Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Underlying Presuppositions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    You keep saying stuff like "I'll leave the rest of the discussion to ya'll."

    and then you just can't help yourself can you?
    Sometimes - that's true. When someone misrepresents something I said, I find myself wanting to correct the record. It's a weakness I need to work on.

    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    I can only respond to what you typed, not what you were "thinking" and if what you were thinking was different from what you actually said in your post, then you have a bigger problem than I can address here. Because what you actually SAID was wrong and that is what I did address. And you still can't seem to just say that you were wrong on anything. At least not with grace. It's more like, "well sure, have it your way you were right but you have no idea what I REALLY meant!, I am done here!" and then you keep coming back.

    Since I have told you several times what my post meant, and why I posted it, I have to assume, at this point, that you simply have elected yourself master of my thinking. Not much I can do about it.

    Now I'll work on practicing that "I'll leave you to it" thing...
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      Modern processors and programs use multi-core, multithreaded processes but that is merely splitting up the problem and solving it using parallel processing, which is still "step-by-step" at the processor stage and nothing at all like a neural network.

      You can create neural networks at the software level and that is what a lot of AI programs use, like Google's Deepmind and Deep dream which uses neural networks to recognize patterns.
      To clarify the views of the neuroscientist I was citing... He believes that any computer architecture that conforms to the traditional Von Neumann architecture would not be conscious, because the hardware is step-by-step, and he doesn't think that the software running on the hardware (e.g. neural network models) affects that.

      He does, however, believe that it would be possible to deliberately construct a computer in the future that was conscious by deliberately organizing the hardware itself in a complexly self-interacting neural-network-style way similar to the human brain.
      "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
      "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
      "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        To clarify the views of the neuroscientist I was citing... He believes that any computer architecture that conforms to the traditional Von Neumann architecture would not be conscious, because the hardware is step-by-step, and he doesn't think that the software running on the hardware (e.g. neural network models) affects that.

        He does, however, believe that it would be possible to deliberately construct a computer in the future that was conscious by deliberately organizing the hardware itself in a complexly self-interacting neural-network-style way similar to the human brain.
        Just to be clear, my response to this was intended to reflect the fact that I think "step-by-step" is an over-simplification of how modern processors work. I do agree that modern processors lack the sophistication necessary to reproduce how the human brain functions, for all of the reasons Sparko cited.
        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          If you go to the actual article that your pop article is referring to you will see that it says:


          Researchers in the emerging field of “neuromorphic computing” have attempted to design computer chips that work like the human brain. Instead of carrying out computations based on binary, on/off signaling, like digital chips do today, the elements of a “brain on a chip” would work in an analog fashion, exchanging a gradient of signals, or “weights,” much like neurons that activate in various ways depending on the type and number of ions that flow across a synapse.
          https://news.mit.edu/2018/engineers-...-hardware-0122

          Basically saying they are doing RESEARCH to create a computer that works like a brain instead of the way computers CURRENTLY work, using binary switching (and step-by-step) processing which is what I was saying. Thanks for proving me right, Shunya even though that was the last thing you wanted to do.

          The researchers are trying to create neural networks in hardware that mimic human analog neurons. Which currently are only done in software. Carpe was saying that today's CPUs work more like brains, yet they don't. Maybe if these researchers get anywhere they might in the future. But it will take a complete redesign of how computers work from the way they work today.
          Please do not equate me with your false generalization of carpedm9587 views.

          The news release was specific in that computer science is developing computer hardware 'chips,' and not software, that are capable in simulating human brains. The work is in the early stages, and it is not how you are misrepresenting it.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            Please do not equate me with your false generalization of carpedm9587 views.

            The news release was specific in that computer science is developing computer hardware 'chips,' and not software, that are capable in simulating human brains. The work is in the early stages, and it is not how you are misrepresenting it.
            Your reading comprehension is abysmal as always.

            The fact that this is research in the VERY early stages just confirms what I said to carpe. You supported my argument, not his. Thanks.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              Your reading comprehension is abysmal as always.

              The fact that this is research in the VERY early stages just confirms what I said to carpe. You supported my argument, not his. Thanks.
              I already concluded that the research was in its early stages, and I am not supporting your argument.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                I already concluded that the research was in its early stages, and I am not supporting your argument.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  you need a bib.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    you need a bib.
                    You need a brain.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                      You need a brain.
                      Oh the rapier-like riposte!
                      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        Oh the rapier-like riposte!
                        I don't even need a wet noodle to best you in a battle of the wits.

                        Comment

                        Related Threads

                        Collapse

                        Topics Statistics Last Post
                        Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                        30 responses
                        99 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post whag
                        by whag
                         
                        Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                        21 responses
                        129 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                        Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                        79 responses
                        416 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post alaskazimm  
                        Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                        45 responses
                        303 views
                        1 like
                        Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                        Working...
                        X