"By what signs shall we recognise its consciousness?"
Consciousness creep: aeon.co/essays/could-m
Conversation
Replying to
@_100101890 "one mind at a time rule" unfounded - there's nothing that would prevent two minds running simultaneously on the same substrate
2
1
2
Replying to
yeah - it's either baseless or virtually trivial, at minimum. W potential timesharing, weak presumption of identity, channel >
1
1
Replying to
> plexing, qcomp...and have we met the biome yet? It's a stretch even to say a totally typical human CNS, as presently known to >
1
2
Replying to
> function, is possessed by only and exactly one 'mind'. The constraint claim isn't even evaluable if you can't count (the) minds
1
3
Replying to
@_100101890 apart from the obvious stuff I'm fond of the idea that there may be a slow mind and a fast mind running entirely independently
2
1
4
Replying to
yes! Speed, freq. are close enough to same thing from infoprocess' POV. Another form of multiplexing, w/ differential allocation?
1
1
Replying to
..hm. where would you see that? An (eg. Amazon) ecosystem? Or metabolism/chemosynthesis-centric information hub like a human GMB?
1
1
Replying to
@_100101890 definitely a(n eco)system, for example those wandering lichens could support a slimemold-like mode and a cellular turing mode
2
2
Replying to
what's the impetus (if not engineered)? And second/separate substrate of (LT) memory - lichen on lichen on lichen [...]?
2
Replying to
@_100101890 slimemold mode = some sort of internal nervous system
cellular automaton mode = BZ reaction (which I'm sure is turing-equiv)