<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><span style="background-color:transparent">On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 12:35 PM Jason Resch <<a href="mailto:jasonresch@gmail.com">jasonresch@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><br></div></div><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 3:15 PM Keith Henson via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div style="font-size:small">I completely agree with John on these points.</div><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div style="font-size:small">I also happen to think this is not a useful topic.<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Are you signed up to Alco<span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">></span></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Since 1984.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>When you sign up, do they ask if you are comfortable with a digital emulation rather than a resuscitation of your original biological substrate?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">I don't think so, but it has been a very long time.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div> I think these questions are pertinent for exactly that reason.</div><div><br></div><div>Do substrates matter? At what level of precision is required (molecular, neuronal, circuit, or some higher level, etc.)? Will our AI and robot companions be conscious, and if so what is the threshold? This is the aim of the paper. I think these questions are especially pertinent today.</div><div><br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Did you ever read "The Clinic Seed"? In that story from 20 years ago, I had people uploaded into a simulated environment.</span> <span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">It never occured to me that a good simulation would be subjectively different from ordinary physical existence. In the story people moved back and forth between uploaded and physical state.</span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Now that you mention it, my thoughts on the topic, even 20 years ago, are strange indeed. I guess that is the effect of being exposed to Eric Drexler's nanotech ideas from 1979.</span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><a href="https://terasemjournals.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/henson-chapters-1-2-3-with-bio-no-illustrations.pdf">https://terasemjournals.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/henson-chapters-1-2-3-with-bio-no-illustrations.pdf</a><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">The Clinic Seed Story starts 6 pages into this document.</span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">A short chunk on topic is here.</div></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"> This time the nanomachines didn't infiltrate her brain just to shut it down, though they did that
and reversed the mild damage from shock and low blood flow. The nanomachines mapped out
all her neural circuits and cell connections. Shortly before her parents entered the clinic the
next day they tentatively restored consciousness, partly in her brain--which was far below the
temperature needed to run on its own--and partly in the haze of nanomachines that were also
simulating input in place of her eyes and ears.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">snip</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">
Toward the end of her stay in the clinic, Zaba had an understanding of what the swarms of
repair devices were doing to restore her spinal cord, patiently teasing out where the nerves
should be reconnected across the gap, replacing cell walls and myelin in the destroyed section,
rebuilding the shattered bone, muscle and connective tissue and fishing out the bullet fragments
down to single atoms of lead. She even had some understanding of how her mind was being
supported in the nano computers that were acting in place of her very cold brain. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">It's only 7000 words, ten minutes to read. <br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Keith</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div></div><div>Jason</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div style="font-size:small"></div><br></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 11:50 AM John Clark via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;background-color:transparent">On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 9:51 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:</span></div></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><span><div dir="auto" style="color:inherit"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><font size="4" face="tahoma, sans-serif"><b><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">>> </span>I think it would be better to just say consciousness is the way data feels when it is being processed intelligently.</b></font></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="color:inherit;margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br><font size="4" face="georgia, serif"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>I think this would require a lot more specification. Intelligence is always indexed to some goal, which the process itself need not be aware of.</i></font></blockquote><div style="color:inherit"><br></div><div style="color:inherit"><font size="4" face="tahoma, sans-serif"><b>Darwinian <span class="gmail_default">E</span>volution, that is to say random mutation <span class="gmail_default">and </span>natural selection,<span class="gmail_default"> produced us </span>and if it can be said to have a<span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> </span><span class="gmail_default">"</span>goal<span class="gmail_default">" (and that may not be the right word to use) it would be to find a way to get as many genes of an individual as possible into the next generation, although of course the individual need not be aware of that fact or even that there was such a thing as a "gene". One thing is certain, there must be a link between intelligent behavior and consciousness because natural selection can detect intelligent behavior but it can't directly detect consciousness any better than we can except in ourselves, and natural selection can't select for something that it can't see.</span></b></font></div><div style="color:inherit"><font size="4"><b><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></span></b></font></div><div style="color:inherit"><font size="4"><b><span class="gmail_default"><font face="tahoma, sans-serif">I think consciousness must be an inevitable byproduct of intelligence. We all assume that as an axiom in everyday life, that's why we think our fellow human beings are conscious most of the time, but not when they're sleeping or under anesthesia or dead, because when they are under those conditions they are no longer behaving intelligently. </font><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"> </font></span></b></font></div><div style="color:inherit"> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="color:inherit;margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><font size="4" face="georgia, serif"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>Also there is arguably no intelligence when there is no behavior</i></font></blockquote><div style="color:inherit"><br></div><font size="4" face="tahoma, sans-serif"><b>If there is no behavior there's no way to tell if something is intelligent or not. A rock might be smarter than Einstein but it's so shy it keeps a low profile and never speaks up. I doubt that's true but I can't prove it's false. The Turing Test is not an infallible test for intelligence<span class="gmail_default">,</span> passing it means it's intelligent but failing it doesn't necessarily mean <span class="gmail_default">it's </span>unintelligent. And it's an even more faulty test for consciousness, but it's all we've got<span class="gmail_default"> and all we'll ever have</span>, so we've just got to make the best of it.</b></font></span></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><font size="4" face="tahoma, sans-serif"><b><br></b></font></div><div class="gmail_attr"><font size="4" face="tahoma, sans-serif"><span class="gmail_default"><b>John K Clark</b></span></font></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>