A sovereign social network
powered by Bitcoin

the name is wrong it's not artificial intelligence intelligence would involve Consciousness from the girdle argument you see this is the plot which I think has got lost now a computer is a very specific kind of mathematical structure it means computational mathematics it's a very limited part of mathematics I don't think they will ever become conscious by virtue of being computers in our current sense of the word but I think Consciousness it's not computational that's still true with AI you talk to an AI thing it doesn't know what it's toing computers have got so powerful that they've lost the thread of what they're doing I think the point has got lost I think touring wasn't too far off I I think people have lost the plot few times you talk about the Nobel Prize um we' back from Stockholm uh this year we've been there interviewing Nobel Prize winner don't you think that this year Nobel Prize is the tribute to the Nobel comedy for artificial intelligence Nobel Prize Nobel Prize and physx father for fathers of of AI Nobel price in hemistry uh sir Demis hassabis co-founder of deep mind that's AI system David Baker computer vision digitalization of proteins don't you think there the tribute for AI I see well you have to be careful first of all the name is wrong it's not artificial intelligence it's not intelligence intelligence would involve Consciousness and I've always been a strong promoter of the idea that these devices is are not conscious and they will not be be conscious unless they bring in some other ideas the comput they're not they're all computable Notions but intelligence it's not Consciousness it depends on Consciousness you see well it depends on how you use the word I think when people use the word intelligence they mean something which is conscious I mean that you see I developed my own ideas after going to a course course you see when I was a graduate student in Cambridge I went to three courses which were nothing to do what I was supposed to be doing one was by Bondi on general relativity one was be dra on quantum mechanics the seem wish very distinguished Paul D and the third subject was on mathematical logic and I learned about touring machines and comput the notion of computability and I know knew what computability meant and I learned about girdle's theorem and girdle's Theorem I found stunning because it told you that there are things that the understanding transcends the use let me put that more clearly what girdle does it's very clever what he does is to produce a statement now suppose you you you're trying to develop your mathematical methods of proof what do you mean by proving a theorem in mathematics how do you know it's really true will you prove it what does proof mean well you see does it mean okay you've got a set of rules and if you follow these rules that makes it a proof now how do you know these rules only give you truths well you've looked at them carefully and you say oh maybe AI create its own rules ah no no you see have to be careful about this this is the point but I I learned from from Ste this is a man called Steen who is a logician and I learned from him this important thing about girdle's theorem now girdle's theorem is extremely clever you make a statement which asserts that it's it cannot be proved by these rules it's just you the clever thing is to make it do it it says you give your rules which you regard as the rules of proof proof and you could put them on a computer so that mean they're computational rules now I knew that there were things that you cannot put on a computer I learned from this course that there are non-computable things there are things in mathematics which are not computable now what does computable mean it means that you can make a computer well you have to Define what a computer is and touring had one definition of a computer there with several other church and Curry other people had their definitions of comput they all turned out to be equivalent so there is one universal notion of computability which is what you mean by what can be done by a computer maybe this is only language problem that the language development has not kept out development of AI maybe we have just only language problem that we cannot you know describe what we create it no I don't agree with that it's not a language problem you see you make your new language sure you can do that you make your new language and that's what you can do see let me describe the girdle theorem how it works you see see the girdle theorem says you construct a statement which says you you see what it means the way you've constructed the sentence you can see what it means what it means is I am not provable by those rules and it does that it really says that then you see okay well is it perhaps it is provable by the rules if it is provable by the rules then it must be true well I've said it the wrong way around doesn't matter the other way suppose it's false then that means it's provable by the rules and if it's provable by the rules you've understood the rules you said you looked at them all and say yes that's okay that's okay that sure if you follow those rules it is true so that means you believe that the rules only give you truths so therefore it is true that it's not provable by the rules if it's false you see then it is provable by the and therefore it's true so it has to be true and not provable by the rules I found that amazing but still I don't understand why AI cannot create its own rules because it doesn't know that they're true you see that's the whole point about the girdle theorem the whole point as far as I'm concerned about the go theorem is how do you transcend the rules and that's what you do by understanding them you understand them why they're true it's not that you use the rules but you understand why use of the rules only gives you truths and that's how you can prove things which go beyond the rules by knowing why they're true now knowing why they're true well what does it mean what it means means you understand them what does understand mean you've got to be conscious of them you see you the wording is clear it means that you have to know what you're doing you have to know why they're true not that they're true you can be told that they're true you can have you can learn at school that they're true that's not the point you have to know why they're true why they're true needs understanding them and understanding them requires to being conscious of them now that's require that you see the point I was making is that Consciousness enables you to transcend the rules you see why they're true and that goes you beyond it you see what the girdle theorum does it tells you how to use your understanding of why the rules are true to transcend the rules you think that AI is the simple tool or simple thing that we can use in the single case no I don't say single it's obviously infinite no clearly that's not the point the point is it doesn't know what it's doing that's still true with AI you talk to an AI thing it doesn't know what it's doing it has it speaks from experiences if you like you see people have confused the story the story is they've lost it in the power of computing the thing is that computers have got so powerful that they've lost lost the thread of what they're doing they're Computing do you regret it that it's so power I well it's it's losing the point you see I think the point has got lost I think touring wasn't too far off you see he he was a little bit confused person in way because he it was not clear what he believed but he did call this thing the touring test how do you de decide whether an entity is conscious or not will you have a conversation with it you talk to it maybe AI is a new sphere of human existence no it's missing something I think yeah that's the trouble you see it's all I mean obviously it has a role to play I'm not going to say that clearly it has a role to play it has a role but you must mustn't be confused the fact that it has a role to play it's to do with the power of computation sure you computers have got so powerful now that they can do things Way Beyond what humans do in comp Computing sure and you can take a mass of data and you can analyze that data and you can see what the data says and does this thing in in accordance with previous things in the data or is it not and a that's all it does it doesn't understand what it's doing and and understanding is different from Computing because inside a black box there is just only statistic that's this simple statistic machine well if it's a machine it's not conscious no I I think people have lost the plot yes no that's true you see I wrote my book The Emperor's New mind but what does it mean that people lost the plot yeah I think they've lost the plot because the whole point of my train of thought was we've got to find something in physics you see I believe I'm a physicalist and that I believe whatever is going on in our heads whatever creates Consciousness is part of the physical world I don't believe it magic comes in from who knows what black boxs it's also part of the physical rule but what you mean by Black Box we know what's at the input we know what's at the output but we have no idea what's deep inside that's the Black Box yes but that's doesn't help because you don't know what's inside what kind of physics is inside that box maybe new physics yes but new physics of a particular kind what I'm claiming from the girdle argument you see this is the plot which I think has got lost what I claim is saying that the physics that in is involved in conscious thinking has to be non-computable physics now the physics we know there's a little bit of a glitch here because it's not completely clear but as far as we can see the physics we know is computable you see uh what about general relativity where we have wonderful machines which compete what black holes do when they spiral around each other and produce gravitational wave signals and you could say yeah yeah yeah that is a black hole Collision because this has this very clear feature yeah you can do all that that is fine but that's not what I'm talking about what I'm talking about is the physics has to be a physics which is in principle non-computable so AI can blast his go ahead as much as it likes it's not going to be able to get this you talk about a black box but you don't know what's in that box is it a computer is it a computer of the kind we understand now is it something which involves a physics which involves a non-computable process not so far I'm not saying that won't happen I dread it because I don't want it to happen I can't help it because I suspect it will happen someday but it's not AI as we now know it AI we as we now know it is computer-driven and that means it's not going superhumans AI will never exist what you trouble is that AI is a bad term it means artificial intelligence now intelligence in my view is conscious that's what intelligence is about okay so how I can call it artificial um cleverness how about that AC you can see the difference to some extent when you do mathematical you have mathematics students some of them understand what they're doing some are just clever they can they can repeat what they've learned they know how to do it very cleverly they can calculate very well but they don't necessarily understand what they're doing the the physics we don't know involves non-comp computability so that's my claim so I made this claim in the emperor's new mind and I made it more a little bit more forcefully in Shadows of the mind I mean that maybe it's not the consciousness maybe it's something absolutely new maybe it's not a wordness but that's there may be completely unknowns which we have no concept of at the moment that could be true I'm talking about things you see if you're talking about AI that means unfortunately it's a bad term because it says artificial intelligence which to me what people use that term they mean things that can be done by by computers that's what they mean they have computers and their computers are very powerful and then what they mean by AI is using computers it may not be using the Straight logical way usually as I haven't studied these things so I'm probably out of date but but as far as I can see what it is is you look at masses of data and then you s look for patterns or you you try to analyze it in that kind of way but it's all computational you're using computers but it's very nature it's computational the word means computational means by a computer now a computer is a very specific kind of mathematical structure it means computational mathematics if you study the mathematics as an abstract subject you rapidly learn that there are things Way Way Beyond computability it's a very limited part of mathematics some of the mathematics is involved is not computable you can't get at it by an algorithm now you see people often think well AI doesn't use algorithms because it's using sort of random methods or something I don't know I haven't studied in detail what AI really Asser what is called AI really involves when you put it on a computer but it is being done by my computer so it's still something computational no question about that I'm claiming that you want something non-computational now you see people tend not to believe this because they just think of computers and they don't know there are non-computable things if you study the mathematics mathematical logic you see that there are non-computable structures there are could the logic the physics of the world could easily be non-computable and my view is that yes it is non-computable and that somehow Nature has been clever enough to produce beings which can tap into the non-computable aspect of the physics and they managed to do this using natural selection I have no idea how far down the animal kingdom and goes humans are certainly conscious I believe anybody who owns a dog is absolutely convinced that dogs are conscious I believe it cats probably elephants certainly way down way way down probably octopus is I'm sure I don't know is a bacteria I'm conscious I no idea is a is a a frog conscious probably yes is a uh an amoeba conscious I have no idea I'm just speculating I've no real reason for leaving these things but I think Consciousness is something different it's not computational and the thing is that it's just people are so hypnotized I don't should use a rude word like that really by the fact that computers have got so powerful that yeah there's the answer the computers are so powerful we found the answer it's just computers I'm saying no it's not the answer is something much more deeper than that it's not it's not more complicated than that it's deeper than that it involves a kind of physics which we don't probably know yet it's deeper because it's based on the quantum world it's is beyond the quantum role you see the quantum World Is Still computable what's not computable in far as we know what we don't there's a basic unknown in Quantum world the quantum theory is fundamentally incomplete I call it even wrong in a certain sense because it believes that Quant superpositions persists at all levels maybe when we ever create the universal quantum computer we can create a synthetic Consciousness maybe yeah no I have nothing nothing against the department for that I don't like it now I have nothing um theoretically against that do you agree with thate Nobel Prize committee uh when you look at the Noble in physics for father sopi I I haven't looked at the details of it what I don't know what they say for fundamental uh work under synthetic neutral networks for Jeffrey Hinton is it physic I'd be rather doubtful whether it's really physics I'm not sure you see Nobel prizes you might question some of their decisions sometimes I would question a few of them maybe I would question this one I'm not sure you I haven't I haven't looked at it carefully it depends exactly what they say you see it's a technological advance I would say it's probably making use of I is it a theoretical advance or is it's I don't think so is it but I mean the Nobel committee normally doesn't give the prize for purely theoretical I mean it doesn't it does you have to have a a physical application of it yes now here I'm not quite sure

Ok sorry but this is what the bsv treechat llm is designed to solve.
Anyone implying as trump has just done that ai is in fact intellegent . Not talking you sunnie im talking grok chat gpt claude.
Absolutely and definitavely and utterly incorrect in traditional science.
He changed wrong word.
Intellegence by traditional schollarly definition is a human quality , animals living beings are intelligent .

I stand by this with 99 % confidence as i am human and can make errors.
So next question is @Sunnie
" are native or hosted or accessable or accessable from bsv blockchainbase layer and treechat in its true entirety . Not outside of your designated treechat grouping that you decide for your reasons.
Llms ai and this group of technology accept for man and woman contributions to final answer not if a human is quoted by purely computer system.
The human intervention addition even comment suplementing the machine delivered entry is only intelegent by definition component of product answer , response,
The rest is a mechanical reality expressing parts of human intelligence.

Very hard question to word but this is my best right now attempt at explaing why super intelligence is a incorrect description of the llms ais whatever.
Only the human contribution to the final response of the ai or llm it truely intelligent by defonition.

So treechat and bsv base layer llms ais whatever are not intelligent. Is the statement that im putting to you, true or false and why.
Posibly short supplementary explanation by you to assist in pursuing our leading quest for truth.