User Controls
Posts by Common De-mominator
-
2019-07-03 at 1:10 AM UTC in Free energy coming soon
-
2019-07-02 at 11:44 PM UTC in Ok is it me or is most of the internet down.SpectraL doesn't know shit.
-
2019-07-02 at 11:43 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
-
2019-07-02 at 11:42 PM UTC in Free energy coming soonSpectrum crookes cock in his ass
-
2019-07-02 at 11:40 PM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Malice Metro EditionSome kind of cumondrum
-
2019-07-02 at 10:32 PM UTC in Simulation is ConsciousnessTldr: what makes something a simulation?
-
2019-07-02 at 10:27 PM UTC in Ok is it me or is most of the internet down.
-
2019-07-02 at 10:22 PM UTC in look in desperate can anyone help ASAPWarMar
-
2019-07-02 at 10:21 PM UTC in Ok is it me or is most of the internet down.Spectral is fucking retarded.
-
2019-07-02 at 10:15 PM UTC in Simulation is Consciousness
Originally posted by Obbe When your brain does arithmetic you are doing it via simulation, you are simulating "units" in your metaphorically simulated "mind-space".
Not really. My consciousness doesn't "do" anything, as best as I can observe it, it is simply an appearance of the workspace for some unconscious processes. For example I just did 22+88=10 and as far as I'm concerned, the process just popped into my head when called upon. I'm not "simulating" symbolic logic in my head to do arithmetic. Literally nobody does that. It's probably possible (just play out and keep track of the rules) but you would be real shit and slow at mental arithmetic.Tell me where you draw the distinction between "consciousness" and "simulation"? What do you see as the definitive difference?
The point where there is "something it is like" to be a system.
What goes into that? Well that's the question we are trying to answer you munt.It seems to me that the entire contents of consciousness are metaphors or simulations.
Even if the entire contents of consciousness were simulation, you'd have to explain how they actually become a conscious experience. In itself all a simulation is, is a bunch of shit happening. How that gets turned into some sort of unified phenomenal experience is an entirely separate question.
If I show you a random simulation with dots moving around on a screen, you probably won't know wtf it is or maybe make a guess that probably turns out incorrect. It is no more or less semantically meaningful to you than looking at static on your TV screen. But if you and I weren't there to interpret it, it wouldn't mean shit at all. The same is the case with whatever is happening in your mind.Earlier you stated that it was a matter of fact that a simple simulation using pebbles has no consciousness. When I asked how you knew this you eventually admitted that you cannot know whether or not the pebble simulation has consciousness.
Something happening is just something happening. By itself two pebbles are just two pebbles. The fact that they are a "simulation" is happening in my perception and I see no reason why something happening in my perception would make any difference as to what is going on in the system of pebbles itself.
Now the separate question is whether I can rule out of that the pebble system has consciousness. This is a red herring. I'm saying it being a simulation of something has literally nothing to do with whether the pebbles are experiencing anything.
The fact that it's a simulation that has some meaningful informational content is a product of my perception.
Similarly, there is no reason to believe there is "calculation" "in" an abacus: it's just some balls sliding around in shafts. If a martian saw it without knowing the rules of an abacus and how they relate to our mathematics, it would just be some balls on sticks.I don't believe you can actually know whether or not anything has consciousness. Maybe "consciousness" is just a word we invented to refer to the metaphorical and simulated "events" that take place in the metaphorical and simulated "mind-space". It isn't unimaginable that a simple simulation utilizing pebbles could eventually become more and more complex to the point where it starts to incorporate smaller simulations into itself, creates a metaphorical language and then uses that language to become more complex and maybe even refer to its "internal" simulations as its own consciousness. I mean, I'm not saying that's a fact or anything, just a possibility, and it's a possibility that this has actually already occurred before. Human consciousness as we know it likely started out eons ago as something much less complex than it is today, maybe it started out as metaphorically similar to two pebbles.
You are brain dead retarded and fail at athletic abilities.
I'm not making any claim as to knowing what isn't conscious, I'm pointing out that something being a simulation is a fact of our own conscious apprehension, it doesn't change anything about the thing being used. -
2019-07-02 at 9:31 PM UTC in Free energy coming soon
Originally posted by -SpectraL In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is an unknown form of energy which is hypothesized to permeate all of space, tending to accelerate the expansion of the universe. Dark energy is the most accepted hypothesis to explain the observations since the 1990s indicating that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. Assuming that the standard model of cosmology is correct, the best current measurements indicate that dark energy contributes 68% of the total energy in the present-day observable universe. The mass–energy of dark matter and ordinary (baryonic) matter contribute 27% and 5%, respectively, and other components such as neutrinos and photons contribute a very small amount. The density of dark energy is very low (~ 7 × 10−30 g/cm3) much less than the density of ordinary matter or dark matter within galaxies. However, it dominates the mass–energy of the universe because it is uniform across space. Two proposed forms for dark energy are the cosmological constant, representing a constant energy density filling space homogeneously, and scalar fields such as quintessence or moduli, dynamic quantities whose energy density can vary in time and space. Contributions from scalar fields that are constant in space are usually also included in the cosmological constant. The cosmological constant can be formulated to be equivalent to the zero-point radiation of space i.e. the vacuum energy. Scalar fields that change in space can be difficult to distinguish from a cosmological constant because the change may be extremely slow.
Brooklyn Eagle, July 10, 1932, Nikola Tesla states: "I have harnessed the cosmic rays and caused them to operate a motive device. Cosmic ray investigation is a subject that is very close to me. I was the first to discover these rays and I naturally feel toward them as I would toward my own flesh and blood. I have advanced a theory of the cosmic rays and at every step of my investigations I have found it completely justified. The attractive features of the cosmic rays is their constancy. They shower down on us throughout the whole 24 hours, and if a plant is developed to use their power it will not require devices for storing energy as would be necessary with devices using wind, tide or sunlight. All of my investigations seem to point to the conclusion that they are small particles, each carrying so small a charge that we are justified in calling them neutrons. They move with great velocity, exceeding that of light. More than 25 years ago I began my efforts to harness the cosmic rays and I can now state that I have succeeded in operating a motive device by means of them. I will tell you in the most general way, the cosmic ray ionizes the air, setting free many charges ions and electrons. These charges are captured in a condenser which is made to discharge through the circuit of the motor. I have hopes of building my motor on a large scale, but circumstances have not been favorable to carrying out my plan. This new power for the driving of the world’s machinery will be derived from the energy which operates the universe, the cosmic energy, whose central source for the earth is the sun and which is everywhere present in unlimited quantities."
Tesla specifically said he wouldn't release details in his new source of free energy and never published shit about shit on the subject. Therefore he didn't prove shit.
QED -
2019-07-02 at 9:11 PM UTC in Free energy coming soon
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny the problem is we being having to PAY to be able to tap into it.
Are you fucking dumb.
Of course you can harness it for free. Go set up a petroleum extraction and refinement plant in international waters to harvest energy for free without paying... Oh wait, you can't? Why, because it would cost too much and you don't have the know how? You can't harvest the raw materials with your bare hands? Maybe you get a loan and pay some people to help you out, buy the materials. How do you pay back the bank's investment? Maybe you start selling the harnessed to people for money... Congratulations you have just come around to the concept of running a fucking business in the energy industry. How is that a problem u muckwit? -
2019-07-02 at 9:03 PM UTC in Free energy coming soonAnd the point is finding shit with a large concentration of energy is that we can make it flow to a lower energy gradient to use it in order to do Work. All of reality is made out of energy but that doesn't give us anything. So is whatever we want to paper. The problem is finding a gradient we can tap.
-
2019-07-02 at 9 PM UTC in Free energy coming soonNikola Tesla didn't prove shit.
-
2019-07-02 at 8:47 PM UTC in Simulation is Consciousness
Originally posted by Obbe But how do you know for a fact the simulation has no consciousness?
How do we know for a fact that a rock has no consciousness? We don't. There's just no reason to believe it and no good logic has been offered to suggest one should believe it does in any non deprecated way. So for example if you believe panpsychism then a rock is indeed conscious but that would be in a completely deprecated sense.
Undoubtedly our consciousness does engage simulation, doesn't mean that simulation is consciousness, that's just backwards. My brain can also do arithmetic but that doesn't mean arithmetic is consciousness. -
2019-07-02 at 5:35 PM UTC in look in desperate can anyone help ASAPI really dislike the fact that Aldra attempted to help you.
-
2019-07-02 at 5:30 PM UTC in Simulation is Consciousness
Originally posted by Obbe You know this for a fact?
Of course.
A simulation only has to make any semantic sense to me. I could be "simulating" something with two pebbles if I wanted. Doesn't mean that the system of pebbles is conscious in any meaningful or non-deprecated way.
The hard part of figuring out consciousness is stuff like how we derive that semanticity from it. By itself the simulation is just shit flying around on a screen and in a box. The issue is understanding how shit flying around into space turns into a conscious creature. Absent our context, a computer isn't doing anything meaningful, it's just pushing around symbolic relations we gave it by analogizing them to information states. -
2019-07-02 at 3:41 PM UTC in Simulation is ConsciousnessYou can create an entire simulation without having any element of consciousness involved anywhere. The challenge is how you get a bunch of local interactions to become an integrated perspectival view.
-
2019-07-02 at 3:40 PM UTC in Free energy coming soon
Originally posted by -SpectraL The first spark costs you, but the rest is free.
That's not what free means. It costs you to access it is what makes it not free. Every energy source ever outputs more from its dormant state once initiated, that's the point of an energy source. That doesn't make the energy source free. You are simply retarded.
TL;Dr: Shut up, faggot. -
2019-07-02 at 1:11 PM UTC in Free energy coming soon
Originally posted by -SpectraL Free energy already exists. Like, if you put a single match flame to a pile of sticks, the flame spreads on its own and creates a huge amount of energy.
It's not free because you have to pay the energy cost of the match, and of collecting those sticks or going out to the woods to use them, or bringing shit over to heat with the fire.
