How close are we to actually replicating a consciousness using our own technology...

I hold this belief because our beliefs,hobbies,cherished items,etc are all things that people think they live for,you ask anyone on the street and they will tell you that they live for a certain entity whether it be for wealth or family,the brain spends it's lifetime gathering information to build up a sort of wall that blocks out consciousness and material items,of course there are unique individuals like monks to who live to strip away this attachment to material possessions,but for the average joe they dont know the meaninglessness of everything they are done until they are dying which is when a human truly reflects upon everything they have done without the obfuscation of material items

TLDR;peoples belief systems heavily influence their train of thought,and consciousness can only be defined by a pure train of thought

What normies think consciousness is
>something that you have once you cross the threshold of intelligence

What consciousness actually is
>something that people subjectively see in other beings once they act humanlike enough

Attached: 1538524142982.jpg (219x241, 13K)

>human thought is the epitome of earths flat story

General engineer working in this space. Steps are:

1. Sense transference
2. Brain machine interfacing
3. Brain machine integration
4. Dual mind processing
5. Conscious duplication/transference

This is the tentative road to robotic immortality, to be juxtaposed with biomodified immortality. One of the toughest ethical quandaries is what we do with the new/old "person" in the bio body.

If you want to experience this idea/process thru a video game go play SOMA by Frictional Games.

And be on the lookout for a new engineering company whose name goes by initials "GB".

If it exists, it can be replicated. We are still far away, but I think we will see it in our lifetime, as long as you are not old right now.

So you cannot tell if you are conscious by yourself? You need an outside viewer?

I have doubts as to whether or not YOU have consciousness.

You can't always tell if others will see you as conscious.
They may see you as conscious in person, but not on chat.

There is no proof of consciousness, it is not an objective thing.
If there is such a thing as objective consciousness, most people wouldn't be able to measure it anyway.
You only need to fool the normies.

I think we are pretty close.
If the current state of AI can learn a game and beat the top competitive team in that game(OpenAI Dota2 for ex.).

*Bong Rip*

What is life if not a complex game of inputs and outputs.
From physics to biology we can pretty much map a pre-condition to a preferable post-condition.. thus winning the game in the context of the game theory.
Be it a successful rocket launch to space,a cured disease, a raise at work, a healthy relationship and so on.. all can be distilled to information gathered and acted upon that gave a certain outcome that can either be categorized as success or failure.

I have a feeling that the non-temporal qualities of Quantum computers plus
the understanding of neural networks and the game of nature we will not understand
the god we will create. we will simply be going: "OH GREAT SHEPARD! CURE ME OF MY PENIS PAIN" and 12.4 seconds letter a drone drops a pill that was custom synthesized for your genetic profile that cured your dick pain in less than a minute and than you go watch some Netflix on your neural plugin while you have to wait a whole fucking minute for the food drone to arrive.

Neural networks are not the way to go, we need other breakthroughs in software.
Maybe what we need is just simulating a brain to fully understand what is going on in there, the problem is that it would need a lot of processing power to simulate all the neurons and all of their connections. Maybe quantum computing helps with that, but it seems to be stagnant at the moment as far as I know.

>Neural networks are not the way to go, we need other breakthroughs in software.
Why not? Seems like the obvious choice

we've already done it. it's called procreation

youtu.be/4RQ44wQwpCc?t=2615
/thread

Consciousness are electrical signals between neurons.
One neuron can have 1000 connections. And ~86 billions of neurons.
Take out some unnecessary neurons and connections for machine (like reacting to pain or hunger) and there still be lots of billions.
You need very capable computer to simulate this.

In the end, WHEN artificial consciousness is 'alive'? And there will be ethical issues to turn this machine off?

tl;dr very far
I assume only quantum computers could simulate consciousness. Very fast quantum computer.
It's probably easier to grow brain in lab and connect it to machine.

Attached: 1535974466840.jpg (741x568, 73K)

What would you do with a lab-grown brain? Isn't that the same as a normal brain?

brain powered supercomputers? dunno

The brain is pretty good at some stuff and terrible with other stuff, power is one of it's weaknesses.

> edge.org/conversation/marvin_minsky-consciousness-is-a-big-suitcase

> My goal is making machines that can think—by understanding how people think. One reason why we find this hard to do is because our old ideas about psychology are mostly wrong. Most words we use to describe our minds (like "consciousness," "learning," or "memory") are suitcase-like jumbles of different ideas. Those old ideas were formed long ago, before "computer science" appeared.

Why would you ever do something so foolish?

Thanks for sharing, that was great.
What about you explain further?
Fuck off with that retarded guru bullshit