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
I don't think I've heard or seen that. It's also really hard to know whether it changes the meaning the author intended, so it's safer to just quote literally.
RT @HumanProgress:
"The number of reported [extreme weather] events are increasing, but that is mainly due to better reporting, lower thres…
Always remember that your villa was built on ant land.
If you don’t want it to be a misquote it does.
@royalsociety @acmedsci @WHO @ISC
Sounds like the road to climate lockdowns...
Popper writes somewhere in his LScD (paraphrasing from poor memory) that although our theories are always tentative, our actions need not be.
Allowing the possibility that one could be wrong – which one should always do – doesn’t mean one shouldn’t take ideas seriously, or act on them with hesitation.
[...] I'll need to look deeper into your provided arguments for this.
Why don't you do that before asking me to provide them again? Fair warning that if you keep ignoring things I've already written in the FAQ I may not be interested in discussing much more.
...And how information is processed is a matter of software.
Can you please provide an outline of the argument?
You could build a computer out of nervous systems, metal and silicon, or chewing gum and vacuum tubes. It follows that the physical substrate doesn't matter all that much as long as it can process information...
It wouldn't be epistemically equivalent because "conciousness requires neuron signalling" has been refuted, whereas my position has not.
I'm not an expert on Rand's views but it seems she made a mistake which, borrowing from Karl Popper, could be called 'the myth of the legal framework': blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/objectiv…
I think a good and relevant criticism of objectivism (which, incidentally, connects with Popper's epistemology) is mine, on how objectivist legal philosophy makes a mistake which Popper called 'the myth of the framework': blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/objectiv…
More generally speaking, much of the criticism of Rand which I have read is bad. One mistake people make is they criticize things she already addressed or never said, or they employ manipulative discussion tactics (like the argument from intimidation) which she has long debunked.
For clarity, I provided two links, one of which Twitter turned into a preview. It's not just one link that's being displayed and previewed.
The first quote is from aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/selfis…
The second is from courses.aynrand.org/works/the-obje… (and the word 'objective' should be italicized/surrounded by asterisks)
Some criticisms:
twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
E.g.:
The structure appropriate to a capitalist economy is a republic [...] the American kind [...] established by the American constitution.
You also reference her building on Aristotelian tradition, which is thousands of years old.
Do you have any references to her ignoring tradition or institutions?
She seems to have been a great advocate of American capitalist tradition and American institutions. She goes into some of that here: youtube.com/watch?v=5mQmP-…
Also:
[...] one need not launch into unprovoked moral denunciations or debates [...]
and
[...] a mere “I don’t agree with you” [can be] sufficient [...]
Unwanted/unsolicited criticism sabotages growth.
Rand didn't advocate for unsolicited criticism. From courses.aynrand.org/works/how-does…:
The policy of always pronouncing moral judgment does not mean [...] that one must give unsolicited moral appraisals [...].
@SmashAGrape @ReachChristofer @CosmicSkeptic
A fake apology followed up by another insult. I don’t see how discussing with you could benefit me. Let’s end it here.
@SmashAGrape @ReachChristofer @CosmicSkeptic
I have no idea what you’re talking about.
@SmashAGrape @ReachChristofer @CosmicSkeptic
There’s no need to put ‘reasoning’ in scare quotes. You’re being aggressive in a dishonest, sneaky way.
@SmashAGrape @ReachChristofer @CosmicSkeptic
Forcing a line at humans makes controversy that sells books but misses reality.
LOL
@SmashAGrape @ReachChristofer @CosmicSkeptic
Did you listen to the link I provided?
My first thought is that 'self-identity' sounds like a tautology; beyond that I can't really say without more info. Do you have a reference to something Lulie said or a quote?
Having just finished BioShock 1 – late to the party, I know – its portrayal/critique of objectivism isn't accurate: objectivismindepth.com/2016/11/23/wha…
@SmashAGrape @ReachChristofer @CosmicSkeptic
You asked "[w]here, in evolution, does consciousness begin to emerge[?]"
I pinpoint a specific genetic mutation in our evolutionary history here: doexplain.org/episodes/11-a-…
@SmashAGrape @ReachChristofer @CosmicSkeptic
[...] it is unclear (scientifically speaking) whether Bunny has been trained to use specific buttons on her AAC device [...]
She has. She's a meat robot. It's amazing ppl keep falling for the 'omg she's pressing buttons and my interpretations of them make sense to me!' thing.
It's not an assumption, it follows from computational universality.
Shouldn't the fact of your theory being unfounded be enough?
No, again, Popperian epistemology.
[...] my concern is mostly with the confidence that you have in your theory [...]
Again I don't see why it matters.
RT @HumanProgress:
Using just salt, sugar, and water, David Nalin found a way to save millions of lives at almost zero cost. #HeroesOfProgr…
Wirklich gute Nachrichten.
Ich bin zwar kein Geschichtsexperte, aber nach allem, was Tschechien durchgemacht hat, hätte man es früher erwarten dürfen. (Allerdings gilt das genauso für Deutschland…)
[...] Creativity -> Genuine Discovery -> Consciousness
I didn't say that. I said
[C]onsciousness involves genuine discovery [...].
and what you wrote isn't a representation of that.
I think it's more like:
Creativity -> Consciousness
Creativity -> Discoveries
My critisism of your position is that you are relying on premises that are unfounded.
That's totally fine, guesses don't need foundations. Plus there's enough there in the article to refute, also there are specific ways presented on how to change my mind.
'But without government, who'd freeze everyone's savings?' twitter.com/TheJuggernaut8…
That's cool you're learning Unity, too. That playlist looks good – I also recommend the Brackeys channel. I did this tutorial recently: youtube.com/watch?v=j48LtU…
And xe should have a homosexual relationship with the Bond person.
RT @SJobs_Stories:
"The most advanced phones are called smartphones - so they say. And they typically combine a phone plus some e-mail capa…
New blog post: ‘Breaking Out of Frames in Unity’
Instead of a shift I think it connects creativity to consciousness because an entity that isn't creative cannot make genuine discoveries.
I'm more interested in refutations of my position than trying to convince you it's true.
“The hair on my legs turns blonde when I tan,” the whistleblower added.
RT @Jaber_Hassoun:
It was my great pleasure and honor to have this conversation with @DavidDeutschOxf
We discussed:
The Fun Criterion
Obj…
- Doesn’t know the singular of ‘stimuli’
- Reduces people to brains & inputs/outputs
- Is maskless herself twitter.com/libsoftiktok/s…
Disgusting, on several levels:
⚡️ “California students will be required to take ethnic studies to graduate high school” by @CalMatters twitter.com/i/events/14465…
I really don't see why an entity performing a preprogrammed algorithm can't be concious (a preprogrammed concious experience).
One reason is that consciousness involves genuine discovery, and preprogramming implies that all the discovering has already happened.
Seeing as we have conflicting views, why do you place the burden on me to refute yours rather than on yourself to refute mine?
RT @PessimistsArc:
Amazing find from 1938 h/t @johnmichaelw @WSTSpod https://t.co/O0ysUt8G9w
RT @CommunistTerror:
From Poland, Hungary, Lithuania, Estonia and more: the extent of the deportations to remote parts of the Soviet Union…
RT @DavidDeutschOxf:
Der Anfang der Unendlichkeit ist jetzt auch bei zusätzlichen Online-Händlern erhältlich, darunter Thalia, Hugendubel u…
RT @libsoftiktok:
Wait what?! #AustraliaHasFallen twitter.com/The_AlphaX2/st…
"You'll have to squint to see the mouse once the script starts [...]." Sounds about right.
maybe austria is sorta the canada of germany...
That quote in your embedded tweet isn't from the two sections I referenced, so why would we be going in circles? Seems to me you're ignoring the refutations and not counter-refuting them.
@ReachChristofer @CosmicSkeptic
I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss this if Alex is down.
Refutation of complexity leading to consciousness: blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/animal-s…
Refutation of brain and nervous system being necessary: blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/animal-s…
If you have additional questions/comments I suggest you read the whole article first, odds are I've already addressed them.
@Donqua2 @Numb3rPi @DavidDeutschOxf
Es gibt auch ein Diskussionsforum, wo man sich ueber das Buch austauschen kann: groups.google.com/g/der-anfang-d…
David Deutsch's The Beginning of Infinity has a great chapter detailing why this pretense is not only false but mathematically impossible:
New blog post: ‘Pathfinding in Unity’
We become conscious of the disappointed expectation of there being another step.
The dog ‘learns’ that, yes, but not creatively, just by updating parameters according to inborn mechanisms.
New blog post: ‘Controlling a Character’s Movements in Unity’
New blog post: 'Being a Beginner Again'
That’s Popper’s example, IIRC. In any case, humans don’t learn how to deal with an unexpected stair through reinforcement.
That's not error correction, it's negative reinforcement.
RT @TheBabylonBee:
Australian Hospitals Over Capacity With People Beaten By Police For Not Wearing Masks babylonbee.com/news/australia…
Steve Jobs understanding the importance of criticism and error correction: twitter.com/SJobs_Stories/…
I understand that. But are you aware that people who don’t seek hard-to-vary explanations are still people?
The creativity component has to [...] select the most hard-to-vary [trial model] that it produced.
You're trying to build a rational AGI, a kind of 'explanation machine', which isn't what the project of AGI is about.
In your model is there some point [of complexity] where you’d agree that it makes sense to say it’s “aware”[?]
No, I think it has nothing to do with complexity: blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/animal-s…
It sounds like you’re saying it makes no sense to say a function is aware of what values was given to it upon execution?
yes
This case demonstrates the possible reach of the term “awareness”.
It demonstrates a dilution of 'awareness' to meaninglessness.
They’re just calling things ‘public health threats’ now so they can exercise more power over them. twitter.com/disclosetv/sta…
In all seriousness, a while back a fellow libertarian and I put together an FAQ for when you get asked for the 100th time who’d build the roads… You can just link to the corresponding heading, it’s already written for you. Hope somebody finds this useful
‘Who’d build the roads’ also really got me thinking and I’m afraid I don’t have answer so I’m not a libertarian anymore either. twitter.com/lockoutdays/st…
This is not an uncommon way to explain what a function does.
I have been a programmer for some ten years and I've never heard that. Also I'm not sure how it's supposed to help understand consciousness?