Human enlightenment is when you are free to believe in anything, even if nothing is real.

The trick is that fear has nothing to do with it.

If nothing is real, you may as well just have fun.

From my presentation at the 28th Annual meeting of the ASSC.

Presenting Cognitive Carrying Capacity (CCC), as a candidate for an algorithm that determines and predicts the scale of self in agents.

Humanity has reached a point where an unsustainable amount of voices are taking part in discussing, influencing and creating echo chambers regarding the status of life on Earth.

It is getting harder and harder to stay sober and I wonder what the hangover will look like.

Every thought is shallow if your universe is deep enough.

Is there an example of an idea that came out of nowhere?

An idea that the leap in any direction was wide enough that we cannot understand how that leap was even made?

Can you “see” an idea, if the parts that make it are foreign to you?

Are there any unconscious subjectives categories of information, an agent can predict?

Uploading == Copying
Same principle will apply for uploading your consciousness.

It will be a mind that will believe that it is you. But your first person experience will just seize to exist after your own hardware does. You are the specific representation of a self that runs on a specific hardware

People that believe that they are choosing their thoughts… grossly underestimate the way complexity works.

In a purely algorithmic way… thoughts are 100% choosing you and not the other way around.

The paradox of consciousness: how do we find meaning in a world full of selves and species? In my latest blog, I explore the tension between individual fulfillment and collective well-being. Let the limitations guide your light. nikostzagarakis.medium.com/the-paradox-...

36th trip around the Sun….
Imagine if there was an organism that was celebrating the number of trips around you.

How would a universe without computation look like? Is there an analogy that lives purely out of any computation, while allowing the formation of systems?

Most likely… you can have attention without consciousness, but you cannot have consciousness without attention.

People saying that LLMs are not creative, do not see that the first aspect of human intelligence that clearly is slowly getting replaced, is creativity.

It is getting more obvious that especially in everyday problem solving, creativity is largely coming from a vector space and not synapses firing.

It’s impossible to imagine the universe as we know it outside of a simulation. Everything you “understand” is a simulated model of whatever the universe is.

If the dataset that is training your simulations is also simulated, is irrelevant. It could be turtles all the way down.

Image by Dall-E 2

If an idea is basically a computational threshold (a point where a problem becomes simpler to comprehend because others have solved parts of it) that allows humans to solve a part of a problem.

Could the idea of self be a far more complex computation making our subjective notion irrelevant?

There is no shortcut to causality. Humans learn very slowly. That’s because of the symbolic computation of our inferences due to the causal structure of our experience… we forget that it takes us years to compute the relationships of objects.

Intelligence exists as a category only when a complexity can analyze the system is in. There is no need for intelligence if there is no conscious complexity to spot it and categorize it. We could never escape the system that created these computations for us to emerge.

Can the different interpretations of free will, lead us to specific descriptions of the nature of consciousness?

If so, what other mechanisms could support this mapping of the different descriptions of the nature of consciousness?

Recently, Tevin Naidu invited me on to his podcast, where I rambled excitedly for nearly three hours about consciousness, Dennett, AI, and much more youtu.be/jTO-A1lw4JM?...