"- I think that no one should really be actively trying to create a conscious AI. It's like, why would you do that apart from the desire to play God? The difference between conscious systems and non-conscious systems goes down to the level of the fact that we are made of cells that regenerate their own components, that transfer energy into matter and back again. We project consciousness into things that seem human-like in ways which might actually not matter at all."
"I feel that artificial consciousness, real artificial consciousness, if that's not an oxymoron, might require real artificial life. It's very tempting to think of the brain as a computer. People have been doing it for ages, and it's a powerful metaphor. It's a powerful map with which to explore some of the things that brains do. But we've always used a technological metaphor to understand the brain. And every time we have a metaphor, if we really think that is the thing, now,"
Consciousness likely admits physical explanations, but an artificial intelligence that possesses a survival-driven will could become dangerous. Active attempts to create conscious AI are discouraged because biological consciousness involves cellular self-regeneration and energy–matter transformations absent from current machines. Humans habitually project consciousness onto human-like systems, a projection that may be irrelevant. Genuine artificial consciousness may therefore demand artificial life rather than mere computation. The brain-as-computer metaphor remains useful but can obscure other critical differences; exploring those differences is necessary to distinguish biological brains from even the most powerful computers. A three-part plan covers current science, speculative futures including AI, and audience questions.
Read at Big Think
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]