I mean it’s the same question we’ve been asking all our lives about the animals, fetuses and now AI. When does it stop being a flowchart and start being a consciousness.
Comment on there is a special place in hell for these scientists
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Raises uncomfortable questions about consciousness. The only difference between these neurons and your own are the number of them and the structures they form. Of course it doesn’t know what it’s doing, but… Neither do our own neurons
KindnessisPunk@piefed.ca 19 hours ago
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 day ago
Nueralink did pretty much the same thing to monkeys that are actually concision. So it this different only because those are human neurons? Is human consciousness different than animal consciousness?
Turret3857@infosec.pub 23 hours ago
i dont think op made a mutually exclusive statement?..
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 23 hours ago
I’m not sure this is quite analagous to neuralink’s monkey experiments. That said,
So is this different only because those are human neurons?
To my mind, a neuron is a neuron. The only difference between your brain and a monkey brain is, again, the number of neurons and the structures they form. I don’t see this as any different from monkey or rat or ant or entirely digital neurons.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 23 hours ago
I’m not sure this is quite analagous to neuralink’s monkey experiments.
Why not? It’s a chip reading inputs from neurons. This meme doesn’t make it clear if the chip was also stimulation neurons but Neuralink has plans for neural stimulation and it’s possible this was also tested on monkeys. So what’s the difference?
dtaylor84@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 hours ago
You seem to be arguing against a point that no one has made.
SpaceCadet@sopuli.xyz 21 hours ago
Sounds like those are uncomfortable questions being raised…
Paddzr@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
Yes. Because it’s us. Anything not us is always going to be less valuable. You’d kill 100 lions if it means saving 1 human.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 22 hours ago
Lions are not conscious. And I’m not asking about value. Of course we value human consciousness more than monkey consciousness. We don’t grant monkeys any rights. Hell, we assign more value to unconscious (brain dead) humans than to conscious monkeys. But how exactly is human consciousness different?
UnhingedFridge@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
What leads you to assume that lions lack consciousness exactly?
MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca 21 hours ago
That was just to try and make the equipment work at all, it wasn’t about doing anything with software. It’s the opposite where you’re only worried about the physical damage and infection.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 20 hours ago
I was focusing more on the “hooking up conscious brain to computer” part than about the damage and infection part.
Thought experiment: let’s say we have a dead brain patient. You have verified that there is no neural activity in the brain beyond cerebellum. There’s no consciousness in the brain. Legally it’s still considered a person. You can’t for example shoot them.
We also have a 5kg blob of lab grown human brain tissue. We have verified there is neural activity in the entire blob but we don’t know what it’s doing and we can’t communicate with it.
Which one is more conscious? Which one should be considered more human and should have more rights?
MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca 8 hours ago
Hooking up to a computer is just installing a software keyboard in your brain, that doesnt really mean or do anything. It’s what software you load after that’s relevant.
ziproot@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
Do those neurons interact with hormones like mine do?
Zacryon@feddit.org 23 hours ago
And now bring artificial neural networks, i.e., AI, into the picture to make it even more spicy.
luciferofastora@feddit.org 22 hours ago
Science and Ethics — the age old enmity between “I wanna know” and “I’m not allowed to find out”
Sturgist@lemmy.ca 21 hours ago
FTFY
luciferofastora@feddit.org 20 hours ago
I simplified for comedic effect. You’re absolutely right that the “compromise” would be finding some humane and ethical solution, but “The most effective and direct way of finding out is cruel and callous” isn’t quite as snappy.
That kinda dodges the conflict by not engaging with ethical concerns at all. I feel like calling it a solution would be morbid, but it does make the problem stop being a problem…
Sturgist@lemmy.ca 19 hours ago
I guess I…kinda lost the plot a bit when I wrote the second part, eh?
There’s ethics…and then there’s what the government in the country a scientist operates in views as “morally and ethically acceptable”.
Stem cell research was banned in most places for a long time. The US is banning CRISPR, if I remember right, the OG Nazis, Soviets and Empire of Japan (and honestly basically everyone else too, just those are the three that were highlighted when I was in school) rubber-stamped and funded research that should warrant execution by vivisection…die by your own methods and all that.
You’re right it’s not really a solution. However the realities of modern society means that there’s room within what is morally and ethically acceptable in any country to operate in both a humane and inhumane fashion. And if it doesn’t then money and connections to those in power allow further leeway to be an example of humanity at it’s best…or a monster in a human suit…