Conception of a 21st Century Mind

[version]

What does ChatGPT say if you ask it about the structure of its mind?

 

[sufi]

What does ChatGPT say if you ask it about the structure of its mind?

the usual shite

My mind is a neural network—a vast web of interconnected nodes trained on text to predict and generate language. It processes input as tokens, draws on learned patterns, and generates responses based on probabilities shaped by context, not consciousness or memory (unless enabled).

 

[version]

i don't think the brain works like that in reality - concepts and so on carve out physical routes through the grey matter

Has anyone managed to capture physical evidence of this? Imagine if you could stick sensors in a brain and detect changes as you introduce various concepts and ideas to it, like teaching an AI something and watching the code change or even the hardware its hosted on start to twitch.

 

[hmg]

how many nights did you spend in the 90s smoking yourself catatonic to FSOL's test transmissions and lifeforms? Chat GPT hasn't done that.

A few, but the shape of the mind was most apparent during the acid and DJ HMS/Producer sessions.

Der überallgabbapummelling compresses neural plasma into a mind walnut that can sense the walls around it

 

[dilbert1]

I have the sensation of not having access to knowledge or areas of my intellect unless I’m in a certain context or prompted by someone in conversation. Being asked questions, or far along a line of conversation, around certain types of people or in reference to some common object. But then alone sort of isolated I have different kinds of thoughts that would maybe never occur to me in those kinds of situations. Different stimuli unlocks different parts of me that are not available all at once in a given moment. That’s probably impossible, I’m mostly content with efforts to push my thinking to the extent that I can operate in each of these modes to a high capacity, but it is a struggle integrating what you’ve learned in some holistic way, getting the insights to connect in some way, identifying what’s necessarily incoherent versus what incoherence you can overcome.

 

[thirdform]

You should ask ChatGPT this question, tbh.

No worries—I get that the “smelly hippie” friend was the one asking, not you. But the bottom line is still the same: as an AI, I didn’t experience any nights (in the ’90s or any other decade) zoned out on Test Transmission or Lifeforms.

 

[version]

I have the sensation of not having access to knowledge of areas of my intellect unless I’m in a certain context or prompted by someone in conversation. Being asked questions, or far along a line of conversation, around certain types of people or in reference to some common object. But then alone sort of isolated I have different kinds of thoughts that would maybe never occur to me in those kinds of situations. Different stimuli unlocks different parts of me that are not available all at once in a given moment. That’s probably impossible, I’m mostly content with efforts to push my thinking to the extent that I can operate in each of these modes to a high capacity, but it is a struggle integrating what you’ve learned in some holistic way, getting the insights to connect in some way, identifying what’s necessarily incoherent versus what incoherence you can overcome.

You experienced this before? Sounds somewhat similar.

 

[sufi]

Has anyone managed to capture physical evidence of this? Imagine if you could stick sensors in a brain and detect changes as you introduce various concepts and ideas to it, like teaching an AI something and watching the code change or even the hardware its hosted on start to twitch.

its right on the border innit
between stuff you can explore from the outside quite vaguely by mapping how experiences affect your thought processes
and looking at the tiny nano whatnots in your brain hardware through a hubble telescope type device which just shows spots and sparks

 

[dilbert1]

the idea that you already knew, you just hadn't uncovered that part of the map yet

Yeah, I get that sensation. Is it pompous though? To think that just because something is true and clicks, you must’ve somehow already “known” it. But then recently I was listening to this professor explain Kant and Hegel, saying that once you get through all the schematism and highly articulated philosophical argumentation, you’re often left with the feeling, “well in the end they’re just telling me something I already know, that everyone knows.” And he’s like, “well, sometimes we need to be told what we already know!” Or reminded of it, or told it in a new way. So there’s that. The vanity inherent to learning, maybe

 

[thirdform]

Yeah, I get that sensation. Is it pompous though? To think that just because something is true and clicks, you must’ve somehow already “known” it. But then recently I was listening to this professor explain Kant and Hegel, saying that once you get through all the schematism and highly articulated philosophical argumentation, you’re often left with the feeling, “well in the end they’re just telling me something I already know, that everyone knows.” And he’s like, “well, sometimes we need to be told what we already know!” Or reminded of it, or told it in a new way. So there’s that. The vanity inherent to learning, maybe

Well, among the many little facts I could tell of a controversy at the Socialist Youth Congress in Bologna in 1912 between the "culturists" who wanted, with Tasca, to reduce the youth movement to a small school, and the "anticulturalists" who, through me, claimed for it full political function and in the front line of the fight against the reformist right of the time. I have always been anti-scholastic and anti-culturalist, and I have always been defined, right from then on, as a maniac of doctrinal rigidity and theoretical premises . Contradiction in me? No, dialectical complexity of the problem, and impossibility to reduce it to pills.
So workers must not take courses in philosophy or anything else, but must only fight for their class. I remember that then, as usual touching on subtleties in the use of exact terms, it was said that I contrasted Tasca's culture with socialist "faith" and "feeling". In a certain sense it is so: but it would be another grave error to see in this a slippage outside of healthy materialism. What I willingly deride is the "consciousness" required of every single class fighter: see the Rome meeting and related schemes of Marxist praxis. First act as revolutionaries then understand and discuss: therefore in place of the individual (soldier or marshal) we have the class party.
What did Marx mean then? Better to make it more difficult and less edible than to alter its scope.
The revolutionary bourgeoisie "inherited" from the ruling classes of the feudal regime the culture and philosophy monopoly especially of the Church, and aligned the revolutionary material of anti-authoritarian criticism, with which it boldly pushed forward in the field of natural sciences and the criticism of dogma, until the anti-feudal revolutionary flame was exhausted. But who then were the "bourgeois"? The feudal class despised them as "vile mechanics", they were merchants, shopkeepers and small manufacturers, sometimes skilled technicians, but ignorant of theoretical philosophy. The Galileos, the Diderots and D'Alamberts etc. generally came from the nobility and sometimes from the clergy itself: a secondary fact, indeed a symptom of the coming of revolutionary times, but they forged powerful weapons while the illiterate sans-culottes uprooted the Bastille. It is therefore correct to say that the bourgeoisie inherited the intellectual direction of society and founded critical philosophy.
But while in England and France the revolutionary consequences were pushed to the social extreme, in Germany the theoretical work was formidable, the political work nil or almost nil: already at the time of Marx the German bourgeoisie had fallen into impotence and it was up to the proletariat to inherit the tasks of criticism, which remained on philosophical ground, and to implement it in history by overthrowing feudal and bourgeois institutions.
This task belongs historically to the entire class and its party that leads the struggle in theory and in action (criticism with weapons). Whoever is in this camp has "inherited" that class task, whether he philosophizes or shoots. In the historical sense, being in this camp defines the proletarian: a worker who is in the opportunist parties carries out a bourgeois task, I do what I do as a proletarian. The rest is worth two cents.
Let's not repeat the nonsense that workers cannot understand. It doesn't matter. You have no experience with intellectuals and you don't know enough how empty, cowardly fools they are and how difficult it is to move a millimeter from the dominant prejudices. For forty years I have learned in depth how much more easily a working-class audience grasps bold, radical theses that contradict traditional ideas, whereas the right-thinking people, perhaps with several degrees, respond by stating gigantic and pitiful nonsense.
I have therefore put aside forever the worry that the workers do not understand. Precisely because they are free from the scholastic path and with a method that is more instinctive than reasoning, they bring themselves to the level of their class doctrine, and act accordingly.

 

[sufi]

An AI developing and warping like an Autechre performance.

i got these out of latent diffusion back in the day (like 2022)
somehow got it's brain messed up & exposed its guts while working on the prompt

 

[sufi]

its right on the border innit
between stuff you can explore from the outside quite vaguely by mapping how experiences affect your thought processes
and looking at the tiny nano whatnots in your brain hardware through a hubble telescope type device which just shows spots and sparks

A key neural pathway reveals how the brain forms fear memories from psychological threats

Fear memories can form in the brain following exposure to threatening situations such as natural disasters, accidents, or violence. When these memories become excessive or distorted, they can lead to severe mental health disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety...

medicalxpress.com

Using advanced chemogenetic and optogenetic techniques, the team precisely controlled neuronal activity, revealing that the lateral parabrachial nucleus (PBN) is essential to form fear memories in response to visual threats. They further traced the origin of these signals to the posterior insular cortex (pIC), a region known to process negative emotions and pain, confirming a direct connection between the two areas.

🧠

 

[sufi]

Yeah, I get that sensation. Is it pompous though? To think that just because something is true and clicks, you must’ve somehow already “known” it. But then recently I was listening to this professor explain Kant and Hegel, saying that once you get through all the schematism and highly articulated philosophical argumentation, you’re often left with the feeling, “well in the end they’re just telling me something I already know, that everyone knows.” And he’s like, “well, sometimes we need to be told what we already know!” Or reminded of it, or told it in a new way. So there’s that. The vanity inherent to learning, maybe

what about if yr talking to an old friend and they prompt a memory that you hadn't had a route to before
its the connections not the nodes

 

[thirdform]

Yeah, I get that sensation. Is it pompous though? To think that just because something is true and clicks, you must’ve somehow already “known” it. But then recently I was listening to this professor explain Kant and Hegel, saying that once you get through all the schematism and highly articulated philosophical argumentation, you’re often left with the feeling, “well in the end they’re just telling me something I already know, that everyone knows.” And he’s like, “well, sometimes we need to be told what we already know!” Or reminded of it, or told it in a new way. So there’s that. The vanity inherent to learning, maybe

i wish you would chuck @luka down 100 flights of stares like roko's asilisk so that he would understand how Deleuze still remains trapped in the Spinozan phase.

hunger sharpens the mind! meaning that pressure on the sated stomach pushes forward the production of knowledge.

 

[version]

"... one very important aspect of art is that it makes people aware of what they know and don't know that they know... "

 

[dilbert1]

Yeah, could be pompous, although could flip it the other way and come to an egalitarian conclusion where everyone's capable of picking up these things, not just the select few erecting a fortress around them.

I think that’s true. But isn’t there a difference between picking up on something, having it change the way you think, versus absorbing an insight because you “already know” it, recognizing that it conforms in some way to your previous knowledge. Obviously making sense of anything requires prior sense. Its interesting to think about, when does learning transform you and when does it cause you to double down on previous thinking. Those can’t be mutually exclusive right? When I feel I’ve corrected previous thinking, sometimes I can forgive my past self and understand why I was confused, but other times I’m like “how the hell did I think that way?”

 

[version]

I think that’s true. But isn’t there a difference between picking up on something, having it change the way you think, versus absorbing an insight because you “already know” it, recognizing that it conforms in some way to you’re previous knowledge. Obviously making sense of anything requires prior sense. Its interesting to think about, when does learning transform you and when does it cause you to double down on previous thinking. Those can’t be mutually exclusive right? When I feel I’ve corrected previous thinking, sometimes I can forgive my past self and understand why I was confused, but other times I’m like “how the hell did I think that way?”

Yeah, it's difficult to untangle. I think on some level you have to have been aware of what they're talking about otherwise you'd never have the moment of recognition. The new knowledge is like someone shining a light on something. The thing has to be there in the darkness in the first place for the light to reveal it.

 

[dilbert1]

Dialectic of continuity and change

 

[version]

i wish you would chuck @luka down 100 flights of stares like roko's asilisk so that he would understand how Deleuze still remains trapped in the Spinozan phase.

I'd like to read @luka explain the Spinozan phase.

 

[dilbert1]

I’d never so much as chuck an old timer down a curb! @thirdform