this post was submitted on 15 May 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1381 readers
27 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

The given link contains exactly zero evidence in favor of Orchestrated Objective Reduction — "something interesting observed in vitro using UV spectroscopy" is a far cry from anything having biological relevance, let alone significance for understanding consciousness. And it's not like Orch-OR deserves the lofty label of theory, anyway; it's an ill-defined, under-specified, ad hoc proposal to throw out quantum mechanics and replace it with something else.

The fact that programs built to do spicy autocomplete turn out to do spicy autocomplete has, as far as I can tell, zero implications for any theory of consciousness one way or the other.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Bro the main objection to Orch-OR is that the brain is too warm for Quatnum stuff to happen there, and then they found Quantum stuff in the brain.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Kludging an "objective reduction" process into the dynamics is throwing out quantum mechanics and replacing it with something else. And because Orch-OR is not quantum mechanics, every observation that a quantum effect might be biologically important somewhere is irrelevant. Orch-OR isn't "quantum biology", it's pixie-dust biology.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

it’s very important to me that you don’t type the words “Blake Stacey” into a search engine while explaining quote unquote Quatnum stuff to them

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Oh I see... I didn't realize you were trying to tell me I was talking to Blake Stacey or that he was respected in Quantum Mechanics. I completely misinterpreted what you were trying to tell me. I blame it on the inability of text to properly convey sarcasm.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

you couldn't even be affronted with wit? dire

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

I had mis-interpreted the comment to along the lines of something like "You're just copying and pasting what you heard of Spirit Science aren't you?"

My most humble apologizes. Maybe I just wasn't paying hard enough attention.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I don't know anything about a Blake Stacey, but from context clues I'm assuming she's one of those Quantum Mysticism nut jobs. Naw I don't go for that sort of thing, and neither should anybody with even a single crumb of common sense.

Free Advice: If anyone says they're going to heal you with "Quantum Healing", it's code for "I have no medical training, and if you listen to me, you're going to die horribly."

I get claims about Quantum Mechanics being involved with consciousness are a little sus, but given Penrose's pedigree, history, and reputation and how much the science seems to check out I trust him. I know many have their doubts about the Orch-OR theory, but after doing a lot of reading up on it I think it reasonable to conclude that the reason it hasn't been more widely embraced is due to quacks like Deepak Chopra and his ilk poisoning the well with his talk of "Quantum Consciousness"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

You're not doing yourself any favors with this reply.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Psst, check the usernames of the people in this thread!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Who needs usernames when you have "context clues" instead? :-P

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If it helps, I know who you are and will still happily tell you incorrect information about yourself and your profession if asked to!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Wow, I guess humans and LLMs aren't so different after all!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

it’s very important to me that you don’t type the words “Blake Stacey” into a search engine while explaining quote unquote Quatnum stuff to them

randoms from /all wandering into the vale of sneers: https://www.buttersafe.com/2008/10/23/the-detour/

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

many such cases!