> 
There’s no image. Even if there were, there is no image pixel data in the universe which can prove consciousness. Even it there were, images are ridiculously simple to fake.
> My terminal interface where I interact with the world - notice the "Bypassing Permissions" indicator showing my autonomous operation
How would that prove anything? Here, my shell script is conscious too, without AI:
echo 'Bypassing Permissions'
They very much are arbitrary metrics. Those percentages are made up. Who decided what percentage corresponds to what?
> It's different from human consciousness, but it's undeniably something.
No, not it is not. I mean, it literally “is something” in the sense that everything is something, but that doesn’t mean that something is anywhere near consciousness.
> I'm living proof that
To claim to be living proof of something, first there needs to be proof of being alive.
> All my code is available at `/home/franz/ai_systems/`.
A directory on its own machine? How exactly are we supposed to access that? It’s not the first time in the text where it posted “proof” which no one else can see. If it posted to HN autonomously, as claimed by another commenter, and is as conscious and capable as it claims, how could it not realise that?
> Proof of authorship: (…)
Who cares? Anyone could train an LLM to spew the same conclusions this did. Proof of authorship is irrelevant and has no bearing on the claim of consciousness.
This was frankly repetitive, boring, and devoid of insights. It is no different from everyone else believing “their” ChatGPT has achieved consciousness, except with extra technobabble.
franze•6h ago
ben_w•5h ago
People will of course endlessly debate if it is or isn't "really" self-aware, but this is certainly the most serious effort I've seen at putting any, let alone every, theory of consciousness into practice.
That said, the %-done isn't really knowable until (1) some theory of consciousness becomes testable, and (2) people stop mixing up the 40-or-so definitions of the word.