Chile

1010 readers

12 users here now

Comunidad general de Chile para Feddit.cl

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

feandoe@feddit.cl

Discusión Random Semanal - Semana del 20/04/26 (feddit.cl)

submitted 2 weeks ago by feandoe@feddit.cl to c/chile@feddit.cl

680 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Este hilo será renovado cada lunes

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] caradenada@feddit.cl 3 points 1 week ago (15 children)

Aquí que somos todos ñoños podemos jugar:

types of guy in the AI consciousness debate:

guy who thinks ai can’t be conscious because it’s “just a stochastic parrot”
guy who thinks ai must be conscious because claude is a good boi
guy who hasn’t gotten over 4o
guy who unironically thinks everything is computer
guy who claims to have a more nuanced argument for computational functionalism, but it just boils down to everything is computer
dualist whose belief in dualism is downstream of their belief in god, yet tries to argue the inverse
guy who doesn’t understand the difference between cognition and p-consciousness
guy who asserts illusionism but has apparently wrestled with zero of the implications other than “reductive materialism wins again”
guy who says the hard problem is easy, but then proceeds to only answer the easy problem
guy who rejects ai consciousness because otherwise it might be wrong to abuse claude with death threats to make CRUD apps faster
guy who argues that consciousness is the key to moral patienthood, but completely ignores that when discussing animal rights
eliezer yudkowsky being pedantic
guy being pedantic about eliezer yudkowsky’s pedantry
guy who rejects dualism because that would make mind uploading impossible and mean that he finally has to confront the inevitability of his own death
guy who thinks this argument is unresolvable so everyone should just shut up and accept his position (which obviously deserves the benefit of the doubt)
guy who would literally cut off his own hand if he thought there were a 1 in 10 trillion chance of creating ~infinite utility~
guy who just thinks that redness is, like, super weird, man. can’t explain that!
guy with a rarely-updated philosophy blog despite not majoring in philosophy or even reading that many books, talking about how “the whole field is up its own ass”
academic philosopher who, for some reason, expects a higher caliber of discussion on x dot com the everything app
guy who thinks that vectors are literally emotions and bites the bullet that, yes, your thermostat does feel hot
panpsychist who took dmt once and contributes almost nothing to the conversation
guy who is literally a solipsist but is still really invested in convincing strangers on the internet that he’s right

fuente

Desde mi ignorancia (no entiendo ni la mitad de los conceptos en la lista), creo que sería un simple número 4.

[–] lambisio@feddit.cl 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Soy 1. Todas las demás posturas son inútiles a la sociedad orgánicamente, y son características de poseros del tipo "te juro que tengo inclinasión umanista" (se manda otro sediniazo) con demasiado tiempo libre.

[–] Pudutr0n@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Tienes una visión estrictamente materialista de fenómenos que no entiendes y todas las otras posibles posturas son idiotas con completa certeza?

Estoy tan sorprendido...

[–] lambisio@feddit.cl 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Hablo del contexto propuesto en el problema, es decir "types of guy in the AI consciousness debate". No negaría que algunas de las posturas son interesantes o útiles en debates sobre cosas que realmente traen algún beneficio o tienen un interés científico especial, como lograr determinar si tal especie de animales o no ha desarrollado consciencia. Pero en cuanto a las AI, todos sabemos bien de sobra la basura de donde viene todo eso y cómo se trata de blanquear y adornar las discusiones sobre el tema.

Y ojo, no he dicho que sean idiotas, sólo que son poseros, y que esas posturas (nuevamente, en el contexto de las IA) son inútiles para una sociedad. Incluso diría perjudiciales. Los humanos tenemos el punto débil de emocionalmente ponerle carita a todo objeto inanimado, y las oligarquías lo saben.

[–] Pudutr0n@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

De acuerdo, somos poseros.

La compasión por otras formas de vida o conciencia son una debilidad? Interesante aseveración.

Y tu remate fue verdaderamente lambisioso. No me esperaría nada menos.

load more comments (13 replies)