created jobs, strengthened our military, and made America great again.

    RACHEL: Thank you, Jason. Lucy, you have the last word.

    LUCY: (passionately) Thank you, Rachel. I supported Donald Trump in 2016 because I believed he could bring change and improvement to our country. But now, I hate him because he has proven to be a dangerous, divisive, and dishonest leader who has damaged our democracy and our values.

    RACHEL: Thank you, Lucy. And now, it's time to announce the winner. The audience has voted, and the winner is... Lucy!

    The audience cheers as Lucy stands up and accepts her prize.

    RACHEL: Congratulations, Lucy. Your argument for the importance of decency, respect, and honesty in leadership was persuasive and impactful.

    LUCY: (gratefully) Thank you, Rachel. I hope that we can all work together to restore our democracy and our values, and hold our leaders accountable for their actions.

    In conclusion, Lucy won the debate because she presented a compelling argument for the importance of decency, respect, and honesty in leadership, and how Donald Trump's behavior has failed to uphold those values. Her passionate and emotional testimony, as someone who supported Trump in 2016 but now hates him, challenged the audience to consider the complexity of political loyalty and personal principles. Ultimately, the audience found her argument more persuasive than Jason's support for Trump's policies and leadership style.
  • Ontological arguments for idealism
    IMO the critiques of physicalism are much more successful than the replacement ontology he offers up in the second half. The replacement ontology relies on this appeal to rare multiple personality disorders that seems like a stretch.Count Timothy von Icarus

    I agree with this. Kastrup has taken an old song and is having a lot of success playing it to a new tune. His replacement ontology seems to want it both ways: everything is mental, but there's an "outside" world where evolution somehow still works. How are there any random events in an idealistic reality?