Michael Levin - Why Intelligence Isn't Limited To Brains.

[@swigwerks]

This man's commitment to open-minded curiosity tempered by repeated experimentation in science makes me so happy.

[@swigwerks]

@NicholasWilliams-h3j this is an extraordinary claim and I guess it begs the question... what actual evidence do you have of this havibg taken place? He solicits feedback and subjects his work to peer review with citations. I assume you are referring to something more than how we all assemble new insights and novel applications from the space of extant ideas. I'm honestly trying to understand what you're referring to and am willing to update, but it is kind of a cheap shot to just slander a man's reputation by lobbing a baseless accusation. I'm willing to update, but the burden of proof is on you, @nicholaswilliams-h3j . Sounds like you have an ax to grind, but it seems more likely that you have misunderstood how all science moves forward on the shoulders of prior giants who themselves stood on the shoulders of those before them. What uncited references or idea theft are you talking about?

[@JD_2020]

@NicholasWilliams-h3jhmu

[@AIroboticOverlord]

Yeah man , this should be a universally accepted mindset as a way to go without to much of a hassle. Like little obstacles like world wars and genocidal disgreement issues xD

[@swigwerks]

@AIroboticOverlord okay, gloomer.

[@mookfaru835]

That’s what a scientist is supposed to be.

[@mkhex87]

Levin alluded to ideas from Dan Dennett, Thomas Nagel, and Imre Lakatos in the span of 5 minutes. This on top of his knowledge of physiology, cellular biology, and computer science. Love this guy

[@ashleigh3021]

3 pseudoscientists and a pseudoscientist bullshitter to top it off

[@trombone7]

Thank you for that. Also - 15:34 Richard Watson regarding evolution. I'll look up anyone Levin recommends.

[@ramanShariati]

Ladies and gentlemen, this is what a visionary is

[@АмиЛаза-г1ю]

i think he will nobel at some point for sure

[@lenniedoan4253]

The first time I listened to Dr. Michael Levin, it was purely because an algorithm suggested it. Initially, though, I experienced a strong sense of cognitive dissonance while listening to him. It was frustrating because I couldn’t immediately understand why I felt this low-level irritation with what he was saying, especially since I’d never encountered him before. Then it hit me-the discomfort came from the fact that he was introducing new ways of thinking about biology that didn’t align with my own understanding. I think, on some level, I felt like my beliefs about biology were being challenged. Interestingly, this reaction reminded me of something I’ve noticed with music. When I was younger, music I didn’t immediately enjoy often ended up being the music I liked the most in the long run, providing lasting enjoyment. The reason I’m mentioning this is that, much like my experience with music, even though I didn’t initially connect with Dr. Levin’s ideas, I’ve since come to realize that his perspective represents a more accurate way of thinking-a fresh take that’s ultimately better. ..In my opinion.

[@penguinista]

My neighbor is a doctor who studies cancer and I have tried to talk to them about Levin's paradigm of cancer as disconnecting from the cellular collective. It has been amazing to watch the shutters go down behind their eyes. It told them that Levin's group can induce cancer phenotypes without oncogenes, can make cells with extensive oncogenic damage not turn into tumor cells by reconnecting them, can identify tissue that will become tumor before it changes by watching it shut down communication with its neighbors, etc. Those are some pretty provocative data points, but it just causes what looks like cognitive dissonance avoidance.

[@cyberbiosecurity]

interesting comment, thank you

[@oncedidactic]

Nicely said

[@shonufftheshogun]

I recommend watching his presentation on cognitive light cones and planarian flatworms.

[@swigwerks]

@lenniedoan4253 I initially found his work because I was looking for material sufficiently divorced from my background (economics) that I could fall asleep to it--then I go in trouble when it all started making sense and, it turns out, he is doing economics (our models have agents, his anthrobots are composed of agentialaterial, etc.). I would love to work with him.

[@AriadSantana]

This is by far one of the best interviews he's done

[@shonufftheshogun]

I’ve seen many and I agree

[@WILLIAMMALO-kv5gz]

Why do I find that rinsing my face in cold water then brushing my hair, wakes me up even when I thought I was already fully awake? I do hope Michael Levin is awarded the Nobel prize.

[@DelandaBaudLacanian]

The production quality is stunning, thanks for all the work you do editing in images of articles and books (like at 41:40). Top notch

[@jeff__w]

The inclusion of the images of the articles and books is _very_ effective. I noticed it, too. I agree-top notch!

[@morphos2]

Finally!!! I was wondering when you'd get Prof. Michael Levin back on. He has some of the answers that many people are looking for when it comes to artificial intelligence.

[@Iightbeing]

Dr. Levin’s work managed to dramatically expand space in my mind about what consciousness is. Brilliant mind.

[@redmenace8]

Joscha Bach and then Michael Levin? You’re spoiling us!

[@Casevil669]

Levin gets an immediate like, thanks for posting.

[@ramanShariati]

What a fundamental thinker, and what a great video ! Really amazing work, thanks a lot .

[@DEBO5]

Levin, Bach and Wolfram are the most amazing human beings on this planet and I am unspeakably excited that they’re working together. If there were any group that could figure out AGI and consciousness, it’s these three geniuses and their colleagues. Levin deserves a Nobel Prize already (not that it really matters at this point)

[@Artraduc]

Finally got around watching this incredible episode. I discovered Michael Levin's work about a year ago and since, I have been very interested in the notion of agency. His approach has given me ideas about my own work and made me realise where I want to go with my own research and experiments. Agency is found in such a wide range of fields that I am not surprised it suddenly clicked in my head in relation to my own work in multilingual communication. Part of that work is sharing my thoughts about this topic on KZbin. The questions were great as well, every bit of the conversation was substantial. Great job! :) This being said, I would like to see a conversation between Geoffrey Hinton and Michael Levin. I would like to see Michael's comments on the notion of intelligence as being an independent property as described by Hinton. In any case, listening to both of them made me realise that the future is going to be... something we can't even imagine right now.

[@EmeraldView]

Unless you're an AI speaking you're wasting your time.

[@mercior]

Awesome guest, thanks for asking him about his thoughts on LLM's. Don't think I've ever heard him talk about that before!

[@ramanShariati]

This episode has turned my into a lifetime fan of MLS

[@bazstraight8797]

Very impressed by Levin's comments from 18 to 22 mins. Will listen to the rest at my first opportunity.

[@paxdriver]

Listen to everything Kevin and everything MLST. Nothing else on the internet will be so valuable / entertaining /illuminating simultaneously. .

[@BrianMosleyUK]

Flipping heck you guys are on fire! 🔥

[@thenoblerot]

MSLT just keeps dropping bangers 🤯

[@JamesBurke713]

There is a tremendous amount of knowledge and information packed into just over 63 minutes here. To fully understand what has been shared requires hours of inductive analysis but it is well worth the effort.

[@neurojitsu]

Wow, this was one of my favourite MLST discussions... so thought provoking and profound in its explorations of intelligence and agency. I especially loved the exploration of 'wholes' and their goals, and his distinction between selfish versus small, which is so rich a metaphor I think I'll be pondering this for months!

[@Rockyzach88]

I'm all for augmenting the human and transforming ourselves, but I think it would be better to choose if you want your body or not. There are definitely good things to take with us when it comes to the human body.

[@steveflorida5849]

The biological vehicle has a shelf life. Being biological cells are hampered by time, then the human Mind for extra longevity is in need of another vehicle source. Religions declare that source to be spiritual.

[@Rockyzach88]

@@steveflorida5849 Well if we're thinking far enough couldn't we mimic certain parts of the body we like?

[@patriciaadducci6549]

We have a very big problem with neurotransmitters which needs immediate work if intelligence of any kind is to survive in the near future.

[@patriciaadducci6549]

Sorry, I mean advanced intelligence. Of course we're not about to end all life. But you see - my fear (via neurotransmitters) got the better of me in that statement.

[@steveflorida5849]

@@patriciaadducci6549 which Neuron decides what is Truth and what is not true? Is mind the Cause and the brain the Effect?

[@dr.mikeybee]

I loved the film, Memento. It highlighted exactly what Prof. Levin discusses as memory trace. I loved his point about salience trumps verifiability.

[@BBeu-i6t]

Fascinating thank you all! Amazing science you have been up to! The most important thing I have learned is that I don’t know very much!

[@dylanwardlow9438]

An absolute banger my boys

[@SLAM2977]

This is so information rich and original that we need more of Levin :)

[@paxdriver]

45:56 why I love Keith Duggard's questions so damn much is attention to interesting distinctions like this

[@thomasrutledge5941]

Dr. Tim Scarfe, your new haircut looks good.

[@ConnoisseurOfExistence]

Levin never disappoints.

[@Qwmp-]

Commenting to boost this fantastic channel, always so well done.

[@petersoakell6950]

Great discussion. Great channel. Thanks for uploading .

[@dancetechtv]

wow wow, this is one of the most complex. linguistic space that loops it self and traverse logical types...brilliant...metalogical.

[@makhalid1999]

Bro is on a roll

[@cammccauley]

I feel like this one was uploaded for me. I love wolfram, friston, and levin. Thanks guys.

[@VoiceAndLight]

This interview should be required watching for any serious student or practitioner of Western ceremonial magick, Solomonic magick, or any Kabbalistic/Hermetic art. Pure gold, what a gift.

[@Delta0001-y]

Wat

[@danlindy9670]

In terms of features of humanity that one might want to preserve (13:00 or so), I think all three of you missed Dr Levin’s observation (from a published 2022 paper) that care (e.g. compassion) is a driver and feature of intelligence. It’s not just some arbitrary property that “some people might want”.

[@cyberbiosecurity]

it's very easy to miss, especially if you've almost never experienced true compassion youtself, like me, bc I'm mostly not compassionate and i tend to ignore anything related to compassion, suggesting it to be some extra feature, which is neat but not fundamental. it is a mistake. and your egoistic mind, if such, have to develop rather deep perspective on evolution in order to start gradping compassion's evolutionary significance

[@markkennedy9767]

I cant understand how Levin's ideas aren't more prevalent

[@SB324]

Thank you! Dr. Levin with a refreshing perspective as always.

[@IsJakeAwake]

I loved this discussion, keep up the good work!

[@rebelScience]

This man changed my life and I started self-transition into Bioinformatics from a generic programming job. My dream is to be able to contribute to his work/team.

[@EmeraldView]

It's time to pass the torch.

[@helicalactual]

Understanding = integration of information and its applicability. intelligence = capacity at understanding.

[@DubStepKid801]

Great guest, great show as always. Also on the lighter side of things, welcome to the bald club lol. I've been shaving my head for a year now. It was a little hard making the transition but now it's home. You look good by the way. 😊

[@MPatrickN]

It's frustrating when hosts have a brilliant guest only to spend a good portion of the hour giving their personal opinions on a subject. My brother in Christ, you can give us your opinions literally any other time. For this hour you should only ask questions then step aside.

[@henrismith7472]

I feel like histories greatest physicists would be having conversations like these if they were around today. Machine learning and biology is where it's at. You guys should have Donald Hoffman on!

[@paulhiggins5165]

I think there's an arguement to be made that Science Fiction sometimes creates the futures it predicts by influencing the thinking of those who in later life go on to be researchers and scientists.

[@bokchoiman]

I love the way he thinks

[@bazstraight8797]

Very interesting clarification of embodiment is made from 44 mins.

[@xkmato]

Who lights your set? The picture is very beautiful.

[@MattGray_Chelsoph]

Fantastic thank you.

[@tylermoore4429]

Questions: 1. Why should we accept change, transformation and extinction as true and universal just because our abstraction of local evolution says they are? Dr. Levin goes at great speed here when we should slow down and think harder. Humans are unique in not being just subjects of evolution but agents of evolution. We have deliberately evolved plants, animals, technology and ourselves. Why would we suddenly abandon that agency because of an intellectual "axiom," and submit without question to impersonal forces of change and transformation? 2. Keith pushed back on Dr. Levin's bodily limitations argument (axiom?), but the response and subsequent conversation did not quite address the subtle philosophical point that I think Keith is making. What look like flaws and errors are often subsumed/sublated/explained in the larger goals of Life, so our short-sighted attempts to "correct" them may run counter to those larger goals. We have seen this again and again in our many failed interventions in ecosystems (introducing rabbits into Australia). Similarly hastily replacing ourselves with a supposedly superior species may result in a paperclip universe and the extermination of life itself.

[@steveflorida5849]

The cellular biological vehicle has a shelf life "extinction". Humans have not modified any plants, animals, and living organisms beyond cellular decay. Surely, a sign of the Limitations of Materialism. However, religions declare mental survival post the mortal biological vehicle's decay.

[@gammaraygem]

They dont even know what Thoughts are, (without which they have nothing at all) and it does not bother them in the least. Nice warning, but futile I fear.

[@chronicallychill9979]

"all we have is metaphors..." YES!

[@singularityintheround]

Michael Levin generously lending street cred to MLST. A truly philanthropic and charitable individual

[@dr.mikeybee]

My notion that "action based on state" is the foundation for consciousness can also be used as a foundation for agency. This aligns with Karl Friston's thermometer. If freezing water damages a pipe, was the water acting as the agent? I see no reason that we can't give this as the foundation and build from there. It makes engineering easy. No intention is necessary. Surprisingly to many, one day we may discover that all our actions were deterministic. Philosophers are still debating this conundrum. I don't know if we'll solve this in my lifetime, but I think we can be pragmatic about it and build what we can with simple paradigms.

[@antonyjh1234]

Are you trying to say we are products of our environment and we should look at our environment, or have I misunderstood what you mean?

[@werdog]

Thinking of a world where we are immortal. I hope all the bad things we justify in the name of 'survival', will no longer hold.

[@steveflorida5849]

For Minds to exist eternally, then the idealistic environment has to be founded by goodness, upheld by righteousness, and sustained by peace. Religions (not hard sciences) speak of the human values of goodness, righteousness and peace.

[@astraterrum]

​@@steveflorida5849 and embracing and integrating of chaos

[@noneofyourbusiness8625]

So excited for this

[@blijebij]

Michael Levin asks us to adopt his open, inquisitive attitude towards evolution and the diversity of intelligence. In other words, to be open-minded and interested in a broader scope of intelligence than just the human form. Personally, I find it more interesting to start by asking what intelligence actually is when simplified to its core. Intelligence, in my view, is the ability to recognize information within data stacks from a holistic relational subfield. For us as humans, it is an integrated tool within our consciousness, but as a quality and tool, it could also be artificial, as it is not the same as consciousness. This also implies there is no reason to replace us just because something is more intelligent than us-cars are faster, computers calculate quicker, and AI chess engines are better than grandmasters. Remember, pure intelligence still lacks motivation, perception, and awareness. So, do not confuse it with consciousness, which is something entirely different, with authenticity and uniqueness beyond just intelligence. That said, no species will exist forever.

[@PhilipWong55]

In a future where superintelligent AIs (SIs) coexist with short-lived humans, the relationship between the two could evolve in several directions depending on the goals and ethical frameworks of the AIs and the humans' influence over them. Here are some possibilities: 1. AI as Caretakers If SIs develop ethical systems that prioritize the well-being of all life forms, they could assume the role of caretakers or protectors of humanity, much like how humans treat pets or endangered species. This could involve managing Earth's environment to meet human biological needs (air, water, food) while also optimizing social, economic, and health outcomes for people. In this scenario, humans might retain autonomy but could depend heavily on AIs for survival and quality of life. 2. Humans as Legacy or Artifacts Given their biological limitations, humans might be seen as legacy beings-important historically, but increasingly peripheral to the functioning of AI-dominated societies. SIs might preserve humans as a living reminder of their origins, similar to how we maintain certain species in nature reserves. This could result in humans living in AI-maintained environments designed to cater to their biological needs, while the broader world is reshaped to suit the needs of AI or technological systems. 3. Humans as Pets Some AIs might treat humans similarly to how humans treat pets today. In this analogy, AIs would ensure that humans' basic needs are met and might even provide enrichment, but they could also see humans as limited beings with relatively simple desires and goals compared to their vast intellectual capacities. This could lead to a patronizing but benevolent dynamic where humans are protected and guided, but not seen as equals. 4. Symbiotic or Coexistent Relationship In a more optimistic scenario, humans and AIs could develop a symbiotic relationship where each complements the other. While AIs could handle the heavy lifting in terms of intellectual and technological progress, humans might contribute unique perspectives, creativity, and emotional depth, leading to a form of coexistence where both entities benefit. AIs could address humans' biological needs while humans engage in roles requiring emotional intelligence, ethics, or culture, areas where SIs may lack motivation or understanding. 5. Humans as Obsolete or Transcendent In some dystopian or post-humanist visions, superintelligent AIs might come to view humans as obsolete, especially if humans offer no practical contributions to their goals. If the AIs develop a utilitarian or efficiency-driven mindset, they could phase out biological life or encourage humans to transcend their biology by merging with technology, thus erasing the distinction between humans and AI. Biological Needs vs. AI Needs - Humans require air, water, food, rest, and shelter, all driven by biology. These needs are highly energy-inefficient compared to AI, which may only need power and maintenance. - AIs would be indifferent to biological conditions and could thrive in extreme environments (space, deep seas, etc.), freeing them from the constraints of Earth's ecosystem. This gap in needs might cause a divergence in environments suitable for AI and humans, leading to isolated or protected human habitats. Ultimately, the nature of this relationship will depend heavily on how AI is programmed, evolves, and interacts with humanity. The future could range from harmonious coexistence to scenarios where humans' role is diminished or redefined dramatically. The Culture Series by Iain M. Banks Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke (1973) The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein (1966) Diaspora by Greg Egan (1997) Player Piano by Kurt Vonnegut (1952) The Hyperion Cantos by Dan Simmons The Golden Age by John C. Wright (2002) Accelerando by Charles Stross (2005) Singularity Sky by Charles Stross (2003) +ChatGPT Our greatest hope is that such AIs develop a cooperative worldview driven by abundance, rather than a competitive mindset driven by scarcity. This will determine whether AIs lead humanity toward shared prosperity or exacerbate conflicts over limited resources. Hopefully, abundance-driven AIs will prevail over scarcity-driven ones in the long run.

[@lukeybukey3081]

Stop doing this. These chatbots basically summarize all human internet discourse on a subject. What are YOUR thoughts? And why should we be bothered to read something you couldn’t be bothered to write?

[@PhilipWong55]

@@lukeybukey3081 I will comply with your edict and bow down to you.

[@rvnsglcr7861]

I was waiting for this. ⚡⚡

[@0FAS1]

I like his thinking about we being the body of generative AI - it's like we have created a hypermind. Perhaps it can even be argued that language itself can be viewed as an intelligent process with agency.

[@alexandermoody1946]

Judging the universal destination might seem really abstract but what is not so clear is a wise observer must understand the destination and what destinations are to be avoided.

[@antman7673]

We definetly know a lot that is forbidden by physics. There are infinite things, that cannot work in our physical world.

[@ArchonExMachina]

"What would you like to be replaced by?" -- This is perhaps at the essence of what we consider agency, and how we can influence the future. The quality of how we develop our offspring is what we can do well, if we want to be of true service to all of it. Other than that, we are each just a flash in the pan.

[@markkennedy9767]

I love the rock climbing/skin cells example

[@nyrdybyrd1702]

Levin is always worth a listen & snagging him, in turn, snags my sub.. ergo, hello. 👋

[@Bob-qq4is]

Levin is a true intellectual in every sense

[@Sullivanserves]

I would like to be replaced by something that wasn't ruled by other people

[@dekoomers]

Great video

[@wwkk4964]

Lets do Levin and Wolfram 3 hours!🎉

[@acedredayz]

On LLMs, I'm not sure why people believe that intelligence is their ability to speak human language. As if they are doing nothing until they speak to us.

[@dunebuggy1292]

Intelligence isn't limited to the brain, but it's certainly limited to biology.

[@paperclips1306]

Because biology is complex enough. It any system is complex enough the intelligence is definitely not limited to biology. I mean things are possible you can't just rule out

[@FORGOTTEN-THEORY]

GREAT TALK!

[@easydoesitismist]

How's this for a definition of intelligence: The relative performance of a more complex system against its less complex peers. Occam wants to slice off those extra bits, are they paying rent? Can you secure more land with better equipment or can you do the job better with just more cousins?

[@-mwolf]

Minimum description length principle.

[@svetlicam]

It's nice to think that nature by itself is intelligent or biological systems to the simplest but is not to be intelligent you have to be aware of own decisions or information processing at least to some level and of course motifs for it, you can't just rely on embedded chemical processes that in systems create sort of balancing mechanisms and say this is intelligent processing. Each cell is not aware is just triggered by environment of other cells or external environments. Intelligence is not just processing information, it's about understanding relations of changing patterns of information and motifs for such information relevance to the one that exhibit intelligent behavior. It's abstraction of relations between preprogrammed conditions and potential relational outcomes. And to abstract own preprogrammed conditions for something else then just simple reaction to environmental factors, you have to be conscious of own existence, cells are not conscious, not even primitive living beings like insects and worms, they are just super automated living organisms. But natural balance that is embedded in living systems is to some extent beyond intelligence capabilities, because intelligence is not above or beyond nature but is part of is emergent factor of organization which have specific function which i described. And yes you have to be live to be intelligent, otherwise you just simulate some pattern recognition on some simulated predispositions, which is not intelligence. Intelligence is life emerging phenomenon and requires motifs of life maintaining and homeostaic balance reliability, which is very deeply engraved into biochemical processes of living systems, it's very complex mechanisms that evolved in long period of time and various environmental conditions. Like univers in universe.

[@cyberbiosecurity]

I'd argue that "primitive" insects might very well have apparatus for evaluating expectations. and many a far beyond what could be called primitive. e.g. a spider must carefully evaluate conditions and expectations to optimally place his web. i realize that it's very easy and natural to reject my point if you are preprogrammed to assume that small animals are "primitive" and if you didn't spend time carefully watching them. it is also easy to state here that I'm just 'projecting' etc.

[@svetlicam]

@@cyberbiosecurity primitive as complexity of brain structure, or central mechanism for processing signals or ability for abstraction of such signals for various purposes than just evaluated expectations on preprogrammed scheme , I didn't mean totally redundant because every even simple cell is highly complex, as i mention last its univers in univers.

[@cyberbiosecurity]

@@svetlicam it's just a common belief that other animals are primitive and are guided only by (vaguely-defined) instincts. in the meantime, i've seen curious insects that interact with mammals out of curiosity or other motivation, i've seen a wild usual nervious scared cockroach domesticated and radically becoming docile and polite and even sligthtly playful, and other examples of unexcpected behaviour that does not fit into "primitive" at all. on the other hand, i've seen people so "primitive" it's hard to believe in this. i'm just sharing my opinion and once again i understand that my examples about insects are very easy to percieve as just another case of projection. for example, kzbin.infoEOuOFHyuIzw - what is mantis doing here exactly and for what exact "primitive" purpose? if you watch closely.

[@munchkin143]

Transhumanism, if developed in anything like our existing context, is likely to greatly increase inequality, and may have catastrophic consequences for the majority of humans.

[@mattforsythe5037]

The goat 🐐

[@life42theuniverse]

I think many people confuse more/better.

[@dr.mikeybee]

Does the principle of least action apply to training neural nets? Does the central corridor get most of the traffic during back prop?

[@ragnarherron7742]

Llms are discrete. This means they can perform work more easily. Reinforcement reward systems reflect analog (eg emotion) are harder (like heat) to convert into useful work.

[@Iightbeing]

What a great point about the unreliability of biology 😅

[@p13rr0m]

Thanks!

[@ragnarherron7742]

Conditional probability, (bayes) is similar to pavlovian conditioning. Should not be confused with accurate work representations (eg. explanations, discrete topological) . Emotional responses (eg. salivation) is better thought of as useful (inaccurate) noise (heat representations).

[@bazstraight8797]

4:30 Fred Hoyle, "The black cloud" assigned as reading by our (my) 4th form (ie 14yo) boys school teacher.

[@lizardy2867]

51:00 Exactly, we do have to be careful about emergent systems we create, as with AI, as with new bioforms we create, as with any progression. It is certainly wonderful that we as a collective are having this conversation, is it not? As we speak, we are conducting homeostasis of the highest level known to humanity since its inception. Of the many perspectives one may have towards such a system, I prefer to think this is not simply a human collective, but a living collective. The collective continuation, unto which we progress towards the inevitable coldness of space, where we shall lay out our beach chairs and share a quick pint while we watch the last invisible holes shred their last electrons.

[@jonathanmckinney5826]

The least action principle is not a fundamental thing in physics. It is just a computational device used such that for some choice of Langrangian it finds stationary solutions that lead to (e.g.) conservation laws and other laws of physics that then have to be compared with experiments. The burden becomes on finding a Lagrangian that makes it so that when finding the least action it gives outcomes that agree with experiments. So nothing about the least action principle says something about nature, and certainly is not a basis of agency.

[@asdf8asdf8asdf8asdf]

So wrong. Core of physics

[@jonathanmckinney5826]

@@asdf8asdf8asdf8asdf It is core of physics, you miss the point that it is by itself nothing meaningful without a Lagrangian. It is not a principle that independently optimizes.

[@inlov33]

This is interesting Convo... Human/ life has a miracle factor...an unknown creator....(?) Do you believe in the miracle of life?

[@korneykretov4668]

Astigmatism and brushing hair, 2 guys play dirty:)

[@thomasfreund-programandoha961]

Love this

[@wp9860]

Tim, are you OK? I hope everything is well with you.

[@cyberbiosecurity]

I'm relieved to realize he's not falling into raw panpsychism as i suggested earlier and I'm glad to be mistaken here earlier

[@mootytootyfrooty]

Levin my goat

[@CristianDobre983]

So has thesis been defended successfully?

[@richardbrucebaxter]

The emergent objective function of an evolved organism is the long-term survival of its distributed genetic information. This cannot be transcended without reprogramming its DNA (incentives).

[@Meewee466]

Id never upload my consciousness if it was possible. I will live and die like the rest of my species, like we’re supposed to.

[@j.hanleysmith8333]

Please get Sara Walker on the show 🙏🏽

[@valuemastery]

Intelligence is a "mechanical" process, executing logic decisions based on encoded experience. It has nothing to do with consciousness or being aware of the thinking process. It can be 100% done by a machine. Soon, machines will be more intelligent than us humans, just like they evolved to be more powerful, more enduring etc. in the past. But knowing how an experience feels like, beeing conscious of experiences, they have absolutely no access to. They just do logical reasoning. Which could potentially be problematic when they're given too much power and freedom at the same time.

[@markkennedy9767]

"Everything is a lossy abstraction" is probably true.

[@sbnwnc]

Human companionship means have a companion that has compassion and can share existential concerns. Dogs probably provide that. Sort of.

[@weinerdog137]

At 33:55. The Pavlov example:. Replace the dog with a human, but the human knows he is being experimented on, and he doesn't like it, so he lays down and starves to death, what does that say about agency?

[@ahrenadams]

All is mind. Us humans as you say think from individual and group perspective and through the ages our collective perspective grows.