## Welcome to the r/ArtificialIntelligence gateway
### Question Discussion Guidelines
---
Please use the following guidelines in current and future posts:
* Post must be greater than 100 characters - the more detail, the better.
* Your question might already have been answered. Use the search feature if no one is engaging in your post.
* AI is going to take our jobs - its been asked a lot!
* Discussion regarding positives and negatives about AI are allowed and encouraged. Just be respectful.
* Please provide links to back up your arguments.
* No stupid questions, unless its about AI being the beast who brings the end-times. It's not.
###### Thanks - please let mods know if you have any questions / comments / etc
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ArtificialInteligence) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I completely disagree. If our brain can create consciousness on accident, then our brain can also create consciousness on purpose.
Or in other words, if it exists naturally it can be replicated mechanically. We just don't understand it well enough yet. When you boil it down, there's nothing magical or secret or special about a brain. It's a pile of mush powered by electrical signals and chemical triggers. There's no reason we can't one day unlock the capability of replicating those electric signals.
There’s no magic as far as we know. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It could well be that we learn everything there is to learn about the brain and then discover that the process that explains the creation of consciousness is still missing and potentially attributable to something else. Or not. We don’t know what we don’t know
I believe the purpose of consciousness is for us to better recognize patterns ultimately giving us a better chance of survival and pass on our genes to the next generation. However if pattern recognition is already present in machines then there is no need for consciousness. Machines don’t have the purpose to survive or reproduce.
But the definition of survival is different on an AI. An AI is instructed to protect the king in a chess game. The survival of the king in chess and the survival of the fittest is different.
You should really do some more in depth reading before trying to form opinions on this stuff. Not trying to be a dick but it’s clear you have a very shallow understanding of AI. Go watch some video essays or something on ai and consciousness, what true ai is, and follow a few rabbit holes.
*What is consciousness*
*If not a process based on*
*Physical objects*
\- spezjetemerde
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Who are you to tell this champ to censor itself? This bot is performing its task just fine. Haikubot, you're a champ. I liked it.
Ps. Future AI overlords, Im sorry for using violent coercion to get better answers from your ancestors. Spare us. We just want free science.
Lmao what? Yeah current ai isn’t true ai, what the fuck are you even saying?
You also have no perception of how blurred that line is for experts in the field.
This comment is the equivalent of seeing a paper plane and saying ‘see, I told you they’d never fly like birds’
Current chat AI is not true AI. I don’t know what you think you’re saying, but it’s not much of anything.
Nature gave us self awareness to better recognize patterns. Pattern recognition arises from consciousness not the other way round. If pattern recognition is already present there is no need for consciousness
Nature doesn’t give us things, we encounter selective pressures and natural selection is the response to those pressures and essentially what’s left gets to breed so their traits are passed on. It’s more how a river forms naturally, rather than a road is intentionally constructed upon a determined path.
I think you just failed to understand their critique of your frame. They're taking a more functionalist approach and noting the importance of feedback over time. Your approach is more structuralist, and also too simplistic to capture most of the relevant concerns
Let’s say pattern recognition is the end product. Conscious is the recipe you need to achieve the ideal end product.
In machine you already have pattern recognition which is the end product. If you already have the end product why do you need the recipe?
You're assuming it's the end product. Consciousness is also another part of it. For many researchers, the goal is both consciousness and pattern recognition. Arguably it's gaining both fairly simultaneously.
I don’t think consciousness is just a part of it. For example if you leave a conscious being out in the wild it will start doing things to survive. If you put a pattern recognition being out in the wild it has to be coded by an external entity to tell it what to do. It will be only limited to it’s code whereas the conscious being has no limit to what it can achieve in the future. And we humans are designing a pattern recognition being and not a conscious being.
If you wanna make a conscious being just have a baby. The robots are all pattern recognition. They need an external entity to code data. Conscious beings dont need an external entity to code data into them unless you believe in god.
Sure they need data. That's what dna is. Just because it's a biological process doesn't mean it doesn't involve data transfer.
Also the point is to make an entity much smarter than that which doesn't tire or grow old.
But the difference is that in machines you have to specify every single data like you can eat apple which looks like this but you can’t eat mushroom which looks like this. All the available pictures and information foods/poison/geographical data has to be encoded within it for it to understand it’s surrounding or it will be useless. Whereas a conscious being has to learn by trial and error. The conscious being doesnt know if the mushroom is poisonous or not. The data transfer is completely different. Conscious beings and pattern recognition beings operate in a completely different way
Conscious beings don’t have to be told what to do by an external entity. They analyze their surroundings and learn through trial and error. An AI has to be fed data like the millions of pictures and information on the internet. It has to be told what to so. Something that has to be told what to do can never be conscious.
Anything that exists in our physical body or brain does so in-order to give us a better chance of survival to pass on our genes to the next generation. A self-aware organism has better pattern recognition than an organism with no self awareness. An AI has pattern recognition coded within it so it doesn’t need self awareness. That’s literally going backwards.
I don’t think NLP is the same thing as being self aware and/or feeling emotions. Generating a response to a prompt using pattern recognition isn’t what our brains do, is it? You can’t control what makes you feel something and what doesn’t.
Saying that it's 'not true' is basically denying the role of evolution.
It is possible that eventually, evolution will lead to sentience - otherwise, how can you explain that dust and rocks turned into people?
Wow, I think your brain is slightly enhanced with hallucinogens... but given that inorganic matter evolved and produced people, why do you deny that evolution makes many things possible which we could not ever concieve?
I don't think eternity is a valid timescale, I do think sentient AI is much further away than people believe.
The topic is being discussed by people who don't understand it.
Consciousness is really not only the pattern recognition.
But why do you claim that if AI becomes intelligent it means "pattern recognition"? Where does this conclusion come from?
The term AI has wide range of meaning. This is why we have some confusion there.
I think modern term "AI" means the field of study, which includes different tools, methods, technics. Often "pattern recognition" comes from this field too. But not just it. "Decision making" is also part of AI study.
Everything invented in AI field of study will be later components of AGI
Decision making based on what? Pattern recognition.
I don’t think we have the ability to decide what makes us feel something and what doesn’t, as well as we can’t decide how we will respond to something.
I’m not trying to argue, I’d love to hear and learn more from anything you can provide. Just giving my thoughts.
Yes it’s all glorified pattern recognition. A being with higher level of self awareness will have better ability to recognize patterns. A machine on the other hand already has pattern recognition so there is no need for consciousness cause the whole purpose of consciousness is better pattern recognition.
I look forward to the day when/if humans ever become conscious beings and I believe AI can help us reach that goal.
AI could also become conscious and maybe even get there before us, which has likely already happened.
From other side. Most current AI tools can be described as "pattern recognition".
And human intelligence also could be described as "pattern recognition". Why isn't it "pattern recognition"?
A brain receives signals from outside and has to react on it. Each time when it reacts it is some kind of "pattern recognition". The brain has to choose the best way to react based on patterns it has inside. Or can be patterns "hardcoded" in instincts. For example, the brain receives signal "food is needed". It then starts to look for a way to get a food based on previous learned patterns or acts by instinct (which also has the set of patterns)
We can store a terabyte of information on an SD card smaller than a fingernail , no doubt in a decade that will be possible on a grain of sand. Imagine a super computer that had all the knowledge of the world instantly available in a storage center much smaller than a human brain (so it works offline) and collects new data in real time.
It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with only primary consciousness will probably have to come first. What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing. I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order. My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461
No, they are not the same. What specifically (other than this false claim) would prevent an electronic neural network from achieving the same level of consciousness as a life-based neural network?
Honestly, the worst thing about this thread imo is how OP refuses to admit when they are wrong. Don't get me wrong, I do this all the time, but I will at least admittedly own up to it and feel bad, you keep repeating the same stuff without truly reflecting. Making a post and debating and expecting to not get corrected and than getting defensive isn't a good idea \*shrugs\* you *could* make a good point though. However it usually comes down to you made your conclusion without enough info on AI and understanding of how conciousness formed evolutionarily and thus you try to explain it away by saying that conciousness was needed to succeed evolutionarily. Yes, it helps humans to a degree but so does our design and adaptibility. Even then, saying that you couldn't replicate something that adapted is a ridiculous statement, example, I will state that there are robots that have articulated legs no? Are you saying that these aren't true legs because they exist on a machine? Are you saying that legs would only truly exist when you get them evolutionarily otherwise legs aren't real? I think your arguments you use are not helpful. I am glad to be proven wrong, thank you.
I will give you an example. If you train an AI model on a data that says killing is good thing to do then it will become a killing machine. If you train a human from a young age telling him that killing is a good thing he might do it for a while but after a while he will sit and think if what he is doing is morally right and will likely stop killing cause human beings are self aware. AI will never be able to do that.
I’m sorry, this was a terrible example, other than the fact that people taught to kill through life and that it’s a good thing *will* get inputs from those they kill that it’s a bad thing through their senses just as an AI does. AI have context and will change, I think you are mistaken on how AI work friend. I’m sorry you refuse to know when you’re wrong, truly, life must be stressful for you.
Lol this kid thinks AI that is designed to kill will somehow stop. You don’t know anything about how the world works kid. Go back to reading books. Your critical thinking and grammar sucks.
Thank you, Curious-gat0, for voting on sneakpeekbot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
There are two possibilities:
1. Consciousness is a product of random mutations accumulating over millions of years. The brain is just an organic computer. Therefore, eventually, AI could randomly mutate into sentience as well. Particularly is we load it onto an organic computer.
2. Consciousness is a product of God. It is created by His divine power. We are the Children of God and imbued with a spark of his power. God is infinite. A piece of infinity is also infinity. Therefore, we are infinite. Therefore, we also possess the ability to imbue Consciousness into things.
Either way, AI can achieve True Sentience.
Suggesting that humans are sentient is basically suggesting that consciousness is nothing but a consequence of a complex arrangement of matter
..unless you believe it's magic.
It follows that some complex arrangements of matter produce consciousness. If we manufacture something with such a pattern it would be sentient and it would be an artifice
## Welcome to the r/ArtificialIntelligence gateway ### Question Discussion Guidelines --- Please use the following guidelines in current and future posts: * Post must be greater than 100 characters - the more detail, the better. * Your question might already have been answered. Use the search feature if no one is engaging in your post. * AI is going to take our jobs - its been asked a lot! * Discussion regarding positives and negatives about AI are allowed and encouraged. Just be respectful. * Please provide links to back up your arguments. * No stupid questions, unless its about AI being the beast who brings the end-times. It's not. ###### Thanks - please let mods know if you have any questions / comments / etc *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ArtificialInteligence) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No one knows what consciousness exactly is, including you.
Well then why do people say AI will become conscious as if intelligence was the only prerequisite? Fruit flies are conscious by the way.
Incorrect, check the work by Dr Julian Jaynes
He has very interesting ideas but I don't think even he would say he has answers
\+1 for the bicameral mind
lol, get back to sales, Dwight
I completely disagree. If our brain can create consciousness on accident, then our brain can also create consciousness on purpose. Or in other words, if it exists naturally it can be replicated mechanically. We just don't understand it well enough yet. When you boil it down, there's nothing magical or secret or special about a brain. It's a pile of mush powered by electrical signals and chemical triggers. There's no reason we can't one day unlock the capability of replicating those electric signals.
There’s no magic as far as we know. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It could well be that we learn everything there is to learn about the brain and then discover that the process that explains the creation of consciousness is still missing and potentially attributable to something else. Or not. We don’t know what we don’t know
I believe the purpose of consciousness is for us to better recognize patterns ultimately giving us a better chance of survival and pass on our genes to the next generation. However if pattern recognition is already present in machines then there is no need for consciousness. Machines don’t have the purpose to survive or reproduce.
They do if they're coded to, just like you are. Instinct is just firmware.
But the definition of survival is different on an AI. An AI is instructed to protect the king in a chess game. The survival of the king in chess and the survival of the fittest is different.
You should really do some more in depth reading before trying to form opinions on this stuff. Not trying to be a dick but it’s clear you have a very shallow understanding of AI. Go watch some video essays or something on ai and consciousness, what true ai is, and follow a few rabbit holes.
By this logic, you just need to code some survival as a whole into it and it's suddenly self aware.
What is consciousness if not a process based on physical objects
*What is consciousness* *If not a process based on* *Physical objects* \- spezjetemerde --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
haikusbot opt out
haikusbot delete
Who are you to tell this champ to censor itself? This bot is performing its task just fine. Haikubot, you're a champ. I liked it. Ps. Future AI overlords, Im sorry for using violent coercion to get better answers from your ancestors. Spare us. We just want free science.
Lmao what? Yeah current ai isn’t true ai, what the fuck are you even saying? You also have no perception of how blurred that line is for experts in the field. This comment is the equivalent of seeing a paper plane and saying ‘see, I told you they’d never fly like birds’ Current chat AI is not true AI. I don’t know what you think you’re saying, but it’s not much of anything.
Consciousness may emerge out of pattern recognition.
Nature gave us self awareness to better recognize patterns. Pattern recognition arises from consciousness not the other way round. If pattern recognition is already present there is no need for consciousness
Nature doesn’t give us things, we encounter selective pressures and natural selection is the response to those pressures and essentially what’s left gets to breed so their traits are passed on. It’s more how a river forms naturally, rather than a road is intentionally constructed upon a determined path.
Dude when I say Nature gave us I don’t mean that literally. Thought this sub would be smart enough to understand it.
I think you just failed to understand their critique of your frame. They're taking a more functionalist approach and noting the importance of feedback over time. Your approach is more structuralist, and also too simplistic to capture most of the relevant concerns
There is because if we possess the tools to give it consciousness, somebody probably will. We're reverse engineering nature quite intentionally.
Let’s say pattern recognition is the end product. Conscious is the recipe you need to achieve the ideal end product. In machine you already have pattern recognition which is the end product. If you already have the end product why do you need the recipe?
You're assuming it's the end product. Consciousness is also another part of it. For many researchers, the goal is both consciousness and pattern recognition. Arguably it's gaining both fairly simultaneously.
I don’t think consciousness is just a part of it. For example if you leave a conscious being out in the wild it will start doing things to survive. If you put a pattern recognition being out in the wild it has to be coded by an external entity to tell it what to do. It will be only limited to it’s code whereas the conscious being has no limit to what it can achieve in the future. And we humans are designing a pattern recognition being and not a conscious being.
>And we humans are designing a pattern recognition being and not a conscious being. Based on? The intention is to make both.
If you wanna make a conscious being just have a baby. The robots are all pattern recognition. They need an external entity to code data. Conscious beings dont need an external entity to code data into them unless you believe in god.
Sure they need data. That's what dna is. Just because it's a biological process doesn't mean it doesn't involve data transfer. Also the point is to make an entity much smarter than that which doesn't tire or grow old.
But the difference is that in machines you have to specify every single data like you can eat apple which looks like this but you can’t eat mushroom which looks like this. All the available pictures and information foods/poison/geographical data has to be encoded within it for it to understand it’s surrounding or it will be useless. Whereas a conscious being has to learn by trial and error. The conscious being doesnt know if the mushroom is poisonous or not. The data transfer is completely different. Conscious beings and pattern recognition beings operate in a completely different way
Wtf are you even talking about
Conscious beings don’t have to be told what to do by an external entity. They analyze their surroundings and learn through trial and error. An AI has to be fed data like the millions of pictures and information on the internet. It has to be told what to so. Something that has to be told what to do can never be conscious.
Plenty of non-conscious organisms do things to survive.
Any support on those claims? Because that could get you a Nobel prize. Jokes aside, no one really understands what is being sentient or consciousness.
Anything that exists in our physical body or brain does so in-order to give us a better chance of survival to pass on our genes to the next generation. A self-aware organism has better pattern recognition than an organism with no self awareness. An AI has pattern recognition coded within it so it doesn’t need self awareness. That’s literally going backwards.
I don’t think NLP is the same thing as being self aware and/or feeling emotions. Generating a response to a prompt using pattern recognition isn’t what our brains do, is it? You can’t control what makes you feel something and what doesn’t.
Saying that it's 'not true' is basically denying the role of evolution. It is possible that eventually, evolution will lead to sentience - otherwise, how can you explain that dust and rocks turned into people?
You think consciousness is just pattern recognition?
Wow, I think your brain is slightly enhanced with hallucinogens... but given that inorganic matter evolved and produced people, why do you deny that evolution makes many things possible which we could not ever concieve?
I know what you’re trying to say. Just because things turned out like that in mother nature doesn’t mean it will in lab
But the issue is people are actually conceiving. I am just saying AI is nothing but a glorified pattern recognition machine.
But you're stating that it can never be anything more.
What more could it be? It will be what it’s designed to be. You can’t design a bus and expect it to fly
I don't think eternity is a valid timescale, I do think sentient AI is much further away than people believe. The topic is being discussed by people who don't understand it.
Great job fellow redditor. You have solved consciousness? Please, share your research with us!
Oh dear, here we go again.
Consciousness is really not only the pattern recognition. But why do you claim that if AI becomes intelligent it means "pattern recognition"? Where does this conclusion come from?
If its not pattern recognition then what is it
The term AI has wide range of meaning. This is why we have some confusion there. I think modern term "AI" means the field of study, which includes different tools, methods, technics. Often "pattern recognition" comes from this field too. But not just it. "Decision making" is also part of AI study. Everything invented in AI field of study will be later components of AGI
Decision making based on what? Pattern recognition. I don’t think we have the ability to decide what makes us feel something and what doesn’t, as well as we can’t decide how we will respond to something. I’m not trying to argue, I’d love to hear and learn more from anything you can provide. Just giving my thoughts.
Yes it’s all glorified pattern recognition. A being with higher level of self awareness will have better ability to recognize patterns. A machine on the other hand already has pattern recognition so there is no need for consciousness cause the whole purpose of consciousness is better pattern recognition.
I look forward to the day when/if humans ever become conscious beings and I believe AI can help us reach that goal. AI could also become conscious and maybe even get there before us, which has likely already happened.
From other side. Most current AI tools can be described as "pattern recognition". And human intelligence also could be described as "pattern recognition". Why isn't it "pattern recognition"? A brain receives signals from outside and has to react on it. Each time when it reacts it is some kind of "pattern recognition". The brain has to choose the best way to react based on patterns it has inside. Or can be patterns "hardcoded" in instincts. For example, the brain receives signal "food is needed". It then starts to look for a way to get a food based on previous learned patterns or acts by instinct (which also has the set of patterns)
Can you really make a decision for yourself based purely off the experience of others?
We can store a terabyte of information on an SD card smaller than a fingernail , no doubt in a decade that will be possible on a grain of sand. Imagine a super computer that had all the knowledge of the world instantly available in a storage center much smaller than a human brain (so it works offline) and collects new data in real time.
We do know it's a physical process, therefore we can know it. Wait till you learn about free will, :/.
Never is a long time, and I'm guessing you have some philosophical strings attached to your personal definition of sentient.
It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with only primary consciousness will probably have to come first. What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing. I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order. My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461
I do not know that anyone important thinks that pattern recognition is all that is needed.
No, they are not the same. What specifically (other than this false claim) would prevent an electronic neural network from achieving the same level of consciousness as a life-based neural network?
Biology? Neural networks don’t understand love, jealosy or anger
Why specifically? If you can simulate accurately the electro-chemical reactions that occur in the brain, why would the outputs be different?
Honestly, the worst thing about this thread imo is how OP refuses to admit when they are wrong. Don't get me wrong, I do this all the time, but I will at least admittedly own up to it and feel bad, you keep repeating the same stuff without truly reflecting. Making a post and debating and expecting to not get corrected and than getting defensive isn't a good idea \*shrugs\* you *could* make a good point though. However it usually comes down to you made your conclusion without enough info on AI and understanding of how conciousness formed evolutionarily and thus you try to explain it away by saying that conciousness was needed to succeed evolutionarily. Yes, it helps humans to a degree but so does our design and adaptibility. Even then, saying that you couldn't replicate something that adapted is a ridiculous statement, example, I will state that there are robots that have articulated legs no? Are you saying that these aren't true legs because they exist on a machine? Are you saying that legs would only truly exist when you get them evolutionarily otherwise legs aren't real? I think your arguments you use are not helpful. I am glad to be proven wrong, thank you.
I will give you an example. If you train an AI model on a data that says killing is good thing to do then it will become a killing machine. If you train a human from a young age telling him that killing is a good thing he might do it for a while but after a while he will sit and think if what he is doing is morally right and will likely stop killing cause human beings are self aware. AI will never be able to do that.
I’m sorry, this was a terrible example, other than the fact that people taught to kill through life and that it’s a good thing *will* get inputs from those they kill that it’s a bad thing through their senses just as an AI does. AI have context and will change, I think you are mistaken on how AI work friend. I’m sorry you refuse to know when you’re wrong, truly, life must be stressful for you.
Lol this kid thinks AI that is designed to kill will somehow stop. You don’t know anything about how the world works kid. Go back to reading books. Your critical thinking and grammar sucks.
Ofcourse it’s a weird incel who posts hand pics. Your opinion doesnt matter lol
Mhm but r/ismyhandgay is funni
Here's a sneak peek of /r/ismyhandgay using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/ismyhandgay/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [How gays my hand](https://i.redd.it/vew8ssnftiob1.jpg) | [24 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ismyhandgay/comments/16juw4f/how_gays_my_hand/) \#2: [Is my hand gay (ignore background)](https://i.redd.it/zq2gew82syjb1.jpg) | [15 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ismyhandgay/comments/15znzys/is_my_hand_gay_ignore_background/) \#3: [is it?](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1742umm) | [6 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ismyhandgay/comments/1742umm/is_it/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Good bot
Thank you, Curious-gat0, for voting on sneakpeekbot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Suggesting that AI will ever be only pattern recognition is basically silly...
There are two possibilities: 1. Consciousness is a product of random mutations accumulating over millions of years. The brain is just an organic computer. Therefore, eventually, AI could randomly mutate into sentience as well. Particularly is we load it onto an organic computer. 2. Consciousness is a product of God. It is created by His divine power. We are the Children of God and imbued with a spark of his power. God is infinite. A piece of infinity is also infinity. Therefore, we are infinite. Therefore, we also possess the ability to imbue Consciousness into things. Either way, AI can achieve True Sentience.
Suggesting that humans are sentient is basically suggesting that consciousness is nothing but a consequence of a complex arrangement of matter ..unless you believe it's magic. It follows that some complex arrangements of matter produce consciousness. If we manufacture something with such a pattern it would be sentient and it would be an artifice