This is a valuable conversation because fluent language makes AI feel more human than it is. I would hesitate to call responsiveness “partial consciousness,” though. A machine may simulate understanding without experiencing anything at all. The better it imitates us, the more carefully we must distinguish intelligence-like performance from soul, will, and personhood.
This is the guy that sees nucleic acid polymers as selfish (full of reason and consciousness). He is a very confused man, directed by demons at this point.
This is a valuable conversation because fluent language makes AI feel more human than it is. I would hesitate to call responsiveness “partial consciousness,” though. A machine may simulate understanding without experiencing anything at all. The better it imitates us, the more carefully we must distinguish intelligence-like performance from soul, will, and personhood.
Spot on.
This is the guy that sees nucleic acid polymers as selfish (full of reason and consciousness). He is a very confused man, directed by demons at this point.
Yep. Dawkins is a product of scientism too.