Raw LLM Responses

@TheRatsintheWalls "Do they provide much specific evidence in the book, or is it all speculation and philosophy?" There is a lot of philosophy of science, with some biological evidence. No one can provide unequivocal proof for this and no one has made a complete consciousness theory, so of course, we can be only speculative about that. "From everything I have seen and read about, while we don't fully understand consciousness, we haven't detected any reason to believe it's more than a complex emergent phenomenon resulting from the various firings in the brain. Our best super computers only barely match the estimates of our brain's computing power; it might well be a matter of time." Actually no. We have absolutely no idea how your brain could create something as unique and incomprehensible as consciousness, being only a biochemical algorithmic computer. Everything we feel and observe tells us, that it is impossible to recreate an actual ability of thinking in a simple algorithmic way. It would create some paradoxes as well. The explanation that says, that our consciousness is a result of quantum phenomena will fix these problems. Almost everything on the quantum level works on probability. And I mean a real probability. When you roll the dice, in fact, you don't have the "real probability". I mean, the numbers you will get, will never be random. If you will have enough information about the speed of the dice, their mass, etc. you could predict what number you will get. It is impossible with quantum. This could explain the somewhat unpredictable nature of our minds. And I am not saying, that we will never create artificial intelligence. I am only saying, that we would need to have different computers than everyone uses and we would need to have a completed theory of consciousness, which would be a great step for humanity. But I agree with you. We might even create it accidentally, maybe without even knowing how our own consciousness works. That would be equally fascinating.