[ExI] Definition of Consciousness (Was Re: My guesses about GPTs consciousness)
brent.allsop at gmail.com
Thu Apr 20 13:58:12 UTC 2023
On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 5:15 AM efc--- via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Apr 2023, Brent Allsop via extropy-chat wrote:
> > Yes. all those are good use cases. We are currently targeting local
> city governments. They pay lots of survey companies like Y2K
> > analytics or flashvote, in an attempt to find out what residents want or
> believe. They are part of the polarization problem, and we
> > believe we can disrupt that industry.
> Nice! Best of luck! =) I'm all for new innovations in trying to achieve
> better and happier societies! I read about Taiwans system, maybe you
> heard about it? If not, maybe something you can read up on and be
> inspired by.
I pride myself in keeping up to date on anything even close to what we are
attempting on Canonizer. There are a bunch of patents and previous
attempts to formalize "truth" and such, but nothing has been successful.
When Wikipedia came out, I was so excited. I was thinking, now someone
just needs to add a camp system to resolve the edit war problem. After
waiting for years, nobody ever did, so I figured I needed to do it myself.
I just wanted a system that would allow us to do what we're doing with
of consciousness topic
(with no censoring, but allowing people to create a competing camp pointing
out how evil the competing camp is).
I'd love it if someone else would do this, so I wouldn't have to give my
life, and SO much money trying to create it myself. I just want to use a
great consensus building and tracking tool.
I haven't heard about Taiwan. If you could provide a reference, I'd love
to look into it more.
> > I (or anyone) could create a camp called "Qualia are Red Herrings".
> Create a new competing sibling camp to "Representational Quali
> > Theory" Then add this as a statement:
> > 'qualia and redness in fact are "red herrings" that
> will get us nowhere, and should best be left alone.'
> > Then all you'd need to do is support it, like signing a petition.
> Like the name... "The red herring" camp. ;) Well, if that is all that is
> needed,sure, I'd sign it. I would hope thought that people would swoop
> in and either improve or demolish the definition. =)
YES! That is the whole idea of bottom up wiki systems. You just throw an
improvement up there, off the top of your head, and expect the rest of the
world to take it from there. Easy Shmeezy, and infinitely more efficient
and able to progress compared to all the polarizing, and infinitely
repetitive, with no ratchitalbe progress, bleating and tweeting
communication we are doing in forums like this.
We have a new "timeline" feature in development which will animate the "as
of" history as things progress. Making it kind of like a sporty horse
race, where you can see the best (most consensus, at least) camps progress
in the amount of consensus they have.
Check out the prototype version of canonizer with the timeline, here
and click on the "event line".
You can see the progress over time. Property Dualism, at one point in time
was the consensus, then James Carol turned on that camp, and led a revolt
to form the Monism camp. I, and many others, eventually followed, and now
it is the leading consensus at that level.
> > It looks like Ben currently shares your views. I'd hope he'd support it
> also. It'd be interesting to see how much consensus this
> > view could achieve, compared to other camps.
> Sure, create it and let me know and I will cast my
OK, here it is, the Red Herring camp
You'll need to create an identity on Canonizer. It is against the terms of
service <https://canonizer.com/terms-and-services>, to create more than one
identity on the system, as that is cheating (ie. no sock puppets).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat