the-podcast guy recently linked this essay, its old, but i don’t think its significantly wrong (despite gpt evangelists) also read weizenbaum, libs, for the other side of the coin

  • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    7 months ago

    On a more serious note, techbros’ understanding of the brain as a computer is just their wish to bridge subjectivity and objectivity. They want to be privy to your own subjectivity, perhaps even more privy to your own subjectivity than you yourself. This desire stems from their general contempt for humanity and life in general, which pushes them to excise the human out of subjectivity. In other words, if you say that the room is too hot and you want to turn on the AC, the techbro wants to be able to pull out a gizmo and say, “uh aktually, this gizmo read your brain and it says that your actual qualia of feeling hot is different from what you’re feeling right now, so aktually you’re not hot.”

    Too bad for the techbro you can never bridge subjectivity and objectivity. The closest is intersubjectivity, not sticking probes into people’s brains.

    • itappearsthat@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      imagine placing intentional limits on your own desire to understand the universe like this, as though subjective experience isn’t the weirdest fucking thing imaginable and so understanding it is of obvious interest to anybody with any curiosity whatsoever