X-Message-Number: 30213 From: "John K Clark" <> References: <> Subject: Re again, feelilng vs. computing Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 00:51:56 -0500 In Message #30207 : > a computer might eventually surpass human intelligence I agree. > you cannot (with certain obvious exceptions) program > a computer to give different outputs for the same input, > whereas this happens often with brains. I don't believe anybody has proved that is true of brains, and if true I am certain nobody has shown why that would be something to be proud of. However in 5 minutes I could write a very short computer program that will behave in ways NOBODY or NOTHING in the known universe understands; it would simply be a program that looks for the first even number greater than 4 that is not the sum of two primes greater than 2, and then stops. The only way to know what this computer will do is watch it and see, even the computer doesn't what it will do until it does it. And that is not a bad definition of free will. > And you cannot program a computer to act in a certain way when > it feels a certain way, because it doesn't feel. It is not only possible to write a program that experiences pain it is easy to do so, far easier than writing a program with even rudimentary intelligence. Just write a program that tries to avoid having a certain number in one of its registers regardless of what sort of input the machine receives, and if that number does show up in that register it should stop whatever its doing and immediately change it to another number. >if subjectivity depends on unique properties of carbon, > then it cannot be duplicated in silicon. So carbon atoms can be conscious but silicon atoms cannot, I'd say that's about as likely as white people are conscious but black people are not. >remember that "emulation" doesn't > count. A description of a quale is not a quale. This demonstrates what's so crazy about this topic. The quale people ask people like me how a computer can have feelings, that is they want a description of how it could happen, but when I give what they were asking for they say a description of a quale is not a quale. Because there is no conceivable answer that would satisfy you I conclude the question is meaningless. > computers don't have agendas in the sense we do And that is why computers always do exactly what we want them to do. > a programmed requirement for human > review before any "execute" order. A computer like that would be of no danger to us, or be of any use to us; it couldn't even balance your checkbook. John K Clark Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30213