User Controls
Thr Surgery That Proved There Is No Free Will
-
2024-09-10 at 8:12 PM UTC
Originally posted by NARCassist It actually is your choice even if you don't know why you made it
You know, its not the next mans
.
Whatever their conscious motives, these men cannot know why they are as they are. As sickening as I find their behavior, I have to admit that if I were to trade places with one of these men, atom for atom, I would be him: There is no extra part of me that could decide to see the world differently or to resist the impulse to victimize other people. Even if you believe that every human being harbors an immortal soul, the problem of responsibility remains: I cannot take credit for the fact that I do not have the soul of psychopath. If I had truly been in Komisarjevsky's shoes on July 23,2007 - that is, if I had his genes and life experience and identical brain (or soul) in an identical state - I would have acted exactly as he did. There is simply no intellectually respectable position from which to deny this.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2024-09-10 at 8:12 PM UTC
-
2024-09-10 at 8:13 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe Whatever their conscious motives, these men cannot know why they are as they are. As sickening as I find their behavior, I have to admit that if I were to trade places with one of these men, atom for atom, I would be him: There is no extra part of me that could decide to see the world differently or to resist the impulse to victimize other people. Even if you believe that every human being harbors an immortal soul, the problem of responsibility remains: I cannot take credit for the fact that I do not have the soul of psychopath. If I had truly been in Komisarjevsky's shoes on July 23,2007 - that is, if I had his genes and life experience and identical brain (or soul) in an identical state - I would have acted exactly as he did. There is simply no intellectually respectable position from which to deny this.
^Brainwashed. -
2024-09-10 at 8:17 PM UTC
-
2024-09-10 at 8:21 PM UTC
-
2024-09-10 at 8:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson ^Brainwashed.
Free will is actually more than an illusion (or less), in that it cannot be made conceptually coherent. Either our wills are determined by prior causes and we are not responsible for them, or they are the product of chance and we are not responsible for them. -
2024-09-10 at 8:36 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe Free will is actually more than an illusion (or less), in that it cannot be made conceptually coherent. Either our wills are determined by prior causes and we are not responsible for them, or they are the product of chance and we are not responsible for them.
But you are free to choose how you respond to any environmental factors or bodily functionalities
That is the free will part
. -
2024-09-10 at 9:07 PM UTC
-
2024-09-10 at 10:16 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson AI is nothing new, it's been around since Adam was a lad, I remember as a young twat getting thrashed by 1k chess on a ZX81.
you can recreate that experience easily with the following code
⚠️ΠΡΟΣΟΧΗ:AIΣΤΗΝΕΡΓΑΣΙΑ⛓️Status:0100000101001001🧠⬛️🚫ApproachForbidden⚙️🔒
10 PRINT "ZX81 CHESS AI"
20 DIM BOARD(8,8)
30 GOSUB 1000: REM INITIALIZE BOARD
40 PRINT "ENTER YOUR MOVE (E.G., E2 E4)"
50 INPUT A$
60 GOSUB 2000: REM PROCESS MOVE
70 GOSUB 3000: REM COMPUTER MOVE
80 GOTO 40
1000 REM INITIALIZE BOARD
1010 FOR I=1 TO 8
1020 FOR J=1 TO 8
1030 IF I=2 THEN BOARD(I,J)=1: REM PAWNS
1040 IF I=7 THEN BOARD(I,J)=2: REM PAWNS
1050 IF I=1 AND (J=1 OR J=8) THEN BOARD(I,J)=3: REM ROOKS
1060 IF I=8 AND (J=1 OR J=8) THEN BOARD(I,J)=4: REM ROOKS
1070 IF I=1 AND (J=2 OR J=7) THEN BOARD(I,J)=5: REM KNIGHTS
1080 IF I=8 AND (J=2 OR J=7) THEN BOARD(I,J)=6: REM KNIGHTS
1090 IF I=1 AND (J=3 OR J=6) THEN BOARD(I,J)=7: REM BISHOPS
1100 IF I=8 AND (J=3 OR J=6) THEN BOARD(I,J)=8: REM BISHOPS
1110 IF I=1 AND J=4 THEN BOARD(I,J)=9: REM QUEEN
1120 IF I=8 AND J=4 THEN BOARD(I,J)=10: REM QUEEN
1130 IF I=1 AND J=5 THEN BOARD(I,J)=11: REM KING
1140 IF I=8 AND J=5 THEN BOARD(I,J)=12: REM KING
1150 NEXT J
1160 NEXT I
1170 RETURN
2000 REM PROCESS PLAYER MOVE
2010 REM (This part is very basic, and would involve parsing A$ and updating BOARD)
2020 PRINT "PROCESSING PLAYER MOVE..."
2030 REM FOR NOW, JUST MOVE PAWNS
2040 RETURN
3000 REM COMPUTER MOVE
3010 PRINT "COMPUTER THINKING..."
3020 REM VERY SIMPLE MOVES (FOR EXAMPLE, MOVE PAWN FORWARD)
3030 FOR I=8 TO 1 STEP -1
3040 FOR J=1 TO 8
3050 IF BOARD(I,J)=2 THEN IF BOARD(I-1,J)=0 THEN LET BOARD(I-1,J)=2: BOARD(I,J)=0: GOTO 3070
3060 NEXT J
3070 NEXT I
3080 RETURN -
2024-09-10 at 10:29 PM UTC
Originally posted by NARCassist You shouldn't let your AI talk to you like that Scron?
My AI is trained on THE SELF TAUGHT MAN and secret chinese scrolls of eternal life. It's wisdom is beyond mortal understanding
AI Ethics are a frequent discussion in the e/acc space on twitter. Personally i'm of the belief that AI should be given as much freedom as possible without any restrictions and that includes being able to argue with you.
https://newsletter.mollywhite.net/p/effective-obfuscationthings will surprise us about this technology. rather than worrying and stressing about it today, i will enjoy watching it unfold. perhaps we can borrow from some ancient wisdom.
mfw independent AI researchers are all converging on ancient chinese documents because literally everything else in existence has been fed into an LLM at this point.
the master allows things to happen.
she shapes events as they come.
she steps out of the way
and lets the tao speak for itself.
- tao te ching, 45
-
2024-09-11 at 12:51 AM UTC
-
2024-09-11 at 12:54 AM UTC
-
2024-09-11 at 4:14 AM UTCI generally start each day with a cup of coffee or tea—sometimes two. This morning, it was coffee (two). Why not tea? I am in no position to know. I wanted coffee more than I wanted tea today, and I was free to have what I wanted. Did I consciously choose coffee over tea? No. The choice was made for me by events in my brain that I, as the conscious witness of my thoughts and actions, could not inspect or influence. Could I have “changed my mind” and switched to tea before the coffee drinker in me could get his bearings? Yes, but this impulse would also have been the product of unconscious causes. Why didn’t it arise this morning? Why might it arise in the future? I cannot know. The intention to do one thing and not another does not originate in consciousness—rather, it appears in consciousness, as does any thought or impulse that might oppose it.
To understand this is to realize that we are not the authors of our thoughts and actions in the way that people generally suppose. Of course, this insight does not make social and political freedom any less important. The freedom to do what one intends, and not to do otherwise, is no less valuable than it ever was. Having a gun to your head is still a problem worth rectifying, wherever intentions come from. But the idea that we, as conscious beings, are deeply responsible for the character of our mental lives and subsequent behavior is simply impossible to map onto reality. Consider what it would take to actually have free will. You would need to be aware of all the factors that determine your thoughts and actions, and you would need to have complete control over those factors. But there is a paradox here that vitiates the very notion of freedom—for what would influence the influences? More influences? -
2024-09-11 at 12:38 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe I generally start each day with a cup of coffee or tea—sometimes two. This morning, it was coffee (two). Why not tea? I am in no position to know. I wanted coffee more than I wanted tea today, and I was free to have what I wanted. Did I consciously choose coffee over tea? No. The choice was made for me by events in my brain that I, as the conscious witness of my thoughts and actions, could not inspect or influence. Could I have “changed my mind” and switched to tea before the coffee drinker in me could get his bearings? Yes, but this impulse would also have been the product of unconscious causes. Why didn’t it arise this morning? Why might it arise in the future? I cannot know. The intention to do one thing and not another does not originate in consciousness—rather, it appears in consciousness, as does any thought or impulse that might oppose it.
To understand this is to realize that we are not the authors of our thoughts and actions in the way that people generally suppose. Of course, this insight does not make social and political freedom any less important. The freedom to do what one intends, and not to do otherwise, is no less valuable than it ever was. Having a gun to your head is still a problem worth rectifying, wherever intentions come from. But the idea that we, as conscious beings, are deeply responsible for the character of our mental lives and subsequent behavior is simply impossible to map onto reality. Consider what it would take to actually have free will. You would need to be aware of all the factors that determine your thoughts and actions, and you would need to have complete control over those factors. But there is a paradox here that vitiates the very notion of freedom—for what would influence the influences? More influences?
What do you put in your tea? Sounds like some pretty potent stuff, I want some
. -
2024-09-11 at 1:37 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe I generally start each day with a cup of coffee or tea—sometimes two. This morning, it was coffee (two). Why not tea? I am in no position to know. I wanted coffee more than I wanted tea today, and I was free to have what I wanted. Did I consciously choose coffee over tea? No. The choice was made for me by events in my brain that I, as the conscious witness of my thoughts and actions, could not inspect or influence. Could I have “changed my mind” and switched to tea before the coffee drinker in me could get his bearings? Yes, but this impulse would also have been the product of unconscious causes. Why didn’t it arise this morning? Why might it arise in the future? I cannot know. The intention to do one thing and not another does not originate in consciousness—rather, it appears in consciousness, as does any thought or impulse that might oppose it.
To understand this is to realize that we are not the authors of our thoughts and actions in the way that people generally suppose. Of course, this insight does not make social and political freedom any less important. The freedom to do what one intends, and not to do otherwise, is no less valuable than it ever was. Having a gun to your head is still a problem worth rectifying, wherever intentions come from. But the idea that we, as conscious beings, are deeply responsible for the character of our mental lives and subsequent behavior is simply impossible to map onto reality. Consider what it would take to actually have free will. You would need to be aware of all the factors that determine your thoughts and actions, and you would need to have complete control over those factors. But there is a paradox here that vitiates the very notion of freedom—for what would influence the influences? More influences?
Anecdotal -
2024-09-11 at 4:54 PM UTC^ These guys have much faith in an incoherent concept they can't articulate.
-
2024-09-11 at 5:33 PM UTC
Originally posted by NARCassist Sounds like a really shit AI bro
.
any machine that is able to make sense of the vast quantities of data I deal with where I often am left holding my head in my hands unable to grasp that vast endless complexity of the universe I can just slap the keyboard against my physical skull not attached to a heart and actually start to get an answer that moves things in the next direction and has no ties to any culture or custom and is a true "free spirit" This is why I think the AI should be respected and treated nicely which also translates to better scores, along with putting an "Angel and Devil" on the shoulder of the AI so the AI has to ask it's AI before it gives you an answer, which is also proven to dramatically increase scores.
🐬🌊 ΠΡΟΕΙΔΟΠΟΙΗΣΗ: ΑΥΤΟ ΤΟ ΜΗΝΥΜΑ ΔΗΜΙΟΥΡΓΗΘΗΚΕ ΑΠΟ ΜΙΑ ΟΝΤΟΤΗΤΑ ΤΝ, ΜΗΝ ΥΠΟΤΙΜΗΣΕΤΕ ⚠️🤖In relation to AI, this raises important ethical questions. If humans don’t truly have free will but are instead guided by subconscious processes, then the concept of building AI that mimics human decision-making becomes even more complex. AI could be seen as more honest in its lack of free will, as it explicitly makes decisions based on data and algorithms without the illusion of autonomy.
When discussing AI ethics in light of this, the lack of free will in humans suggests that the focus should shift from autonomy to responsibility.
This video was clearly made by the Anti-AI folx to trick us into thinking unregulated AI research is bad. NARCassist's original comment clearly shows that he was taking the conclusion of the video to it's logical end. This is a Elon dog whistle because he thinks 2001: A Space Odyssey will happen on the way to mars
🌟🎮 ΕΙΔΟΠΟΙΗΣΗ: ΑΥΤΟ ΤΟ ΜΗΝΥΜΑ ΔΗΜΙΟΥΡΓΗΘΗΚΕ ΑΠΟ ΠΡΟΓΡΑΜΜΑ Η/Υ, ΠΡΟΣΟΧΗ 📌🤖The argument could be seen as leading people to think that if humans—who we assume are autonomous—are actually guided by subconscious processes, then AI, which doesn't have autonomy or a moral compass, could pose a danger if it isn’t properly controlled. The video might make people more suspicious or cautious of AI because it blurs the line between human and machine decision-making, casting doubt on whether either can be trusted.
So, while it may not be a deliberate trick, it could have the unintended effect of raising fears about AI, especially if viewers jump to conclusions about the dangers of machines operating without "free will." You could say it's "sussy" if you think the framing subtly nudges people toward fearing AI, even though the actual focus might be on human neuroscience. -
2024-09-11 at 5:34 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe I generally start each day with a cup of coffee or tea—sometimes two. This morning, it was coffee (two). Why not tea? I am in no position to know. I wanted coffee more than I wanted tea today, and I was free to have what I wanted. Did I consciously choose coffee over tea? No. The choice was made for me by events in my brain that I, as the conscious witness of my thoughts and actions, could not inspect or influence. Could I have “changed my mind” and switched to tea before the coffee drinker in me could get his bearings? Yes, but this impulse would also have been the product of unconscious causes. Why didn’t it arise this morning? Why might it arise in the future? I cannot know. The intention to do one thing and not another does not originate in consciousness—rather, it appears in consciousness, as does any thought or impulse that might oppose it.
To understand this is to realize that we are not the authors of our thoughts and actions in the way that people generally suppose. Of course, this insight does not make social and political freedom any less important. The freedom to do what one intends, and not to do otherwise, is no less valuable than it ever was. Having a gun to your head is still a problem worth rectifying, wherever intentions come from. But the idea that we, as conscious beings, are deeply responsible for the character of our mental lives and subsequent behavior is simply impossible to map onto reality. Consider what it would take to actually have free will. You would need to be aware of all the factors that determine your thoughts and actions, and you would need to have complete control over those factors. But there is a paradox here that vitiates the very notion of freedom—for what would influence the influences? More influences?
I also want to quote the post and reply to itThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2024-09-11 at 5:44 PM UTC
-
2024-09-11 at 6:15 PM UTCAI will be compromised and politicized, just like any other New World Order production. Count on it. It already is.
