Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C

CannonFodder

@ CannonFodder @lemmy.world

Posts
0
Comments
772
Joined
6 mo. ago

  • Tesla’s Head of North American Sales Out After Just Over Six Months, With Canadian Sales Down 60%+

    Jump

  • Agree with all that. Have a T3 with same kind of mileage. Enjoy the car big time. Still I won't buy a Tesla again because of musk - regardless of how many good offers they keep sending me.

  • HOW?!

    Jump

  • Most people can learn to do this to some degree. And starting early helps. But for some, it's impossible.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • You haven't brought anything up as an alternative! You just keep saying my theory has assumptions. I'm just suggesting that anything other than a physical explanation is 'magical' as a semantic tool because whatever it is clearly sits outside of any scientific rigor. Whether you are looking to some spiritual entity, or universe simulation theory, I don't know, so I can't argue for or against those. In fact, those examples ar impossible to argue against because as models they have no consistency or predictable test mechanism. Yes, a physical model has assumptions - as conscious beings experiencing them, fundamentally we will always have to have some root assumptions for any model. But a physical model based on scientific process is different than say 'god made it' theory, because it's based on observation, and impartial (within its own reference frame) testing. It's reference frame is the only one that can produce useful and predictable results because it is the only one based on the notion that the universe is based on predictable rules. That doesn't mean it's correct, but I see it as the only worthwhile approach. You can ponder other models that introduce unknowable things, but they inherently will always be incomplete; hence the 'naval gazing' vernacular. There's nothing wrong with gazing at a nice naval if you're into that sort of thing, but it won't really explain anything, or provide pragmatic results. Feel free to show me I'm wrong. I am not closed minded. But in the absence of a better model, I see no reason not to stick to a physical one.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • What competing model do you propose? Why does my model fall apart?

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • Yes, but that's the only reason it really matters at all. It's inherently unprovable and unknowable so there nothing to do any science on. It's philosophy or meta physics, which is great, but cannot be definitive.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • That's just not how science works. One can only postulate a theory, make predictions based on it, and test it. If you can come up with an experiment that shows the model false, it is disproved. Otherwise only if it stands the test of time, and useful predictions it becomes a law - although there's always the caveat that it could still be proven false.But you do have to start somewhere, with a framework for consistency and logic, or else you'll never get anywhere and it's a waste of time. That the universe is based on repeatable, consistent physical laws is about as basic of a framework as there could be. You can add abstract random magic into your model if it makes you happy, but I think it makes the model considerably less useful. Unless you can show me how it doesn't, of course.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • It's the only one that I can think of that might actually matter from an ethical point of view as ai approaches the appearance what could be considered consciousness. What else are you thinking about that relates?

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • I think it is unique. Consciousness of anyone but yourself is immediately an unknowable thing. There are no related effects we can measure. There is nothing we can predict based on it. You can do pseudo science with it and that could have great value, but it will always fall apart under proper scientific method. Other sciences require assumptions, like that logic holds, math is consistent, the world exists etc. and so they are tested under that caveat implicitly. You can also make an assumption that consciousness exists in some cases - but it doesn't lead anywhere. Like arguing whether a computer can be conscious leads back exactly and only to your original assumptions and so they add no value.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • In this case we can't subjectively measure it. I think it's a pretty safe assumption that with less pain, people would enjoy life more. We can test that now (probably been done, but maybe too basic). We can look at historical records that people has diseases more in the past, and we can measure the relative discomfort of those diseases now. But, yes, there is a certain amount of believe that logic holds, and that historical evidence is reliable. That said, if a competing theory was put forward, I would think about it and see if there was any way to differentiate via subjective experimental means. It's only belief in so much as there are no better models.But what of my belief? How does it offend you so? Are you trying to justify some crazy beliefs of your own by creating a false equivalence?

  • It's the dream

    Jump

  • There's 14 different possibilities because of leap years.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • Not really. We know that a human can detect those frequencies and output information related to them. Like any transducer. Like any computer. We cannot know what the experience is. The best we can do is describe our own experience, and compare the description to that which other people give, but that's not really better evidence than what we'd get from a current llm ai which can do the same. It's logical to assume other people have conscious, but we cannot test it empirically.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • Science is done by observing, theorizing, predicting and then testing. We cannot test anything on consciousness.

  • Trump abolishes the Second Amendment

    Jump

  • It's not just kids doing the shooting. It's to do with deteriorating mental health, poor social connectedness, availability of guns, and more media reporting.Well the shooter drills might help. Did you know that when the j6 rioters stormed the capital buildings, the interns immediately got people to go into offices; shut, lock and barricade doors, turn off lights and hide out of sight of any windows or doors. They did this because they'd got the practice in school.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • People explaining their own consciousness is really not good enough. Simple llm ai systems can do that. I'm pretty sure that dogs are conscience, but we can never get their perspective. You cannot know anyone other than yourself is conscious.

  • Trump abolishes the Second Amendment

    Jump

  • Mmm dead bugs and kid piss soup. Actually I think most drownings are in private pools that aren't really like that. But I don't think anyone cares about guns kept at the range. It's the general availability that means the mentally unhealthy can easily get them and that leads to problems. And it's not the just the numbers of kids killed at schools, it's the knowledge that this happens regularly, the live shooter drills they all have to experience. It's traumatizing for a lot of kids.

  • Australians banned teens from using social media. Now, Australians are worried about teenagers going outside with e-bikes

    Jump

  • Yes, I can be introspective, thanks. Not talking about my personal weaknesses here doesn't negate the point.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • My assumption that being healthy is good? geesh, there is a limit to mindless argument.

  • Our understanding of reality might be a result of the way cousciousness works

    Jump

  • If there's a new force or field, then it's still physical, it's just unknown. But that's not what you're talking about, I think. It's more like the notion of life, which is self organizing matter - which appears at first to go against the laws of entropy. But we can see how a chance configuration that self replicates is a natural phenomenon and actually accelerates entropy in the longer term. Life is still physical even though we can describe it as a concept that might seem to transcend physicality. Consciousness can just be the same. And yes, you can consider consciousness as some sort of other fundamental order, but it's not scientific - it specifically cannot be since we can not measure it.

  • Trump abolishes the Second Amendment

    Jump

  • Yes but pools are fun and give exercise. Gun ownership is useless (since they're no being used now against their main purported purpose).