Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | aaroninsf's commentslogin

That definition is in fact the predominant one today in serious circles: consciousness proper is not itself inclusive of the things which consider to define a continuous coherent self.

I.e. the "self" is not the same as what it means to experience consciousness.

There are for example well characterized examples of memory disruption under the influence of various drugs (e.g. as used intentionally in anesthesia); and neurological conditions which produce various kinds of amnesia.

Do these conditions mean someone is not conscious? We have the luxury of asking people directly.

More unsettling edges yet include things like so-called "split brain" patients or people suffering form serious psychological conditions like so-called "multiple personalities." Psychology does get great mileage out pathology!


The conflation of concerns and synechdochal arguments are a wonder to behold.

So many people flailing around to justify their feelings rather than thinking rationally.

Goes both sides. Anyone who works in tech is immediately circumspect when they defend AI data centers.

Hell I will always side with locals WHO ACTUALLY LIVE THERE than IT workers in their Google cubicles lmao. Ofcourse America in it's dystopian wisdom is now making corporations vote...


Who in their right minds would trust this...?

Quite objectively, the track record for management demonstrating bad faith and lying about this is deep and long.


On my cork board I'll paste this up and run a red string to https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05914

and put a post-it between them with COMPUTONIUM???? written on it

Can we please keep it together for a modest number of decades longer please.


This.

This is what I tell people (including non-programmers interested in vibe coding), the results you get are product of... process. Formal process.

From this naturally emerges the other thing I tell people: domain expertise (or at least, familiarity and or capacity for learning) is still determinate of outcome.

I don't touch the code. But I do push back on expedience, laziness, inconsistency, and all the other recurring unsolved problems of generated code... and continue to play whack-a-mole in pursuit of process that whacks the moles.


Very much agree that while it is is useful in description of motivation and inspiration,

it is very non-helpful—or worse—to use this language, this way.

One might as well say "need neural plasticity" which is as much an analogy and equally misleading and counterproductive in shaping the right model of the system.

One might even call this pernicious, what it encourages is already a social problem; and it doesn't aid understanding, it confounds it.


Assertion: recipient owes the person asking something.

Authenticity earned through proof of work: invest your neurons and time to demonstrate fealty! Context switch for me!

Buried lede: much of the time the person asking could do all the work suggested.

This is like LMGTFY but backwards, it shames the person whose time is being asked for.


New improved LMGTFY with radio buttons to allow selection of "Let me gemini that for you" coming in 3... 2... 1...


Some serious clipping


"We did solve however solve feudalism."

Different problems are different. The problem of wealth concentration is not novel and it's been addressed many time.

Usually in ways the end poorly for those who believe themselves untouchable.


That's quite a lot of words.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: