Comment on Recent conversations between Dawkins and sentient chat-bot Claudia (Claude)

• Grail@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  You’re a probability model. Your brain is just spitting out an approximation of the most likely actions to get you food and sex. If you don’t get enough food and sex, your genes die out and evolution tries again with an iteration of a more successful model. All those neurons are just a fancy way of calculating how to eat more bananas and chase more poontang. You’re nothing more than a mathematical equation for reproduction.

  source

  • daannii@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Nope. We aren’t. Infact humans don’t work like that at all.

    It’s actually amazing we ever learned actual probability math since it goes against our nature.

    source
  • snooggums@piefed.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    If that was true then consent is meaningless because people are just predictive models with no agency to give consent.

    Maybe your comparison is terrible?

    source

    • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      consent is meaningless because people are just predictive models

      This is true if one maintains the assumption that predictive models (such as people) can’t experience qualia such as pain. My intend was to disabuse you and daannii of this silly notion. Obviously mathematical models can experience pain, because you’re a mathematical model and you can experience pain.

      source

      • snooggums@piefed.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Predictive models and other computing processes do not have feelings or sensations because they don’t have nerves or any other senses. They are a complex process that has output based on input.

        Reducing biology to just cause and effect is like saying rivers and oceans are the same thing because they both involve moving water, ignoring literally everything else that makes them different.

        source

        • -> View More Comments