this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2026
220 points (93.0% liked)

Technology

85670 readers
4102 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LwL@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Statement: "There is no indication that the human brain cannot be modeled as a turing machine"

To disprove this, evidence to the contrary is required. It's not at all the same as saying "The human brain can be modeled as a turing machine". In that case they would need to prove that.

We simply do not know. Humans cling to their idea of somehow being "special" very hard with thought experiments like chinese room, and at all points neglect that there is no evidence that a human brain is actually different.

Generally I'd argue that the continuous nature of animal brains makes them quite fundamentally different from the very much discrete states of anything we program, but that still doesn't mean it'd be impossible to simulate.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

Except we have quala, consciousness. That's a well recognised fact. How do you model something we cannot explain?

So yeah there are "indications" we cannot do it. Maybe we can and emerging properties is the way to go, but it might also not be that.

Do you believe we can?

Edit: the chinese room is a farce IMO, and won't push anything either way.

[–] zqps@sh.itjust.works 4 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Many abilities and properties we thought to be exclusive to human consciousness were later proven in animals. Such as the capacity for empathy, thinking ahead, and recognizing yourself in a mirror.

Does that mean animals are partially conscious? Or can we accept that the definition is fuzzy at best, making this a moving target?

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

That makes it probable I guess, but it absolutely does not prove it. We cannot prove humans are conscious (except ourselves).

[–] zqps@sh.itjust.works 1 points 49 minutes ago

I was clearly asking from the position of recognising consciousness in other humans. Or is that not your position?

Solipsism is pointless and boring. By that logic, nothing at all can be proven or disproven.