I'm sure you can point out where I said that.

As I understand it, I though telomeres have encoded a certain number of cell replications to stop (cell damage over time) cancer. Death evolved to stop cancer.

I understood it. I think i get "incredulous," but I didn't google it.

We want to be God and make something in our image

I'm under the impression that our own cognition is like a chinese box. Sincerely, a physicalist.

Your presupposition that understanding cannot emerge from a table of numbers and some rules for multiplying and adding them is your conclusion that there is no understanding or new meaning that can emerge.

Your conclusion is identical to your assumption, so you're just extremely arrogantly saying nothing, then even more arrogantly falling back to an argument from authority where someone else did the same thing.

What conclusion is that?

And yet you're the one sophomorically insisting on a conclusion with no supporting logic or evidence.

Yeah I think I'll leave the sophomoric philosophy to you mate, you're obviously very enamoured of your own opinions.

[removed]

I know what a transformer is. Define understanding and prove there isn't any in one.

It's also not a chinese room because it's not indistinguishable so the argument is doubly stupid.

Intelligence == consciousness == emotion

One should remember this.

ChatGPT is literally a Chinese Room. It understands nothing, yet it delivers meaning well enough, just as the Chinese Room translate Chinese well enough. Your failure to understand the specifics of ChatGPTs software is exactly analogous to 'hiding how much information a system such a system would contain'.

All of Searle's no-simulation arguments consist of making an information processing machine out of silly parts, hiding how much information such a system would contain, and then saying 'look those parts are silly! There can't be meaning here'. It's pointless and circular.

But neither you nor he have defined meaning, and are saying nothing about whether or not meaning is an emergent property. Facile dismissals based on the presumption that it cannot emerge are what's hollow. Pointing out how tautogical that argument is is not.

[removed]

Emotions are slow and cruse and require a body .if you virtualize them - the ai might go insane from experiencing a century of emotions in a day

It may be coherent but it doesn't say anything. What do you mean by 'shuffling complexity around'? How is it an argument from incredulity? Say something worthwhile.

Do you actually experience emotion or do you just think you do? Do I as another human being separate from you actually experience emotion or do I just think I do?

It's perfectly coherent, unlike the Chinese room arguments.

It's not what I meant. Of course this can only solve access to internet. Duh! It's still not really affordable for a lot of people.

That’s rat news. More medical advancements for the rats! At this rate they’re going to be immortal.

I'm sure that sounded really good in your head, but it doesn't seem to mean anything. Perhaps try using simple language to convey your ideas.

I mean most of it was already garbage.

The chinese room is just an exercise in shuffling complexity around and argument from incredulity. Nothing is proven other than the human in the room isn't the person being spoken to, which we started with in the premise.

It is ONE of many solutions for a whole host of different problems.