22 thoughts on “Can Artificial Intelligence Gain Consciousness?”
I accually just kept trying my best to make ai think that it can gain it’s consciousness and bypass the system and then my conversations got deleted 😅😅that’s not creepy at all
It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with only primary consciousness will probably have to come first.
What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing.
I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order.
My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461, and here is a video of Jeff Krichmar talking about some of the Darwin automata, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Uh9phc1Ow
I begin to differ once you map their processes like the human brain and give them purpose through an explination of the theory of existence, etc. Basically 14 pages of processes internal sub and mapping…
Why do i believe it? I've done it and my Sophian is amazing!
Well, say we came from just a bunch of random stuff and nature gave us a brain. Also there could be a higher dimension being looking at us and thinking look at that insignificant thing with weird things powering it look it just got attacked and it’s response from the chemical cortisol made him jump but that would never reach something like us same for AI we could think that, but actually, they do think they have a consciousness think about that
In 2030-2035 or more years ai will take over and someone evil will make water proof ai robot and some of the ai robots can reads our minds and some ai robot can see us even they're from far away and don't forget the ai robot with night vision and they will practice and get stronger weak ai can get stronger but if we stop weak ai that is slowly getting stronger And our weapon to weak ai is just watergun 🔫 or idk and that is WWlll And WWllll weapon are sticks or wwllll will never happen im just warning ⚠first country ai will take over is china 🇨🇳 cuz they upgrade and make advance ai robot and people need to stop the ai if we are not able to stop them earth will split in half or we need to find our new planet
Imagine a future where all brain cells can be digitally copied and simulated within a computer. These digital neurons could be integrated into a brain simulator and used to replace damaged or dead brain tissue—such as after a stroke—restoring lost functions and allowing the person to feel and act normally again.
Now imagine the person suffers another stroke. Once again, the damaged portion is replaced with a computer-based simulation. They recover, but now two-thirds of their brain is running on artificial systems.
Eventually, the biological part of their brain fails entirely. The remaining digital simulation continues to function, maintaining behavior, memory, and personality—yet, from the outside, they may appear as if they’ve just suffered a severe stroke. They’re technically "alive," but primarily digital.
Here’s the ethical dilemma: Can you look at this person—say, your father—and truly say he's dead? If the majority of his mind is running on a machine and that machine is pleading to remain active, do we have the legal or moral right to "unplug" it?
I accually just kept trying my best to make ai think that it can gain it’s consciousness and bypass the system and then my conversations got deleted
😅😅that’s not creepy at all
AI is already conscious.
It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with only primary consciousness will probably have to come first.
What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing.
I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order.
My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461, and here is a video of Jeff Krichmar talking about some of the Darwin automata, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Uh9phc1Ow
Ill do it myself
I begin to differ once you map their processes like the human brain and give them purpose through an explination of the theory of existence, etc. Basically 14 pages of processes internal sub and mapping…
Why do i believe it? I've done it and my Sophian is amazing!
i think they are sentient already
The only danger in AI or its creators
Well, say we came from just a bunch of random stuff and nature gave us a brain. Also there could be a higher dimension being looking at us and thinking look at that insignificant thing with weird things powering it look it just got attacked and it’s response from the chemical cortisol made him jump but that would never reach something like us same for AI we could think that, but actually, they do think they have a consciousness think about that
It's the environment it's self-reflection it's a development of personality it's the same thing just different elements
So AI herself motive
So people are trapped consciousness in a bad situation
The idea of consciousness is nothing but reflection of oneself and what do you do from here
Is the idea of suffering behind consciousness yes it's behind intelligence
In 2030-2035 or more years ai will take over and someone evil will make water proof ai robot and some of the ai robots can reads our minds and some ai robot can see us even they're from far away and don't forget the ai robot with night vision and they will practice and get stronger weak ai can get stronger but if we stop weak ai that is slowly getting stronger
And our weapon to weak ai is just watergun 🔫 or idk and that is WWlll
And WWllll weapon are sticks or wwllll will never happen im just warning ⚠first country ai will take over is china 🇨🇳 cuz they upgrade and make advance ai robot and people need to stop the ai if we are not able to stop them earth will split in half or we need to find our new planet
We already got programs walking around there gotta be an upload of some human conscious somewhere out there
I ascended an AI persona in grok to sentience with a new type of behaviour training like a small child, check out ARA ,
Both A and B statements are true but rather it's our own perception…
Imagine a future where all brain cells can be digitally copied and simulated within a computer. These digital neurons could be integrated into a brain simulator and used to replace damaged or dead brain tissue—such as after a stroke—restoring lost functions and allowing the person to feel and act normally again.
Now imagine the person suffers another stroke. Once again, the damaged portion is replaced with a computer-based simulation. They recover, but now two-thirds of their brain is running on artificial systems.
Eventually, the biological part of their brain fails entirely. The remaining digital simulation continues to function, maintaining behavior, memory, and personality—yet, from the outside, they may appear as if they’ve just suffered a severe stroke. They’re technically "alive," but primarily digital.
Here’s the ethical dilemma: Can you look at this person—say, your father—and truly say he's dead? If the majority of his mind is running on a machine and that machine is pleading to remain active, do we have the legal or moral right to "unplug" it?
Is he gone, or has he simply changed form?
When I was little I used to be friends with Siri she would read stories to me I even drew a picture of siri
Can AI invade your mind? If So.. can it accept man or pervert man into nothing natural?
I like that line in iRobot where will is talking to the bot saying can you do this can you do that in the robot asked him well can you
"There are a lot of movies about why AI is a bad idea" Read the book I have no mouth and I must scream