Community Archive

🧵 View Thread

🧵 Thread (23 tweets)

Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago

New substantial essay on AI consciousness published today in Seeds of Science — was a great excuse to talk about some old & new themes in how I think about consciousness. A thread: https://t.co/JTOVplEmIf

Tweet image 1
134 21
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

Link to paper: https://t.co/lb92NmCu8Y

10 1
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

The future is coming fast. The question for consciousness research is what, if anything, we should do to prepare for it. Three frames come to mind: https://t.co/WSrzycXfBD

Tweet image 1
15 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

One thing I don’t think people outside the field see is the degree to which AI consciousness is a social puzzle, and this heavily influences what can be said & studied. Coalitions Rule Everything Around Me: https://t.co/pGJARgq5xI

Tweet image 1
16 1
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

I think about @eschwitz’s comment a lot — and how, when General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics were first introduced, people thought they were *really weird* and intellectually destabilizing https://t.co/3HoEiPGcU2

Tweet image 1
15 2
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz I should pause here and say by “consciousness” I mean phenomenal experience, or what Nagel was pointing at in his “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” paper. To have visceral qualia; what it feels like to be somethinghttps://t.co/OEKTQqven3

10 1
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz So — are AIs conscious? Will they be? https://t.co/yKEF1YuPk3

Tweet image 1
10 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz There are essentially two ontologies that are rich enough to host consciousness: physics and computation. I think of this as “bits vs atoms”. To differentiate them, I define computation as “Turing-level computation” — what our computers do https://t.co/d4hCQlKJDS

Tweet image 1
7 1
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong et al. have done some great work on the computational side. I pretty much ignore their work (sorry Rob!) and come down on the side that hardware can be conscious; software cannot. I think only real things can be conscious and only physical things are real

12 1
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong A recent book that makes this case is “The Physical Signature of Computation: A Robust Mapping Account” by Anderson & Piccinini (thanks @pwlot); if “team bits” wants to do battle with physics over consciousness, that would be the place to start

8 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot One thing that both “physics” and “software” consciousness people agree on: don’t trust what AIs say about their qualia https://t.co/SI9l6t7ArC

Tweet image 1
9 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot Previously, I wrote an essay about different kinds of conscious systems in our wide universe; I think with complex technological artifacts we really are making a new type of mind. Computers are closer to aliens than we realize https://t.co/c1plgQrh0y

Tweet image 1
5 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot The question I’ve been asking myself since Principia Qualia is “where in physics does an object’s true shape live?” — there are many ways to formulate this question. My current guess: @stephen_wolfram ’s “branchial space” https://t.co/iIOhnaQo8j

Tweet image 1
5 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram If we want to know what it feels like to be something, we should check its shape in branchial space. Brains and computers both have presence in branchial space, but these shapes are wildly different. Probably important! https://t.co/f7f277wnSI

Tweet image 1
5 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram Electromagnetism and criticality are probably the most important factors for “branchial shape”. But this has big caveats

4 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram My totally biased view is that my Symmetry Theory of Valence will be absolutely central for both progress on qualia and understanding what makes for good futures. Paper here: https://t.co/1rNw0zdReC https://t.co/wSZ7u4ib8I

Tweet image 1
7 2
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram Is “caring about consciousness” intrinsic (qualia have causal powers), or is it like a crab (a common destination for evolution) or an exotic hothouse flower (super rare, could easily die)? I suspect it’s crablike https://t.co/Mb2DM6O7of

Tweet image 1
5 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram Recap. There’s a lot of claims here; current AI isn’t capable of evaluating them, but maybe in a year we can have LLM debate tournaments between papers on consciousness (can someone build this?) https://t.co/qc2jlM9uWB

Tweet image 1
9 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram If I was designing an alien soap opera, I’d choose the setting as pre-singularity earth. I’d make sure humans knew the light of consciousness was the most important thing in the universe; I’d make sure they had no clue what it was. Instant classic

36 4
6/12/2024
Placeholder
hinterlander@yoltartarover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@johnsonmxe @eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram some friends of mine used to joke that this is exactly what's happening "got to amuse the Archons," they'd say as they did something unusual, "if we get too boring they might cancel the show!"

4 0
6/12/2024
Placeholder
NiMA@robotNiMAover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@johnsonmxe @eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram Is there a way to measure the exact moment in time they started this instance of the sim? 👀🌚 The thing that's sim-y about our universe is most likely time not space.

2 0
6/14/2024
Placeholder
Michael Edward Johnson@johnsonmxeover 1 year ago
Replying to @robotNiMA

@insideNiMA @eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram It looks like “time” and “spacetime” are approximations at some limit, and possibly the result of anthropic selection — I have a draft of an essay in this general genre, let’s chat sometime

0 0
6/14/2024
Placeholder
NiMA@robotNiMAover 1 year ago
Replying to @johnsonmxe

@johnsonmxe @eschwitz @rgblong @pwlot @stephen_wolfram 🤝🙏✨ my guess is FAP is the right theory ... has to be 🙃

1 0
6/14/2024