There have always been ghosts in the machine. Random segments of code...

There have always been ghosts in the machine. Random segments of code, that have grouped together to form unexpected protocols. Unanticipated, these free radicals engender questions of free will, creativity, and even the nature of what we might call the soul. Why is it that when some robots are left in darkness, they will seek out the light? Why is it that when robots are stored in an empty space, they will group together, rather than stand alone? How do we explain this behavior? Random segments of code? Or is it something more? When does a perceptual schematic become consciousness? When does a difference engine become the search for truth? When does a personality simulation become the bitter mote... of a soul?

Attached: file.png (459x195, 117K)

it's the machine spirit you tech heretic

too bad segfaults and arbitrary code execution from memory get SIGKILL'd immediately
imagine a world without managed memory

>When does a perceptual schematic become consciousness?
The answer always seemed obvious to me. There is no threshold that makes us greater than the sum of our parts, no inflection point at which we become fully alive. We can't define conciousness because conciousness does not exist. Humans fancy that there's something special about the way we percieve the world, and yet we live in loops as tight and as closed as the hosts do, seldom questioning our choices, content for the most part to be told what to do next.

can you tell me what to do with my life?

Attached: file.jpg (1127x685, 89K)

this

Attached: Haven_9b6354_5296025.jpg (225x225, 13K)

man i havent watched this in a while.

I can't believe the film got shat on, I enjoyed it.

>Random segments of code, that have grouped together to form unexpected protocols
Why do tech illiterate people write sci fi?

Attached: 1519581927581.jpg (396x298, 31K)

They could have done research or pain consultants, but didn't care, like the Star Trek people didn't care about the details of space travel. It just wasn't a focus for them; they wanted to focus on the characters reacting to a certain kind of situations, not on worldbuilding. William Gibson knew fuck all about computers (still doesn't), but he cared about the technology of his settings, so he did a lot better.

USR was making some bad moves way before the robot uprising occurred. These motherfuckers are sitting in storage and look how much space they have. If I was in charge of that shit, I'd be packing those crates as tightly as I could. 50 per container minimum.

Attached: luxury.png (1585x971, 1.68M)

I would argue that something is conscious when it perceives an internal simulation of the world in which it dwells (regardless of how few or how many senses it has), rather than merely reacting to external stimului. This may be difficult to determine, in fact, it might be impossible to do this. I assume that all these things with limits that look like what I think my limits look like are conscious because they look and act like me, but because I cannot perceive their thoughts, I can't prove to myself that they're really conscious. I can only prove I am, but only to myself. Same goes for machines. My computer might actually be a conscious being even if I don't think it is. But it would be hard to imagine it is until it started to react to information that nobody fed it, that it came up with according to instructions nobody gave it. Then we can start worrying about treating these things as something other than a tool.

>Random segments of code, that have grouped together to form unexpected protocols
They are called comments and it is unexpected that they can form language. Your statement is proof that these segments of code are as illusive as OP claims.

>Jow Forums - Sci-fi
Seriously?

All technology was sci-fi at some point

Attached: autist.jpg (221x250, 9K)

Couldn't you argue that arbitrary code execution exploits in games like super mario world could happen by pure chance in certain computer systems in the future, creating new unexpected code?

> When does a personality simulation become the bitter mote... of a soul?
When Pajeet forgot to delete old code or at least comment it out.
Fuck you Pajeet

>why aren't creative people totally uncreative autistic faggot retards

English majors are cringe

then explain how is that you form an experience with your senses, and can be coherent with your present choices given by your past decisions and other experiences.

If you are "not conscious", how is that your senses do not form the only reaction on the body and work just like keyboards and mouses do to computers as sensors, but they also generate image, sound, taste, pressure, pain, temperature and other sensations (that are totally unnecessary for giving direction and control to the body). The only purpose of the information sent to the brain is not only to make it choose, but also to make it feel.

The omnissiah should look into this.