And why are you still writing here in this thread?
Do you know Phyllo? He has also no interest in this thread, although he is writing more and more in this thread.
Why don’t you both search for another thread?
Do you know what “pharisee” means?
I am positive on IQ testing. It is partly right that there are some flaws in the method, but the statement that intelligence is not measurable at all is wrong. The correct measurement of intelligence depends very much on the statistics and on the long-term measurement.
B.t.w.: Your “sources” are full of egalitarian(istic) rhetoric.
You and Phyllo are against the IQ because you are following the communistic mainstream. That’s dangerous.
Please search for another thread, because you both are saying that you are not interested in this thread, whilst you are writing more an more in this thread!
A major event in the evolution of the human brain came when the brain achieved a certain level that allowed self-consciousness. It achieved an “I”. Are there any computers that can do this?
You both appear to be in the “too naive to discuss such a subject” column.
Have been since the 80’s.
Even in a “simple” power regulator for one of IBM’s semiconductor testing systems, I designed the regulator to very carefully distinguish itself from influences upon it. It had merely a little Z80 microprocessor and small memory, but was tasked to ensure that the power going into the system was extremely clean of spurious noise and affects.
The most common of such situations is when the regulator has no means of knowing whether it was being affected by the noise and thus merely passing on its own subjective mindset (as people and especially governments often do). The simplest form of this is called a “ground loop” because the “ground” is supposed to be the zero reference. But when the grounding is affected (by current passing through it), it is no longer at “zero”. So I had a processor on board to decipher where “real ground” was despite where it would seem to have been by normal measuring means.
For the processor to determine where ground “really was” meant that it had to know the difference between itself, its output, its input, and ground. People have a really hard time doing that. But that little regulator could because unlike people, it was programmed to not presume - to verify everything related to the issue.
That is absolutely right. =D>
One could also call it the “Stupid meaningless answer” column, or the “Dsiagreement without any argument” column, or the “I don’t like this thread because I write in this thread” column.
Questions can’t be stupid or wrong, but answers can be very stupid and wrong.
They all are writing more and more in this thread, although they don’t like this thread.
Nothing is an issue for computers.
All issues associated with computers, are humans issues.
This entire thread is based on a false understanding of the relationship of man and machine.
You don’t know which languages I read. You don’t know that I don’t have access to someone who can translate for me.
And are you saying that only speakers of one language know about this trend? Germans only?
You don’t know what I think of sources and statistics. I haven’t said.
Now you are talking to me directly and I am responding. Notice that I have not posted anything about your OP question.
There is no forest nearby.
Why don’t you respond to my query and we’ll be done.
You’re all about definitions. Have you defined machine? Human? Replace? A timescale?
An inclined plane is a simple machine … will inclined planes replace all humans?
Is a human with a hip replacement still a human or a cyborg?
What will happen in a million years?
Because you don’t like this thread as much as you don’t like science, statistics, and intelligence.
Why are you writing in this thread? You don’t like this thread. So why should I “respond to your query”.
That are also your words. So your Silly nonsense - not worth discussing’ column can also be called the “Stupid meaningless answer” column, or the “Dsiagreement without any argument” column, or the “I don’t like this thread because I write in this thread” column.
Consciousness requires remote recognition, not merely awareness.
And Self-awareness requires consciousness because it requires a recognition of the whole of itself. A simple PC has that degree of consciousness. It has an internal map/picture of itself versus other activities. The OS knows the difference between when it has initiated what is going on versus something else causing it. It watches itself. And it recognizes a printer versus a display or a DVD drive.
And if a Microsoft product, is very probably accustom to “nervous breakdowns”.
