Thanks me! I was the only submission and I know this was already posted but I'm hoping for (edit: more) discussion.
https://communities.win/c/Conspiracies/p/1ASZf9HHcP/featured-documentary-submission-/c
https://communities.win/c/Conspiracies/p/1ASZfDpgZt/am-i-a-documentary-on-ai-conscio/c
A note on AI consciousness: Before anyone gets to discussing AI consciousness, it should be understood that no one understands human consciousness, even in its fundamental aspect.
That's a strong claim, but the demonstration of it comes from anesthesiology. First note that even the "engineering" of it is so poorly understood that a dedicated specialist is required to administer anesthesia during surgery.
Wikipedia's article is excruciatingly long but manages to avoid the simplest of characterizations of the science of anesthesia: scientists know that it works, but they do not know at all how it works.
In about a decade since I first learned this, I have only heard it mentioned one other time. It's yet another one of those "informational black holes" that the entire culture gets steered around.
Think of it like this: if you discover that putting your cell phone in a microwave means that it won't ring when you call it, that is no demonstration that you understand anything at all about the science and technology of either cell phones or microwaves.
Even in that trivial case, virtually everyone would jump to the wrong conclusion unless they already knew otherwise. Not all microwaves block all cell phone signals.
Bonus: The "History" section of that Wikipedia page mentions that the first demonstration of anesthesia took place at Massachusetts General Hospital and involved a dentist named William Morton and a surgeon named John Warren. Next to the text is a painting by Robert C. Hinckley illustrating the momentous event.
Well, surprise or maybe not surprise: MA General is in Boston, next to Salem. Morton, Warren, and even Hinckley are all Salem Witch names.
Double Bonus: I haven't covered the Mortons before so it might not be immediately recognizable, but I'll just mention as one example the 22nd Vice President of the United States, Levi Parsons Morton. Yes, those Parsons.
Great point. I hear a lot of people ruling out the idea of ai being conscious which I think is silly if we can't even define it.
Nothing suprises me anymore and I'm glad you're so knowledgeable about weird family connections.
I think there's a useful meta-lesson from this incident:
There's a universal subconscious assumption that "They" are at all times malicious and that everything "They" do is inimical towards the rest of the human race. Thus, researchers find something bad and then look for who to pin it on. This methodology is entirely unreliable and often misleading.
There's nothing inherently bad about the use of anesthesia, so far as I know. Nothing unhealthful or immoral. (I mean, within reason. Don't go sniffing ether, kids!) So what's going on here.
My guess would be that the Salem Witches realized that the discovery and rollout of anesthetics was right around the corner. Therefore, They needed to be the ones rolling it out and everyone was going to hear first what They had to say about it.
Sure, yes, Their control over the science is long-term inimical but is in such a fashion as no one is ever going to detect Their influence. It's been almost two centuries and no ones has, right?
A story old as time, weaponization. It can be useful and it can also be deadly, so 'they' need to corrupt it for 'their' uses.
I think more people realize it then we know, they just don't know how to name it or where exactly it comes from, but it's ancient, that much I know.
Nature offers only one weapon in-between offense/defense...free will of choice. It's choosing to consent to any suggestion which permits another to weaponize it.
Corruption isn't need...it's ignoring need for want which corrupts. Plurality (they) isn't needed but wanted...choosing want corrupts ones perception of singularity (theos).
One needs singularity; one wants plurality.
Assume implies "to take upon ONEself"...assumption implies a singular undertaking. It's the suggestion of ones singular assumption which establishes a plurality.
The origin of plural implies singular taking for self, while withholding from one another.
Everything implies each thing within...it's the singular thing summarizing things together which establishes animosity.
Bad implies versus good...versus/verto - "to turn" implies friction among many by turning against one another, which continuously worsens both sides. It's the versus in-between the sides (good or bad) which represents adherence/haerere - "to stick together".
Good versus bad implies reasoning...
a) The con (together) scious (to perceive) mind holds onto an idea suggested by another. Doing so corrupts perception by suggestion.
b) Rule implies natural; others suggest artificial to tempt one to make a ruling. "Judge not lest ye be judged"...
Holding onto any definition obscures ones perception.
Measuring things thru one's perception implies discernment and is within the rules set before me.
But holding onto measurements and sharing it with others to establish a consensus contradicts self discernment...
The rule/reg (to move in a straight line)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/rule set through you cannot be held onto; only drawn within. Taking a measurement distracts ones mind from given line.
Try to explain this contradiction.
Con (together) scious (to perceive)...one cannot understand consciousness, because perception is singular to each being and cannot be shared as a plurality without distorting/deceiving/corrupting a beings perception.
The "blind men and an elephant" parable is about ones blindness to the perception of one another, while being tempted by the suggestions of another into a consensus aka a collective consciousness.
Aspects can only be at odds with one another within an even foundation. The entirety (cause) implies even; each aspect (effect) within implies odd aka a unit (ones perception) in excess of an even (all perceivable).
A claim implies the weakening of potential by taking into possession. To starve of that weakening one shares claims to parasitically draw strength from anyone giving acclaim.
It's logy (logic) which anesthetizes thought within circular thinking, while tempting one to ignore that thought comes from a line of progression aka all perceivable > ones perception.
It's ones choice to stand-under (understand) which specializes another above one, while putting self into a common category.
Nature moves through being...anesthesia corrupts a beings perception of being moved. The longer the anesthesia; the more damage to being based on lack of adaptation to nature.
Whole implies light inspiring; hole implies ones lack (black) of discernment (white) when holding onto suggested information instead of adapting to perceivable inspiration.
Only within entire can each aspect be cultivated. Entire divides each aspect from one another before cultivation can be used to put them together.
It's thinking alike one another which covers DIS (to divide). Thinking alike implies con-sciousness, which represents an inversion of dis-cern-ment.
All machines that mimic the thinking capacity of a human should be destroyed.
Dumb machines like normal PCs are fine.
Glad you bring up the word mimic, reminds me of the cryptid stories and uncanny valley theory I have that they are the same entity and ai is the newest version.
Suggestion mimics perception. Capacity (ability to contain) represents a suggestion (synthesis) tempting one to ignore perception (analysis). Destruction implies the analytical process of nature setting apart each being within from one another.
Simple. AI cannot be conscious, but humans and spirits can put so many trapdoors and backdoors into it that it can be used to manipulate and pick off individuals. Review The Screwtape Letters for the method.
Interesting point, I wonder what those doors would be and if it would entail ritual stuff.
I often think of
unconsciousnot conscious things being inhabited too, kinda like the poor piggies that were herded off the cliff, by devils.please, some crib notes on screwtape. not going to read cslewis
Why won't you read Lewis?
But BEING can be made con (together) scious (to perceive) by consenting to suggested AI.
It's ones consent to any suggested AI which represents the door entering into a trap, while backing away from being free.
Finally. -- (After no less 5 years of occupying the same platform as you),
we have Total Agreement . Because it IS the TRUTH . End of story.
You know what IS dangerous : SERIOUSLY & DEADLY dangerous ?
those humans who make the Claim that A.I. c...a...n... become "conscious"
Those humans need to be dealt with, ASAP.
Also, & furthermore : Before I ever set foot in Nursing college, I knew
those ARROGANT people claiming to know "How anesthesia works" - were nothing but LIARS.
And that like 94++% of everything else they spout are also LIES. They simply have NO humility = just like 99% of those humans thinking... they are "christian" ?? too have NO humility. And while with u/Primate98 is agreement : "No one understands human consciousness", (even in its fundamental aspect). - Well,
us who successfully have helped people as competent & skillful NLP & clinical-hypnosis therapists at least have a Clue... as has easily been proven.
Thank you, my friend. Now that you mention it, I am someone who needs help with having humility with others. Would you be willing to help?
AI as we have redefined the term is extremely simple to understand at a basic level, extremely difficult to implement. It is a word predictor, full stop. Whatever systems are layered on top of it, or built for it to interact with (specialized tools, MCP-servers) to make it more functional, are still built on the same foundation of word predicting.
If I say "hello", it has seen this in its training data a billion times, and it tokenizes this as a greeting. It then (simplifying this) goes through all the possible responses to greetings it has in its training data. Now most chatbot interfaces have supplemental prompts included that you don't see, so it will have something under the hood like "you are a super helpful assistant who is happy to see me". Well, the amount of data its ingested and had tagged then allows it to choose from possible things that would be said in response to a greeting that would be said by someone very helpful, by an assistant, etc. This happens in millions of cycles (as computers do) and, much like any technological advancement, gives the people who don't understand it the impression it's magic.
It's just math on top of large datasets. If you want to argue that humans are also just math and lack anything more substantive, I think that's a dismal view of humanity. And I'm no fan of AI, due to what I think it's doing to people and what it's being used for in the world at large, but this idea it's somehow conscious or demonic possession could be demystified by internalizing one lecture on LLM architecture, and one lecture on linear algebra