<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
On 23/02/2023 23:50, bill w wrote:<br>
<br>
> another question: why do we, or they, or somebody, think that
an AI has to be conscious to solve the problems we have? Our
unconscious mind solves most of our problems now, doesn't it? I
think it does. bill w<br>
<br>
<br>
That's a good question.<br>
<br>
(If our unconscious solves most of our problems now, it's not doing
a very good job, judging by the state of the world!)<br>
<br>
Short answer: We don't yet know if consciousness is necessary for
solving certain problems. Or even any problems.<br>
<br>
Longer answer: I suspect it is necessary for some things, but have
no proof, other than the circumstantial evidence of evolution.<br>
<br>
Consciousness evolved, and we know that evolution rapidly eliminates
features that don't contribute to reproductive fitness, especially
if they have a cost. Consciousness almost certainly has quite a big
cost. This suggests that it's necessary for solving at least some of
the problems that we've met over the last 300 000 years (or at least
for <i>something</i> that's useful), or we wouldn't have developed
it in the first place. Or if it happened by accident, and wasn't
good for survival, we'd have lost it. So we can conclude at the very
least that consciousness has been good for our survival, even if we
don't know how.<br>
<br>
It strikes me as noteworthy that the kinds of things that our
computers can do well, we do poorly (playing chess, mathematics,
statistical reasoning, etc.), and some things that we have evolved
to do well, our computers do poorly, or can't do at all (hunting and
gathering, making canoes, avoiding hungry lions, making sharp
sticks, etc.). Perhaps consciousness is the (or a) missing
ingredient for being able to do those things. Yes, arms and legs are
an obvious advantage, but many other animals with arms and legs
never developed like we did.<br>
As the former things tend to be abstract mental things, and the
latter tend to be highly-co-ordinated, complex physical things,
maybe consciousness has a lot to do with embodiment, and
manipulating the external world in complex ways successfully. Maybe
Big Dog is closer to consciousness than ChatGPT (or, more likely,
needs it more).<br>
<br>
If Big Dog (or whatever the latest iteration of it is called) had
ChatGPT in its head, as well as all the other stuff it already has,
would it be able to build a canoe and use it to escape from a forest
fire, decide where it was safe to stop, and built a hut? That would
be an interesting experiment.<br>
<br>
Ben<br>
</body>
</html>