@thomasfuchs How can choice be anything else but a computation? I think I get your point, but the argument seems to rely on the assumption that humans are somehow non-deterministic, in a good way?
@thomasfuchs Nah, I think I get your point (something along the lines of "it's bad to replace humans with ai for important decisions", and I totally agree, at least for the forseeable future), but I think there are better arguments than "humans are so special that no machine could ever be as good at certain things".
@thomasfuchs Author/theologian C.S. Lewis said this about reading old books: "Every age has its own outlook... We all, therefore, need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own....Not, of course, that there is any magic about the past. People were no cleverer then than they are now; they made as many mistakes as we. But not the same mistakes....2 heads are better than 1, not because either is infallible, but because they are unlikely to go wrong in the same direction."
@thomasfuchs I didn't know that's the guy who made ELIZA. I also didn't know he wrote a response to what happened when people started using ELIZA. Fascinating.
You can't really purchase a physical copy of this book, seems like. Isn't that a bleak sign of sorts in itself?
@thomasfuchs The day a computer can feel is the day it should be allowed to make a choice and not a day sooner. Anything less is tantamount to leaving the future of humanity in the hands of psychopaths.
@thomasfuchs@x2ero Fist, let me back up for a second, because I feel like I sometimes come across as rude or overly opinionated, which is not my intention. If you are not interested in this particular discussion (since it's not the topic you originally posted about), that's perfectly fine. Just say so, or just don't reply. But if you are: Why do you think we aren't deterministic?
@thomasfuchs@x2ero I'm not sure about the pointlessness (on a global scale, sure, but on a personal one, maybe not), but that would not affect if determinism is true, at least not without an argument why everything being pointless could not be possible, right? Regarding quantum effects: I agree, there probably is something like true randomness which could affect brains (and maybe computers too?). Would it be appropriate to call that partially random input to an otherwise deterministic system?
@thomasfuchs only if you believe in freedom of choice which is debatable, tbh most probably we are biological computers that have a predefined output to a given set of inputs hence there is no free will and we are determinsitc machines