bitplane
@bitplane
Followers
451
Following
4K
Statuses
6K
Computationalism is evolution denial, a shitpost in philosophy's ocean of piss...
1
1
21
@matterasmachine @PeterSweden7 Haha Trump was told to keep his mouth shut at the time, that's what the bleach comments were about
0
0
0
@neekneek71 @esrtweet Replace "racist" with "a witch" and read it back in the tone of an inquisitor's mob
2
0
0
Kind of, it was actually more of a search for God's laws, which is why there's this heavy bias towards laws being fundamental, to objective reality being a thing to dualism and so on that wouldn't fly if it was just a search for explanations. The criticism that it's just statistics is a reasonable one IMO, even if I don't buy into @matterasmachine's model, at least it's an attempt to go further.
0
0
0
@mediocroteez @davidbessis @GaryMarcus Yeah, and it isn't just a mathematics thing. People are drawn to things that they are good at and enjoy, at least relative to other people, and the more you do something the better you get.
0
0
1
@JayHuber16 @skdh @paulg You're not far off, value is fundamentally territorial; control over resources. Whether that resource is your flesh, your food, the space in which you exist, or something layered on top of it, territory is the base layer. So we naturally get rent-seeking on the next level up.
0
0
1
@DeyvisMaltaX @wildbarestepf @elonmusk Titillation used to work for engagement, but now we have art generators so spam bots can do it at volume. It was kinda inevitable since Stable Diffusion.
0
0
0
@dunleavy89 @elonmusk Makes you wonder why agent provocateurs are stirring up death threats against the young devs on the DOGE team.
0
0
0
0
0
1
I... uh... I think I just solved consciousness and the crazy water people were right all along. * Mind is the only thing we can actually prove to exist. * Choice is the only thing that we know to be the cause of any action at all. * We know subjective reality exists, objective reality has not and cannot be proven to exist. * Objective reality, or the illusion of one, can emerge from a substrate made of chains of subjective experiences. It can't the other way around. * If you only measure the parts of reality that have consistent patterns and ignore everything else, using empiricism, you'll believe that reality is objective. * If you exist on the crust of the Earth and think in solids, you'll consider everything to be an object. Most of the universe is radiation, gas and plasma, solids are an outlier. * Determinism can emerge from a subset of all choice (as strong preferences or constrained choices). Choice can't emerge from a deterministic system. * If everything feels like something, and its behaviour is due to choices, brains with minds will naturally evolve. Without this, we have no mechanism that would cause brains to host minds. * The more choice things have, the less we can say about it. * The less choice it has, the more it seems to follow rules. * If you measure things that can be measured, and model the possibilities with high accuracy, that model's framing will lead you to believe in randomness. * The is no difference between "unknowable" and "random", so having both fails Occam's razor. * If your history and culture is one that believes in heavens and earth, you will be biased towards separate mind and matter. * If your tradition is one of searching for God's laws, you'll believe that there are laws of physics - commandments to be obeyed - rather than observations of the preferences of stuff. * If your culture has strong beliefs in infinite glory and grace, everafters, omnipotence and omniscience, you'll believe in infinities without demanding infinite evidence. * If you believe in infinities, mathematical functionalism and Platonic forms are the default, rather than processes. So... * Stuff simply is and does as it feels. * The predictable parts of it, like solids, are just stuck in repeating cycles of decisions. * Predictability itself is a measure of lack of awareness of other things. * Our mind is more likely to be in the water we're made of than created by microtubules or electrical activity or chemical reactions. Fluids have the most agency, solids constrain it. Conclusion: We are thinking water.
1
0
2
0
0
1
@gwennelsonuk @kolshidialna @esrtweet @elonmusk No, it isn't. Words mean things, Orwellian linguistics should be resisted by people who have integrity.
1
0
1