2.3M views · Apr 4, 2020 · 23:00 · 3 HN recommenders · 8 mentions · discussed 2020–2025
Clip from Lex Fridman's podcast with Roger Penrose in which Penrose argues that consciousness is not a computation. He discusses Godel-style arguments and the possible role of quantum effects in microtubules.
Why Hacker News points people here: Pointed to in consciousness and AI threads as the best-known statement of Penrose's view, which commenters find interesting even when they disagree.
“I don't take Roger's view about consciousness for granted but it is very interesting nevertheless.”HN comment, 2020
“I think it was on this site that someone posted the very interesting perspectives on consciousness by Roger Penrose.”
Penrose's perspective on consciousness and microtubules.
I think it was on this site that someone posted the very interesting perspectives on consciousness by Roger Penrose.[2] From that I found this video by Dr. Stuart Hameroff, M.D.: Microtubules & quantum consciousness.[1] Higly recommended. [1]: link [2]: this video
“I don't take Roger's view about consciousness for granted but it is very interesting nevertheless.”
Penrose argues consciousness is not computation; interesting though debatable.
Consciousness is Not a Computation (Roger Penrose) | AI Podcast Clips this video Full episode: link I don't take Roger's view about consciousness for granted but it is very interesting nevertheless.
“His larger point is that consciousness is not a computation.”
Penrose on microtubules, quantum coherence, and consciousness not being computation.
Roger Penrose talked about this with Lex Fridman. The anesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff is looking into how anesthesia affects microtubules and the implications for consciousness. Penrose is intrigued by the symmetry of microtubules and the possibility for this symmetry to enable quantum coherence to be accessible biologically. His larger point is that consciousness is not a computation. this video Relevant part starts around 3:30.
Conversation suggesting consciousness arises from quantum effects, not computation.
It reminds me of this talk[1] and a conversation[2], both hinting at the possibility of the emergence of consciousness from a matter due to quantum properties/effects [edit] and having nothing to do with computation. [1] link [2] this video
“Randomly watched this yesterday”
Penrose argues something fundamental about consciousness is missing.
Randomly watched this yesterday this video where Roger Penrose argues that we're missing something fundamental about consciousness and his best bet is a structure called the microtubules. This talk reminded me of my own research into "AI" back in the 00's and that it's almost impossible to talk about AI since everybody has a different idea as to whay AI is, yes i know there's a pretty good classification ANI, AGI, ASI but most people don't know about this and think of AI as a machine that thinks like conscious human. I'd argue that we've solved or at least partly solved the part of AI that has to do with neural nets. We're still some way off utilizing the full potential of neural nets since our hardware hasn't quite reached the capability of emulating even the simplest of complex animals. The thing is that Neural nets are probably only part of intelligence and creating bigger and more complex neural nets probably wont result in what most people consider AI but i guess there's still a chance it might. We might have to wait several years to find out since moors law is plateauing and neural chips are still in it's infancy. My best guess is that we'll solve "Intelligence" long before we solve consciousness and i think we're actually quite far along here. The best theory of intelligence i've read so far is Jeff Hawkins 1000 Brain Theory and i'm really looking forward to see how far it can go. The problem with this theory is that it's still missing the most critical component which is
Penrose's argument that consciousness is not computable.
The question is whether consciousness is computable. Can a Turing machine be conscious? Probably not. link this video
“Same statement from Penrose here with Lex Friedman”
Penrose makes the same claim about AI and consciousness.
The question is answered in the full title: > "Gödel's theorem debunks the most important AI myth. AI will not be conscious" Same statement from Penrose here with Lex Friedman: "Consciousness is Not a Computation" [1]. [1] this video
“It's sad to see the interviewer wasting the opportunity to interview Penrose.”
It's sad to see the interviewer wasting the opportunity to interview Penrose. I found Lex Fridman does a much better job: this video
