Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I have far more epistemic humility than someone who thinks that consciousness arises out of the abstract form of a calculation rather than the physical substrate of a calculation. Believing that consciousness is tied to a specific physical substrate is on-its-face reasonable whereas believing that consciousness is tied to specific abstract forms is on-its-face unreasonable because to do so requires believing all kinds of absurd sequela.

I believe that a microprocessor is what it appears to be, that is, a microprocessor. That is the most epistemicly humble approach. You are rushing to ascribe personhood to a microprocessor with a certain kind of software running on it, or at the very least, saying that we can't rule personhood out. You are the one making the leap, not me.

Intelligence != consciousness, because believing that is so would require one to believe that the pain of a cognitively normal person is more real than the pain of someone with a developmental disability.

Also, I do not claim to have solved the hard problem of consciousness. Rather I have ruled out a particular answer, that is, the answer that consciousness arises from calculation in the abstract.

 help



You could very well be running on a microprocessor right now.

There are actually a lot of trivial reasons why that couldn't possibly be the case, such as the observation of non computable physical phenomena.

> such as the observation of non computable physical phenomena.

There is no such thing. Your observation could simply be short-circuited to make sense and you'd be none the wiser. If you are simulated, your perception and understanding is also fair game for manipulation.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: