Re:Tests for Consciousness in Humans and Beyond
by pixl97 on Sunday March 17, 2024 @02:44PM
(#39736854)
Hell, we don't even have a good definition for intelligence that is accepted across different fields.
The problem I see is we keep looking for supersets of all these features added together, and as the article points out, something that humans have....
>This rationale is particularly powerful if human experience is limited to a small, and perhaps idiosyncratic, region in the space of possible states of consciousness, as may be the case.
There will be a large part of humanity that will want consciousness/sentience as something that humans have and other things don't (you already see this often with the 'has a soul' argument). This will set us up to have a large blind in to machine systems behavior in self organizing systems, and is a shared concern among those that see AI as a potential existential risk.
The problem I see is we keep looking for supersets of all these features added together, and as the article points out, something that humans have....
>This rationale is particularly powerful if human experience is limited to a small, and perhaps idiosyncratic, region in the space of possible states of consciousness, as may be the case.
There will be a large part of humanity that will want consciousness/sentience as something that humans have and other things don't (you already see this often with the 'has a soul' argument). This will set us up to have a large blind in to machine systems behavior in self organizing systems, and is a shared concern among those that see AI as a potential existential risk.