Dennis Hackethal’s Blog
My blog about philosophy, coding, and anything else that interests me.
Tweets
An archive of my tweets and retweets through . They may be formatted slightly differently than on Twitter. API access has since gotten prohibitively expensive – I don't know whether or when I'll be able to update this archive.
But in case I will, you can subscribe via RSS – without a Twitter account. Rationale
If the amoeba backs away from threats and predators through mere pain reactions from the nervous system without the associated suffering the survival value is the same as with the associated suffering.
It’s a complex behavior.
As I believe I have explained, no matter how complex, behavior can be inborn and pre-programmed. Complexity is not evidence of consciousness.
How could he taste treats, feel bath anxiety, realize I was tricking him, or care about anything?
He doesn’t do any of that.
By the way, what does it say about your love for your dog that you deliberately trick him?
And why would a nonconscious dog even try to override his love of treats to avoid a hated bath?
I’ve given the answer previously in a different context. Because his genes programmed him to.
Here are your answers:
How could he do it without consciousness, Dennis?
I put this together for you: gist.github.com/dchacke/485358…
I stand corrected: you did eventually answer that here twitter.com/AstralKing7/st…
Plus at the very least it must be possible the same way nature did it.
We don’t know how to do it currently, but it must be possible. Computational universality is the theory, nature already having done it is your evidence.
No […]
Yay you answered a question of mine!
Have we ever demonstrated thst we can build a conscious anything, let alone a gum-toothpick computer?
‘Demonstrated’ by building something? Dunno. But no need to. Follows from computational universality.
Have you still not read my blog post about swimming dogs? It’d be a lot easier to find refutations of your arguments in there than to talk to me. Would save you a lot of time, too.
The creative software running on your brain. It’s a continuous process of discovery and knowledge creation.
See how I answer your questions but you don’t answer mine? Can you answer mine now, please?
…intelligence does see it. I don’t know why you keep trying to coerce me into agreement when I’ve already explained that won’t work.
Also, biological entities can be machines because machines can be made out of tissue. You’re implying a contradiction but there is none.
He’d assume everybody capable of reading the book would know he was actually speaking about biological entities, not machines.
You’re being very aggressive again. You’re implying I’m the only one not seeing what Dawkins meant, whereas everyone else with even basic…
How could there be a quote?
There could be a quote that backs up your claim, of the sort ‘what I say about organisms being genes’ robots should be understood as a metaphor’. Without such a quote, you should entertain the idea that you may be mistaken about what Dawkins meant
Then I asked if a proposed way to continue the conversation was agreeable to you. You didn’t answer, just immediately started pursuing that way.
I don’t know the biology of amoebas, so I’m guessing.
We always are.
First I asked how the amoeba could display complex behaviors without being conscious. You didn’t answer that. You answers another question I didn’t ask, which I have explained. You don’t take what I write literally.
It’s quite a thing to call your questions more pertinent than mine.
Proof isn’t a desirable epistemic goal. For the reasons Deutsch explains, one has to go by good explanations and be critical, not look for confirmation.
This is sophisticated behavior. The nanobot must be conscious, right? twitter.com/weird_sci/stat…
Don’t. Follow what’s fun. You won’t need to push yourself. twitter.com/mysteriouskat/…
Is should deploy cat-deactivation trick as developed by Mouse-Ad:
Also, isn’t it ironic that to claim CA “is running out of water” they show a picture with lots of water and green land? twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
You ignored “it can’t be X because…” (meaning there’s an explanation coming) and “And so on”.
I suggest waiting for the blog post and then reading it, then we can discuss further.
Correct, but these aren’t just explanations of the form “NOT X”. They’re of the form “If it were X, then should see this other thing, and we don’t.” Or “it can’t be X because…”. And so on.
We have good explanations of what consciousness isn’t, and animals fit that to a T. Will explain more in an upcoming blog post titled ‘Animal-Sentience FAQ’, stay tuned.
RT @ToKTeacher:
Thanks to @jannikwiese and @dchackethal we have an English transcript of this German interview between David and Dennis: ht…
I don’t know why ppl keep asking me if I’m certain. It has no bearing on the matter. Are you asking literally or simply inviting me to question my beliefs? twitter.com/minobenjo/stat…
Can they please program those ‘dogs’ to whimper so that PETA gets involved?
If you simulate a conscious mind in a robot then the robot is conscious in reality and does suffer.
I’m not certain but I’m not after certainty.
I don’t see how ‘rescuing’ your Roomba when it gets stuck under a piece of furniture is practicing caring. But do your thing. Different strokes I guess…
“California is running out of water” twitter.com/i/events/14406…
Expropriate water companies at a price the government chooses (see Berlin with apartments) if water isn’t already ‘public’. Then force people to conserve water by shutting their water off. Also try ‘water lockdowns’.
You can’t harm robots. You can damage them, but you can’t cause them any suffering.
One of the dumber things you can do is try to rescue a meat robot at the risk of injuring yourself. twitter.com/DudespostingWs…
RT @ClimateWarrior7:
Algeria should invade Australia and install a democratic regime.
Could be because a 30% rise of a small number is much easier to achieve than a 30% rise of a much higher number.
She’s a mother (see her bio).
More people using their creativity to be conformists. twitter.com/PatsKarvelas/s…
Die Arroganz wirtschaftlicher Planer (also wirtschaftlicher Analphabeten) kennt keine Grenzen. twitter.com/pkbrln/status/…
Your tax dollars at work. Monopoly of violence not working out so well is it? twitter.com/MichaelPSenger…
RT @DrJBhattacharya:
Bulletin from zero-COVID NZ:
Two men arrested for smuggling KFC in violation of NZ level four lockdown. Police photos…
Yes because persuasion is always possible. You don’t need coercion to ‘get’ people to do things. Not to mention that with such a high death rate it would be so much easier to persuade them. twitter.com/paulg/status/1…
@ClimateWarrior7 @Markgsparrow
Canned cats are pretty good too.
The same argument is often used to coerce adults. For example to coerce ‘covidiots’ who don’t ‘get’ how important vaccines are.
But both kids and adults are capable of understanding. They’re universal explainers (David Deutsch).
Having ‘less inequality’ is bad not good. twitter.com/Noahpinion/sta…
Rick, you should become a daycare employee so you can protect children from safetyism by assaulting them. Surely there are many open positions and your colleagues will love you. Try applying for one today!
Neither, I think, because both can lead to coercion. Perhaps a better alternative is: everyone individually should strive to solve what he considers to be the most fun problem.
The chick in the photo may be Covid-free but definitely not tick-free!
Wasn’t there something about checks and balances? twitter.com/nomadcapitalis…
Auf Deutsch funktioniert die Szene auch gut:
‘Hol ihn runter, Toddy.’
‘Ja, Toddy, hol beiden einen runter.’ twitter.com/brbascript/sta…
It’s an Easter egg. Most people don’t know this.
Chatting with @IamtheWay13 about Popper’s criterion and state-sponsored violence:
RT @Neuro_Skeptic:
This product will stimulate touch receptors in your arm, which sends signals to your brain! If you think that’s neat, wa…
RT @TheBabylonBee:
Vaccinated Man Just Wishes There Was Something That Could Protect Him From COVID babylonbee.com/news/vaccinate…
Yes. Each video is a separate interview with its own distinct content.
RT @DavidDeutschOxf:
Mein erstes Interview auf Deutsch (plus ein Bonus-Interview auf Englisch) über mein Buch Der Anfang der Unendlichkeit:…
For those who wish to jump straight to the English one: youtube.com/watch?v=zoem4r…
Nested groupings could occur in the middle as well, and in more than one place:
‘well=made-order=receipt printout’
For deeply nested groupings the number of bars should increase so you can always identify groupings without ambiguity: ‘author≡copy=order-receipt printout’.
Doubtful you’d ever need more than three bars for a hyphenation.
Contrast the last example with ‘artificial-general-intelligence researcher’. There’s no nested grouping in the latter yet the hyphenation is the same. That’s confusing.
Hyphenation rules don’t work well for nested hyphenation groupings.
‘author copy’ needs no hyphen.
‘author-copy order’ needs a hyphen to group ‘author’ and ‘copy’.
‘author-copy-order receipt’ is a mess. It should be ‘author=copy-order receipt’ so you can see the nested groupings
The translation is now available for purchase: anfa.ng/kaufen
@theoliverhinz @m_ashcroft @reasonisfun
The book is now available for purchase: anfa.ng/kaufen
RT @michaelmalice:
A vaccine passport is not proof of being covid-free
It is proof of submission
Dann wird die deutsche Version bestimmt viele der offenen Fragen beantworten!
RT @DavidDeutschOxf:
🇩🇪 🇦🇹 🇨🇭 🇱🇺 🇱🇮
Der Anfang der Unendlichkeit (die deutsche Übersetzung von The Beginning of Infinity) ist endlich erhä…
They could use responsivewebdevelopment.com …
I just pray that our navy is diverse enough to handle this threat
RT @ClimateWarrior7:
The one with the megaphone is the boss protestor you face at the end of the level.
I don’t know much about hypnosis but I’m very skeptical of it and think it’s quite possible the effects are self-induced by people who want it to work.
I maintain that animals are robots. twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/…
It does seem rather like raising a whole generation of Howard Hughes-type hypochondriacs. twitter.com/MarkChangizi/s…
I’ve been thinking this since the beginning of the pandemic, too.
Never gets old. twitter.com/POTUS/status/1… https://t.co/I3KVEqkChE
It’s giving off the ‘we are serious intellectuals talking about oh-so relevant things’ vibe too much.
To be clear, I mean the second instance of the verb “are”, in “are nuanced”.
Typo on clojure.atlassian.net/browse/CLJ-1959:
[…] writing versions that are performant and preserve type and metadata are nuanced
I believe the verb “are” should probably be “is” since it refers to “writing”.
Doesn’t ‘nested’ mean there’s at least one if statement within the if statement?
People may find my video series on functional JS useful: youtube.com/watch?v=KGR7U-…
But she got to feel so pretty! Look how much attention she got!
You’ve ignored my question twice in a row now. Why are you so resistant to answering ‘yes’ or ‘no’?
Presumably the ticket and dress were paid for by tax dollars. Which means she’s saying, in effect: ‘Give me more money so I can buy more dresses like this one and go to more galas where I keep asking for more money from you.’ twitter.com/disclosetv/sta…
For comparison, here are some questions of mine you either ignored entirely or didn’t answer:
twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
If you link to the tweets where you asked those questions and link to my answers and explain why you didn’t consider them satisfactory, and if I’ll do my best to answer them in a way you do find satisfactory, will you in turn answer my one question above?
How many guys vote for her fantasizing about sleeping with her or so they can get in female SJW’s pants? twitter.com/disclosetv/sta…
The photo made me throw up in my mouth a little. twitter.com/michaelshermer…
“they can get away with it” you seem to have authoritarian ideas about parenting you should question twitter.com/paulg/status/1…
My question was, rephrased: how could an amoeba perform those behaviors unconsciously?
I mean the ‘how’ part literally as in: ‘can you think of specific ways?’
I did answer your questions. I take great care not to ignore your questions.
But you didn’t answer mine, and it’s not a distraction. You answered a different question: could the behaviors of an amoeba as I described them be unconscious? But that wasn’t my question.
Dawkins didn’t comment on the complexity of nervous systems in particular either. And amoebas don’t have a nervous system: study.com/academy/answer…
In any case, can you answer my question: twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
Please take the question literally, not rhetorically.