Total posts: 3,052
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
"Can a robot be conscious?" We might have to spend time on what 'be conscious' means, but not on what 'de facto' means!What is worth spending time on?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I'm sure they left the details of the process unstated to avoid blocking potential story ideas.
Right now I'm interested in a widespread criticism of teleporting in principle, such as this one:
My post above is a brief introducution.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I don't think whether 'de facto' is the 'technically correct' term for what 3rutal meant isn't worth spending much time on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
How is monism de facto?Monism is all is one. De facto means it is wrong.Care to explain what I am getting wrong?
It's a very simple argument: if two 'separate' system interract they are not really separate. Physicalist monists think the one 'big' system is the physical, idealists and solipsists are monists who think the single system is 'mental'.
It's quite a big problem putting these concepts into words - hence semantic quibling replaces constructive discussion far too often..
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
1-3 abstain
4 - no.
People would like to know why a user was recently banned and how long for.
There is no demand for a permanent record of bannings.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
We can suppose you are conscious - presumably what it would feel like is that one's consciousness fades out, like falling asleep or dying.
To make a case against teleporting, imagine a short-range teleport, just from one side of a small room to the other.
As the process starts you feel a strange, but not unpleasant tingle. A moment later, across the room you see the first glimmerings of what will be your teleported self. A few more seconds in and it looks almost solid to you, while you own body seems almost ghost like...
And then you realise that you are about to die, reduced to nothingness only to be replaced by a body you can see being constructed in front of your eyes. In the last half-second of your existence you try to scream to the teleport operator to stop but your body has dissipated too far. The last thing you are conscious of is the new body stepping off the platform and saying 'Well, that went very well.'
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
I don't see it has to be the NASA budget that hasto go.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Interesting, but I put this thread in the philosophy thread to avoid discussing practicalities!
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
I like thinking of computers looking at 100 million dollar plus pictures and 8 year olds pictures.
A treat for your PC -A computer posing nude:
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
It's likely the world will be arranged to make it easier for robots!
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Very good, but how did Alpha Go feel after beating Lee Sedol?
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
I don't disagree but the worry is we'll be posting something very similar 20 years from now...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
So can you show me these verses that include magic?
It could stop a river flowing:
Josh 3:15
So when those who bore the ark had come to the Jordan, and the feet of the priests bearing the ark were dipped in the edge of the water, 16the waters flowing from above stood still, rising up in a single heap far off at Adam, the city that is beside Zarethan, while those flowing toward the sea of the Arabah, the Dead Sea, were wholly cut off.
(also 4:10)
It was carried around Jericho (accompanied by trumpets) to make the walls of Jericho fall and the Philistines suffered disasters when they captured it:
1 Sam 5:6
The hand of the Lord was heavy upon the people of Ashdod, and he terrified and struck them with tumors, both in Ashdod and in its territory.
Uzzah died because he touched the ark:
2 Sam 6
Uzzah reached out his hand to the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen shook it. 7The anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah; and God struck him there because he reached out his hand to the ark; and he died there beside the ark of God.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
Trouble is we've been using that excuse for a bloody long time! I think people were more optimistic about artificial consciousness in the 1950s and 60s than they are today."We haven't done it yet" is not a reason we will never do it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Would you agree that people should be treated as de-facto innocent (not incarcerated or slandered in the press or inconvenienced in any way) until they are proven guilty in a court of law?
Anyone accused of any crime is liable to be incarcerated ('remanded in custody') and inconvenienced pending their trial. I am sure being falsely accused of rape can be very traumatic, but I don't see what 'the system' can do about it.
A similar thing happens with accusations of pedophilia. The conseuences of a false accusation of pedophilia are probably worse than a false accusation of rape - you can't really give rapists the benefit of the doubt but deny it to pedophiles.
AFAIK, false accusation is an offence and anyone falsely accused can sue. I don't see what else can be done.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
@3RU7AL
As I understand it, the myth Stephen refers to is that the majority of Muslims have 'western values', ie the majority is pro democracy, secular and in favour of women's and gay rights. The myth hold that it is only a tiny minority of Muslims who are misogynistic, homophobic and sympathetic to religious rule.
Closer to the truth is that few Muslims are terrorists or support terrorism or the most extreme forms of Islamism, but Muslims are moving way from liberal values, not towards them. It is a mistake to think the Muslim community is overwhemingly liberal but being held hostage by a fanatical few.
Truly liberal Muslims are, or are becoming, the minority. Moderate does not mean liberal - at least not any more. .
I hope Stephen won't mind me plugging that BBC radio documentary again - anyone who hasn't listened to it really should do!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I don't think anyone is suggesting that false accusations are not a serious matter. Rape is particulary awkward because often there is no actual evidence or witnesses. It's often comes down to 'he said, she said'.
It's wrong if innocent people suffer because of a malicious false accusation, but its also wrong if a rape victim gets punished for 'false accusation' if the standard of proof reuired for a successful prosecution is not possible.
I can't see a simple solution.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Thanks... the series seem pretty good.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I don't think they can be proved by anything more fundamental. An error would be to read to much into them. For example the 'I' proven by the cogito is not 'a bipedal human' and the 'ultmate reality' is not necessarily the Abraahamic God. But I've given trying to get Mopac to acknowledge the latter!
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
My point is that we've had grand-master standard chess programs for decades. It turned out it was easy to get AI to mimic what intelligent peope do - ie play chess and diagnose diseases - but very hard to do what 'ordinary' people do, such as make tea in a strange kitchen.It's difficult, I grant, but it's not impossible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
So are lots of things. False accusers are commiting a crime and should be punished or it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Overall, in the CPS’ view, false allegations of rape are “serious but rare”. They estimate that there is one prosecution for a false rape claim out of every 161 rape cases prosecuted. That means — according to the best available data — false allegations make up 0.62 per cent of all rape cases.
Other statistics indicate 4% of accusations are false.
So while false accusations of rape do happen they are rare. Obviously it would be better if it didn't happen at all, but it would be good if rape didn't happen at all. Neither is going to not happen.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
To make a cup of tea in someone else's kitchen - which is something you or I can do, although we probably can't beat Kasparov at chess - you have to first locate a kettle, which could anywhere and could be a variety of shapes, colours and sizes. Then you have to locate a tap to fill the kettle, maneuver the kettle under the tap etc etc... If you imagine trying to write an algorithm that would work for any making tea in any and all kitchens it is bloody hard to do! In the chess universe there is no gravity or friction, no hidden obstacles - nor can you use trial and error in someome elses' kitchen! Compared to making tea, playing chess is easy!"timed machine that is programmed to heat water, steep tea for X number of seconds
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
It's arguable chess programs are really dumb as they work by trial-and-error and rely on raw speed. It turns out to be fairly easy to make a chess playing robot. What is hard is making a robot that can make a cup of tea in someone else's kitchen. That said, I'm very impressed by the progress in automated cars, but I think the real inteligence is in the design of the algoritms rather than in the algorithms themselves.It's not the be all end all, but chess simulators are one of the earliest examples of people starting out thinking "computers can't do X, only people can do X" only to find out that with enough work, computers can do X.
Created:
Posted in:
In other words, illusions are like paperback novels, or movies. Books and films are real things, but what they depict is (often) not real.Even illusions have some reality to them. The thing that defines illusion, delusion, etc is that aspect of it that does not exist. However, as a perception, they exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Desartes use a similar argumrent to prove it was his self that was the one sure thing.In what way?I think therefore I am?
Yeah. Mopac and Descartes both rely on the principle even the appeance of reality requires there must be something rather than nothing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Jeremy Bentham wrote:
What else is it that should trace the insuperable line? Is it the faculty of reason, or perhaps, the faculty for discourse?...the question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer? Why should the law refuse its protection to any sensitive being?...
He actially wrote it with cruelty to animals in mind, but I think the principle is sound. I support abortion rights, but I think Bentham identiied a good candidate for when a cut-off could apply.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Desartes use a similar argumrent to prove it was his self that was the one sure thing.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
If blue brain achieves human-like consciousness it would go a long way towards showing 'element-x' is not necessary.
Mathematicians, philososphers and theologians are obsessed with certainty, but science has to make do with getting closer to the truth with baby steps.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
When you said
Hopefully you understand what I am trying to say.
I'm not sure I did... or I'm sure I didn't!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
One popular version of this supposes our reality is a computer simulation running on a megacomputer belonging to some higher civilisation. In that case we are isloated from the reality the programmers live in; our truth and reality are the rules they programmed into our simulation.
Thus our science, philisophy an theology explore (and uncover) the rules of the simulation. When we investigate 'is there a god' we are not asking if the programmers have gods or if the programmers are gods - we are asking if the programmers put a god in the simulation. And either they did or they didn't! If they program in enough clues required to determine that then we can 'know' there is or is not a god in our simulated reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Who claim that a fetus has the right to life.Other than the woman carrying that fetus who gives it that right?
The mother gives life to the foetus but the right to life is a cutural thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I'm sure the Hebrews had a box they kept some of their most sacred objects in! I doubt that would have been quite as grand and gold-encrusted as Exodus says, though, and didn't have magical powers!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
IT BOTHERS ME BECAUSE BASTARDIZERS LIKE YOU PRETEND NOTHING IS WRONG AND WE ARE ALL GETTING ALONG SWIMMINGLY!!!!I am still waiting for your recommendations of what can be done.
Apparently I think nothing needs to be done because we are all getting along so swimmingly!
That's why I wrote "Today's problem is the worsening of inter-community relations, which results in a hardening of attitides and polarisation. It's a downward spiral that can't end well." and "We have to pull Islam's teeth" and "we have to work with moderate Muslims", "stop using inflamatory rhetoric" and so on and so on.
There might be 'bastardisers' who pretend nothing's wrong - but I'm not one of them! I don't think complacency and appeasement are solutions, but making things worse by spreading right-wing populist propaganda is not a solution either!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I have to wonder why you wanted me to listen to it considering it turned out to support my arguments rather than yours.
I think it doesn't support what you assumed about my position. My position is that an Islamic take over is not today's problem. Today's problem is the worsening of inter-community relations, which results in a hardening of attitides and polarisation. It's a downward spiral that can't end well.
The young Muslims in the program are very different to the Muslim presenter. The billion dollar question is why. I don't accept there is a 'true' interpretation of a religion. There are many different interpretations which have all been dominant at various times and places. I suspect the rise of 'non-liberal' Islam has a lot to do with the byzantine politics of the middle east - but I suspect not even the players of that game know what they are doing!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I've never questioning your rights to post here. Like you, I'm not the type to run to the moderators. I think your posts are one-sided propaganda so I have said so. You seem keener to suppress any criticism of your deliberetely inflamatory material than I am to stop you posting it.you have been trying to shut me up since I signed up here.
I don't want to prevent you posting propaganda - I want you to stop wanting to.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
It remains the crowning achievement in all human history.
Oddly low-key celebrations,tho..
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
Fail Safe does nuclear war using two actors and a telephone... it should be worst film ever, but it's one of the greatest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I think you shouldn't be pointing at all! As I said, there are enough people doing that already. I'm not trying to shut you up or censor you, but what is needed is more analysis and less rhetoric.so where should I be pointing it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
Many here do not remember the move "Dr Strangelove" LINK who was the nutcase the in end, is riding atop the hydrogen bomb as it propels towards Earth and the enemy.
The bomb was ridden by Slim Picken's character,
Major T. J. "King" Kong, pilot of the bomber aircraft.
The movie 'Fail Safe' is a 'straight drama' take on a similar theme well worth watching.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Where then should I be pointing the finger if not at what I believe is the threat?
There are loads of people pointing their finger at 'the threat'. I don't think recycling the right-wing network's meme of the day is what the world needs right now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
OK. I believe the west has a problem with Islam. SO YOU tell ME where I should be pointing the finger?
What you should do depends on what effect you want your posts to have.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
You do realise that Muslims sometimes do things that are not Islamic and Christians sometimes do what is not Christian? Realpolitik often requires a 'flexible' view of religion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
- It's probable. There is nothing wrong with naming a teddy bear Muhammed in good intent, it's a sign of affection -it's quite a popular name too. But after the accusations were made -out of spite- facts got twisted & emotions took over.
You are either naive or disengenuous. You have to ask who was behind the twisting of the facts andfor inlaming the people's emotions - and why.
People like you and Stephen seem to think all the hawks are on one side and all the doves on the other and that problem scan be solved by finger pointing. In the meantime the body count just goes up and up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Russell and Whitehead proved it in Principia Marhematica.1+1=2 equals is true based on assumptions.
also
My proof is shorter: "s'obvious, innit";
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
,I am not pro-abortion. If a woman is pregnant with a healthy foetus and is wiling and able togive her child a good start in life I think she should hae it.
But in the real world, some women will want or require an abortion. Virtually everybody agrees that there's no problem with abortion before fertilsation occurs and agree that post-natal infanticide is not acceptable - the only disagreement is the point at which abortion switches from acceptable to unacceptable.
There have been any number of suggestions for determining the 'point of no return', many with merit. I could list a few but i won't!
My suggestion is a Benthamite one: Abortion is unacceptable if would cause the foetus to suffer.
That's a bit of a cop out because I haven't said what suffering is, nor how to determine if a foetus suffers or not. But I take it mean that there should be constant research and review so we close-in on a goal of allowing abortion upto the point where there is no suffering but not a moment beyond it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Luke's Jesus explains that the kingdom of heaven is not Israel or any physical place but a 'spiritual space' that is everywhere and nowhere. It is aspace one cannot enter with one's body but does so with one's mind, or spirit.
Oviously i should have saidkingdom of god, not of heaven, there.
Jesus is also saying that he is not the nationalistic freedom fighter that a messiah was expected to be.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
Now who's inflating this out of proportion?
if it was a one off i'd be inflating things, but there are loads of similar stories. Get this straight - I am not in the business of putting Islam in a bad light. I am not Stephen. The problem is that Islam and Muslims already have a lousy reputation with many - if not most - westerners. One reason is stories like the ones I picked out that make Muslims appear like a blood thirsty mob following a bizarre and intolerant ideology.
What you have said so far is that is the truth! According to you Muslims can lose their rag over something trivial and turn into a howing mob. How reassured the people of Bradford will be to hear that about their new neighbours!
The thing is you are wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The bible speaks of a 'kingdom of god' and a 'kingdom of heaven'.
In the OT heaven is where yhwh holds court, but isn't where you go when you die. The dead are in sheol, which is either oblivion or a dismal pit devoid of any light or sound - sheol is most certainly not a heaven you'd want to go to!
Traditional Judaism has litte interest in the 'hereafter' - it is much more focused on this world rather than the next, in contrast to the Christian perspective.
Luke 17:20
"Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, 21 nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.”
When the Pharisees say 'kingdom of god' they refer to Israel, freed from the domination of foreign powers and their false gods,ie Israel ruled by yhwh (ie his priests!). That is totally in keeping with the this-wordly focus of their world view. They want to know when the Roman occupiers will be defeated.
Luke's Jesus explains that the kingdom of heaven is not Israel or any physical place but a 'spiritual space' that is everywhere and nowhere. It is aspace one cannot enter with one's body but does so with one's mind, or spirit.
Created: