Re:The Simulation Argument and the Simulation Barrier
by coldtea on Monday November 25, 2019 @06:07PM
(#21633864)
>Let's say I build a chatbot with a predetermined database of perfect responses to every possible string of words. This is quite clearly possible in theory, given a database with infinite room. This chatbot would pass the touring test, even though all it's doing is retrieving prewritten sentences. Is it conscious?
For all intents and purposes, yes. Though without actual consciousness it would be impossible to build it.
>Well, a computer program was not born in the same way that you were, so that assumption goes out the window.
Well, a computer airflow program was also not created in the same way as actual air, but it can simulate it to the degree that we use it to build actual planes.
A computer program might not have been 'born' in the same way that we are, but we can make it simulate the "way that we are" (giving enough computer power, down to the atom or quantum element). So?
Let's say I build a chatbot with a predetermined database of perfect responses to every possible string of words. This is quite clearly possible in theory, given a database with infinite room. This chatbot would pass the touring test, even though all it's doing is retrieving prewritten sentences. Is it conscious?
Ergo, it's quite clearly possible to build an automaton which acts like a human, but actually has no clue what it's saying. Which means the touring test isn't adequate.
---
Here's another take:
You have no proof that anyone in the universe is conscious other than yourself. However, given that you were born in the same way as everyone else, and you're conscious, everyone else probably is too. Why would you be so special?
Well, a computer program was not born in the same way that you were, so that assumption goes out the window.