Baddogma's Other Meta Cafe- Polite Discussions About Scientific Mysticism and General Weirdness

My thoughts are hush cry baby.

My next tier thoughts are thusly..
You are happy and excited for the first time in a long time.. then you faced reality.. then you decided to go back.. then you got sick.. and because you got sick you want to keep getting sick? Yes drugs will solve it! Lol. Maybe if you know how to temper them.

Sounds legit.

And by that I mean stoooopid.




And as my 6666th post with 111 trophies.. lol I must play another..

a reply to: Reverbs

Haha at least you're honest. Mean but believable. I'm not stupid "the sick" is... I'm probably dying, that's how horrible I feel. You have no heart for a dying lady? You monster!
You need to tell me how wonderful it all is and give me good advice like tea. Do I seriously have to tell you how to behave when confronted with a whiny sicko?
Why are you so meeeeeeeeeeeean?
I have the worst disease any human ever had
And I cry as much as I want to
The lol was a mistake. Don't get any ideas, sick people hater. It's not funny it's serious

a reply to: Reverbs


Pour vous!



It is not every day you hit 6,666 posts...

Has anyone listened to this interview with Dr. Ben Goertzel? He was on Rogan this week. He's got some interesting thoughts on AI and how to steer the outcomes towards something with ethics that include humanity. The gist of his plans are analogous to parenthood with the seminal AIs as children; although he doesn't specifically say so, he's riffing on the nature/nurture debate.

He speaks about the potential differences between AI developed by military intelligence compared to being developed by corporate interests. Open Source is where his heart lies as he sees this way as being safer in the long term than the other two. Not that he says any option will be without serious risks.

It's a context I haven't really thought about before and it set off some tangents. One of the tangents was how 'mad scientist' can someone get? Some of his assertions struck me as ill-informed, but he's likely to be close to twice my IQ on its best day so I'm hesitant to look too duh.

Here's a shorter segment to skim:

a reply to: Kandinsky

Omg yes I did!

I thought it was one of the most interesting podcasts in a long long time.

I personally liked how he was trying to shift concepts and joe was trying to make little boxes to understand.. Its like how i try to confuse words. Id love to talk to him..

Oh and his views on world powers/conspiracy is interesting. His personal experience.

I found what he was saying to maybe not make sense to train brain concepts but make better sense for web brain pictures. Which parts did you think were off?

a reply to: Peeple

Girl im jabbing you. I hold no punches joking or serious.

Im actually nice i promise.

But I don't want to hear silliness like that.

Feel better.

a reply to: Reverbs

Which parts did you think were off?

I thought his ideas about uploading and downloading our consciousnesses were a bit simplistic. Sure, aspects of consciousness might one day be uploadable, but the *I* is more than bioelectromagnetic energy to be mapped out. There's the gut microbiome playing its part as well as fluctuating hormones. Plus there's all that sparkling of synapses stimulated by exposure to certain music, and people, in certain moods under varying environmental conditions.

Let's use the '27 club' as a familiar and exaggerated example? A few creative geniuses bend towards self-destruction due to their psychological make-up, upbringing, times, social groups, access to drugs and psychedelics etc. Take all that away and they wouldn't be creative geniuses, they'd just be other people.

But yeah, he was one of the most interesting guests this year and I'll be listening to the last hour this weekend. The first hour was almost inspirational in the way his nature/nurture argument was a fresh and insightful way of thinking about the evolution of AI. We always intuitively knew AI would be different from a miltech perspective, but he described a clearer angle and moved my perspective 90 degrees from where it was.

His mind/body interaction with reality was displayed by the eccentric body language too. His fingers and arms were constantly semaphoring his mental concepts and he had conceptualised, set patterns for ideas like mad scientist sign language.

I was left with a hundred ideas and a different view of the world. You know how Chinese interpret the world differently to Western minds? Or how PNG tribes have different conceptualisations of reality? Thai people see the future as behind us and the past in front of us. Imagine how AIs will have different cultures based on their origins and the mindsets of the programmers.

You Tube comments were full of fear about him. 'He's the dude who'll create Jurassic Park!' I thought he was awesome.

a reply to: Kandinsky

but the *I* is more than bioelectromagnetic energy to be mapped out. There's the gut microbiome playing its part as well as fluctuating hormones. Plus there's all that sparkling of synapses stimulated by exposure to certain music, and people, in certain moods under varying environmental conditions.

Can I borrow this for use in future discussions?

Seriously, I’ve thought about this on occasion and this articulates it as about as well as I’ve heard (or thought)...well said

a reply to: Cravens

Help yourself and thanks for the kind words.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Ill answer to your first point.
He talked about uploading but also said it wouldnt be you. And aswell, added that consciousness is more than connections in the brain.. he was talking about intelligence not consciousness. Sort of like how ai exists now its just not conscious agi. He mentions how he has to settle on words because thats how others think about it, so keep in mind hes making aproximations in a coy way

Im at work ill read the rest if I have time.
Maybe ill even find that part later and link it.

a reply to: Reverbs

I loved his hand movements too. It let me physically link spacing of concepts in 3d and mentally at the same time which is how I think pretty much.. like a 3d abstract model. He doesnt like the word choices he has to use so while hes saying it hes symbolizing spacial relationships which i think is easier for our brains to grasp than words are.. why language is all directional words if you think about it.. "im so over it, hes beneath me.. and weights.. heavy hearted handed or light hearted. Tactile.. is another.. hands can be spatial representers and are very tactile. Just watching another humans hands makes you feel a certain way.. communication in general is hive mind with no obvious driver.. society has tendencies..

And since you brought this podcast back up im going to rewatch it.

I was left weirdly indpired last time. I was drinking a beer watching, but throughout the entire episode i only finished half my beer. No beer left behind is me.. so thats telling.

Ill definitely try to bring some of what i thought were interesting concept stretches and bends to ats so i can explain what i mean by that.

a reply to: Peeple

Peeps (Nadine), you are not dying!

Mostly because I have not met you in person.

But if want our mercy... it is free!!!

Love you!!!

a reply to: Reverbs

I'm trying to find the same bit! I thought he was talking about 'mini-Rogans' running around and my point was they won't be 'mini-Rogans.' No more to say until I catch the right segment.

Hopefully I'll come back and edit in more when it's found.

I dunno if you ever read Iain M Banks? A lot of us fans have been prepped for what Dr. Ben Goertzel is imagining.

ETA - It's around the 1:30 mark. Goertzel speculates about virtual Rogans in virtual worlds before mentioning a 3D printed version with a copy of Rogan's mind in it. The notion of 'forks' of ourselves is almost mind-boggling in the potential outcomes. Yeah, he's exploring ideas and it'd be easy to pause the interview every five minutes and spend fifteen pondering what he said.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Joe asked about mind uploading would it be you?

But hes answered with "thats a different question."
Lets talk about body replication instead.
The forking versions is just anither way of saying consciousness is not transfered but copied.. like clones each with their own mind they would start off similar to each other. Theyd but know their name was joe rogan but they are independent of each other...

Remember hes talking about a full atom by atom replication.

Then he goes on to say its based on two giant assumptions of scanning all the atoms and building atom by atom or virtual atom by atom.. hes not saying those assumptions will come to pass just they need to for this to work..

OK and heres your kicker.
And hes obviously read the book that inspired the matrix movies.

An accurate simulacrum of you..

Thats not you.. thats not your consciousness.

Its like a "non playable character" that acts like you.

Notice how hes constantly refering to the first joe as the first person perspective looking at the simulated one.

They talk more about it if i remember correctly they get to the point of consciousness somewhere in there, but Im off to work.

a reply to: Reverbs & to: Kandinsky

In 4-6 weeks I'll have wifi just wait for it and I'll join the conversation
But since consciousness is my favourite topic and I simply refuse to shut up even without a clue what's been discussed:
Proto consciousness is the most exciting theory and I think we all have met it before one way or another.
I had a car once that had a live of its own, it was an orange 1990 Benz a big car before all the electronics entered their lifes and I swear if he liked the car going in front of it it was making 200 km/h if it didn't he would have "the burps" and refuse to go faster than 130. He was a funny dude. Once a system is complex enough and flooded with some form of energy like electricity it starts to have a minimum will. I have also observed that in laptops.
Haha that was 50% serious, the car story but my point remains:
Matter and consciousness have a serious relationship which goes beyond what materialism says, ie it's not just an emergent of grey matter. Black holes and stars and all of the fabric of the universe carry consciousness they make decisions according to the challenges of their environment, like how fast to spin just in a scale that's unfathomably different than ours. Microbes and humans, also incomparable but alive.

That's my crazy talk for today.

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Thank you some love for the disgusting coughing nose running sweat-ies. But it's okay. Tomorrow it's back to work.
How are you doing sweetest baby? Anything new?

a reply to: Reverbs

Aye, it could be good in a post-scarcity world if we can collectively progress in the coming decades and not stall through environmental challenges. It's certainly food for thought and passes time in these winter months whilst static in traffic.

a reply to: Peeple

At work there's some inverse relationship between urgency and reliability with laptops and web access. The more urgent/important a task is, the more likely the laptop won't work or the internet will go patchy. At times, it's so predictable that a colleague can have a 2nd laptop brought in and bet the 'faulty' one will work fine as soon as the replacement is in sight. It happens a lot.

An intelligent person would say 'why not test the prediction for confirmation bias?' I reckon the tech would work fine under observation and return to its Murphy's Law, oppositional ways when the test was over lol. The spirit of Trickster or an awkward intelligence appears to revel in the mischief and, like you, I'm only two quarters joking and about four eighths serious.

Black holes and stars and all of the fabric of the universe carry consciousness they make decisions according to the challenges of their environment, like how fast to spin just in a scale that's unfathomably different than ours.

Some of my psychonautic adventures in the past would correspond to your perspective. The*me* today isn't so sure although the idea of Life being an expression of the universe doesn't put me out of the comfort zone...not a bit. As the dude in your link says:

“It’s all very speculative, but it’s something we can check and either validate or falsify,”

a reply to: Kandinsky

The "trickster" surely has a strange sense of humor. But it's nice you can confirm my experience with yours. It brings to mind how strange and complicated the concepts of fate and determinism are once you take yourself out of the center. I mean what role do we play in the "machine life" of a laptop or a car? And are we as all collective consciousness facing an all encompassing determined fate? A big part of all life is dead. We try to figure out the end of the universe but why really? It's not like any of us will be here to see it unfold?
Or is it the true purpose of the freaky human consciousness? Are we deep thought? 42...thinking for the universe using all the tools it wouldn't have if we wouldn't have built them.
What role do we little humans really have in the face of the universe? After all we're such an unlikely accident I have a hard time accepting the universe made us just out of chance.
Then again whatever is possible will happen... wtf do I know. It's one of those things that gets more and more complicated and further away from an answer the more you think about it.

a reply to: Peeple

Then again whatever is possible will happen... wtf do I know. It's one of those things that gets more and more complicated and further away from an answer the more you think about it.

There was a science panel discussion about parallel universes and that popular idea about every permutation being possible. Infinite complexity! Someone joked (paraphrasing), "In that case there's a universe where no multiverses exist."

I mangled the quote, but it was pretty Zen.

A big part of all life is dead. We try to figure out the end of the universe but why really?

Inevitable meaningless is a tough nettle to grasp. I hope we're not in the one universe that has no multiverses lol! #sunrises forever

a reply to: Kandinsky

The Higgs had a chance to tell us if it's supersymmetry or multiverse but it refused to and landed in the middle. Am I reading you right and you think this universe was born out of a black hole? Personally I don't like theories which just postpone the problem without a real solution. Like simulation, creator and so on.
My point was more where the fixiation on the end of things is coming from. But it's a funny quote.
#the sun doesn't rise forever