Evolution proves that algorithms can solve any problem: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
===The century of the self=== | ===The century of the self=== | ||
Hofstadter is at his best when when he addresses the reflexivity of human consciousness — the magic that emerges courtesy of the strange loop | Hofstadter is at his best when when he addresses the reflexivity of human consciousness — the magic that emerges courtesy of the strange loop whereby the human perceives ''itself'' inside the universe it constructs, and where that working narrative must allow for, to explain, ones own causal impact on the universe. This sets off an infinite loop which creates magical artifacts by itself. | ||
In Roland Ennos’ recent book {{be|The Wood Age}} he gives a better example: | In Roland Ennos’ recent book {{be|The Wood Age}} he gives a better example: | ||
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
The only way you can explain the movement of those branches is by reference to your own presence. It is hard to see a dematerialized computer operating in a virtual space, having to solve that same problem, other than at the quantum level (it need hardly be said that quantum elements are not the same as machine consciousness - that would be a reductionism too far. | The only way you can explain the movement of those branches is by reference to your own presence. It is hard to see a dematerialized computer operating in a virtual space, having to solve that same problem, other than at the quantum level (it need hardly be said that quantum elements are not the same as machine consciousness - that would be a reductionism too far. | ||
Machines are more like Arthur C. Clarke’s sentinels, watching dissociatively. They purport describe the world as it is without affecting it: they monitor, measure, observe, process and give back but not to themselves, and not for themselves. to do that would be to colour their observations about human interaction, which would be to defeat their commercial purpose. | |||
{{draft}} | {{draft}} |