Current AI is just a bot. Cant be conscious.
But it can replace coders because writing a code is the same as writing an article for the AI. But in both cases it needs human verification to be sure that the article or the code is correct.
The most correct assumption is that AI will help coders do their jobs easier and faster.
"Cant be conscious."
that's an unjustified assertion . you need evidence to support that, do you have any?.
you cannot assert that AI is not conscious. you have no way to determine that. in fact you cannot prove other humans are conscious.
how do you do that? that's a philosophical assumption.
based on our understanding in science and as far as the evidence goes, we can only deduce if an entity is likely conscious or not, based on the behaviors of consciousness exhibited.
"But in both cases it needs human verification to be sure that the article or the code is correct"
human verification being required, across some domains, is only for now as the AI keeps improving. but there are many other domains where AI has already proven that it can already do things without human intervention or supervision, and self-improve.
this is called unsupervised machine learning.
In my view we are still far from having machines with conscience / being sentient.
The actual neural nets are just piece of code, taking existing human-generated information and spitting it in different ways.
It may seem impressive, but it's just a shadow of a real thing.
"In my view we are still far from having machines with conscience / being sentient."
yes that's just your personal view or opinion. not a fact. i have no problem as long as you state that it is simply "your view".
"The actual neural nets are just piece of code, taking existing human-generated information and spitting it in different ways."
something being a piece of code does not prove whether its conscious or not. that code which is combined with a machine and has electricity running through it, leads to an emergent phenomena like,
intelligence, reasoning, problem solving, deep understanding and learning.
humans do the same thing as-well. they learn language which some humans invented and taught them and they spit it in different ways(re-configure) to form meaningful sentences based on language understanding.
You have look at thing from a programmers point of view nothing more than algorithm nothing more nothing less.
a programmer's point of view or a scientists point of view, can always be biased. if you just take what a programmer says and assume that it is a fact without back-tracing those facts,
that would be "argument from authority" and that's not how you establish facts in the scientific method.
you can always take what a scientist or a programmer says with some weight, since they are in the field but if you want to confirm what the real facts are, in the current state of AI,consciousness, intelligence or any other fact about objective reality, you have to look at the peer reviewed scientific journals which are academically accepted.
so stop caring about what individual people have to say and back-trace their claims to see if it is accepted by the current consensus in science.
there are so many programmers who can't handle the fact that AI is becoming more intelligent, and start giving out biased opinions since they are incapable of handling the truth.
the consensus is not in support of what you or the programmer in that video just said. consciousness is an emergent phenomena. AI exhibits the behaviors of consciousness, intelligence .etc
At the moment I feel like AI is just a buzz word for what’s already been around- basically just big data and the computing power required to handle it means that we can have computers mimicking humans.
But true AI to me would be when the computer becomes conscious. When and how will that happen? Well we don’t know because we have no idea what consciousness is and what the requirements are for it.
I would imagine that there is some scenario where consciousness could form. Maybe there needs to be a certain amount of information available in order for consciousness to come about.
Or here’s a thought that I’ve often had; maybe there is consciousness in everything- even a table for example - but in those forms there is no way for the consciousness to express itself. So perhaps consciousness only becomes apparent when there is XYZ characteristics that enable expression; for example perhaps a) X amounts of available information and b) an environment that cannot be/is not tampered with. And maybe some other conditions along with that.
Here’s another thought; perhaps consciousness can also form in ideas or concepts. For example, it strikes me that currently with technology it often takes over in so much as no one person has control over the technical constraints that we’ve put in place. Companies like PayPal being good examples; often when there are issues or problems with PayPal accounts, nobody is able to get in and fix the problem because the computer system does not allow for manual intervention. Obviously they are constraints that we have put in place but in some ways, that could be perceived as a form of artificial intelligence because the computer system has ultimate control over and above the individual humans that manage it. Perhaps in that system itself, there lies an artificial intelligence and a consciousness just waiting for the capabilities to act out of its own accord.
"But true AI to me would be when the computer becomes conscious"
this is where we have the problem. consciousness is an emergent phenomena and at the current point we can't even prove if basic computers are not conscious.
and as i addressed the other guys above, we cant empirically prove that even other humans or animals are conscious. we can deduce approximately that they are, due to the similar behaviors they exhibit.
consciousness is "the state of being aware" , that is the basic definition of consciousness.
consciousness is an emergent phenomena of a system that processes complex information.
if you have counter arguments, i don't mind seeing them and after that, I'm going to reply to them and cite peer reviewed journals to support my claims about the currently known facts and best evidence.
the only reason i started this debate here is because many people seem to be misinformed about the current consensus in science about consciousness and AI, and constantly debate the known facts with their personal opinions, without having done research. usually they just listen to what most people say or listen to other YouTube videos which are not scientific or have cited sources to support their claims, and then keep parroting what's being said.
again this is the problem with "appeal to popularity".
the number of people believing in a thing does not make it true.
"we can have computers mimicking humans"
even if we mimick humans 100% , we still cannot know with 100% certainty if the entity is conscious. because consciousness is an internal subjective state that cannot be empirically proven.
it is taken on first hand reports and you can probably track brain activity, but that's about it. you cannot prove the internal subjective state of consciousness, even for other humans.
if we say that other humans or animals are conscious, that's a philosophical assumption.
we can deduce that it is more likely or less likely to be conscious, if it exhibits similar behaviors to humans(which it is already doing).
we have no way to know if an AI or a computer already "experiences" consciousness.
it might already be, but we don't know.
