DO YOU WANT WORK ON ARC with the MindsAI team (current ARC winners)? MLST is sponsored by Tufa Labs: Focus: ARC, LLMs, test-time-compute, active inference, system2 reasoning, and more. Future plans: Expanding to complex environments like Warcraft 2 and Starcraft 2. Interested? Apply for an ML research position: benjamin@tufa.ai
this was a fascinating discussion - was arguing with someone on reddit about "agents having agency" this settles it. I was wrong on some fronts, opponent was too
It was very informative , many terms i didn't understand but it will help in growth pattern of learning anyway . So i watched whole video just get get basic idea .
I would be humbled, in good faith though, I would need to be confident that I have crafted a scenario for you that I myself in your position would take time to believe was any better a candidate than the typical TH-cam ne’er-do-well. I zero corporate ML experience. I’ve never been taught by a non-self institution. On paper my credentials are a vending machine retailer and know how to make digital media that businesses need. I have no chance Eddie Silicon Valley job if I were not willing to prove myself worthy as a team member and passionate Believer in this automation era. I’m not sure if you need affiliates or you want a long-term partner employee. non-understanding it was worthwhile, I would work for whatever you thought I had earned and no more. I have gave serious🎉 thought too in interning for a few operations. I’ve been looking Rilee for one that I believed would be taking the path in which I believe future gains would be worth the sacrifice it’s long as I could afford my otograph subscription. (this is the disclosure that this message was NOT written with or aided by artificial intelligence)
We do not exist except as individualize sparks of consciousness. Consciousness is fundamental. Mind is elemental and the elements; macro and micro are elemental; a denser elemental than mind. Three dimensions: Consciousness: Mind; and Elements. It is not the one dimension of matter posited by materialists. All is projection from consciousness through mind. Religion always knew that and science is catching up.
حافظه ماشین را همانند درختی fractal شگل داد که دادها وقتی زیاد می شود به بعد های کوچکترین انتقال داد همانند حافظهی انسانها فقط چکیدهای را ضبط کند تا زمانی که احتیاج است دوباره اشکال پیچیده را از شکلهای هندسی اولیه درست کند .
I mean I don't listen to this at 2x because it would be hard to understand with his accent, but I don't think the content itself precludes it from being played at 2x.
scary. fringe human. maybe new species. no joke. asperger awakened. asperger in full bloom (not disabling 'autism') blows humans' minds coz its one octave higher, one step further, next notch.
One of if not the most important scientists of the modern day. A man who not only knows his stuff but knows how to effectively communicate his knowledge, especially in such a way that is profound and awe-inspiring. Thanks for hosting Joscha again.
I know he has a lot of repeating topics and ideas he always talks about, but not only are they brilliant and very much worth be emphasized and repeated, but whenever you get Joscha off the course of his current topics of interests, you still just get these tremendous(!) often-times spontaneous feeling incredibly insightful opinions and ideas. Just brilliant to listen to this man.
real, even he keeps advocating this ideas it takes years for me to internalized it and comprehending it at my own capacity. Also dualist and enactivism failed to acknowledge his significant view (or maybe they pretend to not understand)
“…whenever you get Joscha off the course of his current topics of interests, you still just get these tremendous(!) often-times spontaneous feeling incredibly insightful opinions and ideas.” What is striking to me is not only that what Joscha Bach says is incredibly insightful but that it’s a coherent, seamless whole, perfectly qualified in such a way that there are no contradictions. I honestly can’t think of anyone else who speaks so cogently so consistently.
Whenever he veers off into a different topic, let's say - Christianity, he always somehow provides the best inisght about the topic that I have heard to-date. Almost as if he'd been thinking about it for decades. It's honestly mind-blowing.
I see Joscha Bach in the title, I sigh and reluctantly add the video to my watch later playlist, hoping I will at some point be able to bear the psychological and emotional anguish of listening to his ideas.
Idk if they count as interviews but some of his "theolocutions" on Curt Jaimungal's channel were amazing. He also did a 4+ hour interview on the demystifysci podcast, and there also exists a discussion where he somewhat takes the role of an interviewer with Stephen Wolfram... And then there's his Lex Fridman interviews that are awesome. I also highly recommend his presentation at the 37c3 conference it's one of my all time favourites
*_OMG, this man blows my mind every time I set through one of his talks man. I don't really know how to describe someone that's more genius than genius. I know the model when I see it though, and it's this man. It's 100℅ Joscha!_*
Whenever Joscha veers off into a different topic, let's say - Christianity, he always somehow provides the best inisght about the topic that I have heard to-date, giving the most eloquent and coherent response, Almost as if he'd been thinking about it for decades. It's honestly mind-blowing.
Joscha is by far the most honest interlocutor when it comes to his humble approach to philosophy and the juxtaposition to honest scientific epistemology. His credibility shines bright
2 hours of JOSCHA BACH paodacst is equal to 100 hours of any other person podcast: The WISDOM RAINS LIKE ANYTHING, its not knowledge but the knowledge distilled into wisdom. After a time people becomes repetetive and you know what they will say next and you Transcedent them. But with Joscha Bach, I have been hearing him for some 5 years and not being able to TRANSCEDENT him. ONE OF THE GREATES MIND HAVING WISDOM. HIS THOUGHTS ARE SO COHERENT AND SO DEEPFUL INSIGHTS.
One of the few people who I cannot watch without pausing the video every now and then to really think what he’s saying - amazing stuff! Also: A BIG HAND for his brutal characterization of the pathologies of Gary Marcus 😍
Uber wins by offloading costs to the drivers, paying them less, providing no benefits, then charging just enough to force competitors out of business, then raising the price back up to what they know the market will bear, the pocketing the difference just for making an app. Sure the medallion system needed an overhaul, but not sure that Uber is the terrific example he thinks it is. Otherwise, this was a terrific and thought provoking interview. Loved it.
Tim, your channel is my best source for everything AI. Keep up the good work, your channel is invaluable. Thank you. PS I love listening to Joscha Bach.
gonna need to watch this 50x times to even try to understand - first time I've seen him act out the coherence as a conductor notion and that was adorbs haha
This is one of my favorite people. He's super smart and level headed. Thank you for having him on. Thank you for being you, as you are one of my favorite people too.
The first fifteen minutes of this interview are so good already. That it blows my mind. I like how simply he puts everything, so clearly and concisely. We have to be able to formalize and quantify language before we can turn it into logic for a computer.That's beautiful, but you have to say it out loud before you realize the truth of it.
Really enjoyed this! Says he's not a philosopher but has clearly already arrived at a really robust and coherent philosophy. Around 1hr20 he touched on multilingual language formalisation and building a knowledge graph, I'm particularly looking forward to that!
Micheal Levin is the natural counter balance for this perspective, as it is very important to remember that the brain is composed of living cells. The activation patterns are the cells communicating implementations. The brain and body (i.e. consciousness) are a community of living things interacting and collaborating. Very important to keep in mind
Very very interesting. I am not quite on board with the characterization of animism as a Japanese concept that disappeared with the Enlightenment. Bach's description sounds a hell of a lot like Helge's spirit maybe as a materialistic realization (imagine us to be a little cell in the organism of the planet). However, I am not convinced that self-observation leads to consciousness. As the sociologist Luhmann thought, social systems are also self-observing, e.g. the media reports on the media, but would we call the media conscious? The concept of "second-order perception" seems to very similar to the idea of "second-order observation" (or second-order cybernetics), a concept already introduced by Heinz von Foerster. I also really like his concept of coherence. I think of it as connectivity (Anschlussfähigkeit) of operations. A thought has to allow further thinking, a report of the media should generate more reports and so on. So it is not the same. Bach's notion is more similar to the law in society that exists for stabilization of expectations.
When I am giving a lecture on a familiar topic, and I'm not exhausted, I sometimes go into a mode where I step back, listen to the right words coming out and think to myself "this is going pretty well, but where are all these words coming from??". It's an odd feeling.
And where did the thought of "this is going pretty well, but where are all these words coming from?" come from? and where did that come from and and and and... :-)
Your interviews are great, especially the way you get these smart guys talking about things that they don’t talk about all the time in all their other interviews
1:46:30 Very sophisticated answer, Joshua. The beauty of this argument is that it applies to everything from sweat shops to human trafficking to child labor then, since apparently everybody is free to choose their employer and there isn't such a thing as exploitation under capitalism.
Yes Joscha, implemented is a good way of thinking about it. Emulated, transduced, abstracted, synthesised have been what I have used so far but implemented suggests a set of instructions leading towards the end result, this works much better.
I don’t agree with everything Joscha claims, but I always find it extremely interesting and intellectually stimulating to listen to him. Thanks a lot for having him on-great discussion between you guys! 🤩🙏🏻 (Please have Bernardo Kastrup on as well.)
Jiddu Krishnamurthy: Attention of the content of consciousness removes the self contradiction. Insight can act / use the memories but it is not born of memory. I can relate with Bach, he makes sense to me.
Such an intellectual joy, every time! - and yet, I wish JB would give sources and citations much more diligently and as frequently as he quotes them in his dense assemblies of mindblow.
17:40 There is no emergence between software and hardware because hardware is (still) completely immune to anything software does. If software could influence hardware in some way, like thought patterns can influence brain structure, we would witness emergence. But I always love and appreciate Joscha's perspective.
@@MarkoKraguljac Hi , you said, " hardware is (still) completely immune to anything software does". Are you sure about this, because my claim seems to undermine this idea....unless I have misunderstood your statement.
You can have virtual machines. Doesn't really matter for computational ability, it is still "just" Turing complete computation. Makes more sense to just update weights or graphs or whatever in response to sensory data or let the AI extend itself with code.
11:35 Agency is a physical and materialistic property of a system, the mechanisms and neurological substrates of agency do in fact exist for most of us without neuropsychiatric disorders.
Considering the notion that consciousness happens in the now. Maybe a missing piece next to agency in the current CoT is the ability to get interrupted from the outside and inside
47:42 - Panpsychism is relevant to philosophy because existing models of physics (at least non-idealist quantum interpretations) can perfectly explain the evolution of empirical consciousness in the brain as adaptive functional processes (emulating some function/software for example a perceiver/agent model), without the need to suppose the existence of phenomenological consciousness (an actual subjective or first person perspective rather than simply a model of one).
8:23 - Intelligence & Agency, 33:34 - Software running on our 🧠! 52:48 why we are conscious, 56:59 - how software works. 43:05 - Where & when is consciousness, 51:14
3:00 Hahaha, that scene is hilarious! There’s a guy from the ‘80s standing next to Scotty, thinking he’s crazy. Then McCoy hands him the mouse as if it were a microphone, and Scotty says, “Hello, computer.” 🤣
@ 57:50 Very interesting discussion. I perceive this as warping the state/action (Q*) grid to optimally fit with experience (much like using k-means clustering to focus attention nodes on a grid generalized into triplets) over regions of interest. Note that the two optic nerves generalize, and split their signal, between the two hemispheres of the brain (like a de-fuzzification process in Fuzzy Logic) and that the nerves in the body have a larger volume than the brain and look just like the roots of a tree. I suspect the synapses move, via micro-tubules, to optimize entropy for energy efficiency. Micro-tubules also help guide the separation of chromosomes during cellular division.
When you hear that people in Japan believe that everything is conscious, you should try to understand what they really mean. Consciousness is a completely separate entity. The body has no consciousness, that is the consciousness that lives in the body. The body dies because the consciousness has decided that it is time to move on. But feel free to call it nonsense, because you are actually right, the idea of "Japanese belief", "everything is conscious except dead bodies" etc, as you understood it is indeed nonsense. And you'll be amazed how close you've come to discovering Buddhism101, good job!
Amazing interview with extremely informed questions. I'm a new subscriber. But essentially doesn't this amount to an academic explanation of a simulation within a simulation? I think I'm going to put the transcript into AI and try to find some way to summarize this more succinctly.
28:40 oh mannn, he even breaks down science into relatable stories like on his cyber animism and using Genesis to describe newborn's consciousness awakening
Solomonoff, Kolmogorov, Chaitin, and others following on these ideas, also have conceptialised evolution in terms of programs, and selection is based on simplicity (formalisation of Occam's razor, algorithmic information, Kolmogorov complexity, who knows maybe even Aristotle said something similar, or maybe even presoctatics, like Heracletus)
This man doesn't speak for common mortals, and I consider myself one. His words are simply incomprehensible to me. Highly knowledgeable individuals should strive to communicate in simple terms, making their expertise accessible to a broader audience, rather than only addressing a select elite. By simplifying complex topics, they foster understanding and inclusivity, instead of isolating themselves through intellectual posturing
I find the density of ideas in his speech to be at times challenging, while at the same time admiring how concisely phrased it is. Much could be elaborated upon, but the audience here is probably for the most part has the necessary context in order to be ready to take most of it in. I wouldn’t fault him for making such assumptions in the interest of brevity.
@@stevo-dx5rrI agree that some thinkers aim for brevity, but it often comes at the cost of accessibility. Take Roger Penrose, for instance. He's equally brilliant, delving into deep concepts, but his explanations are far more approachable. He has a talent for guiding his audience through complex ideas without losing them, which is a rare and much-needed skill in intellectual discourse
Title redo: "oscha Bach - Why Your Thoughts Aren't All Yours." - people can think outside of language and people can innovate within a language. Besides many others, there is an empirical and a subjective side to thinking. In Jungian typology these two are known as Extraverted and Introverted thinking. I don't use those terms. I use Empirical thinking and Subjective thinking. I also sometimes use Outward thinking and Inward thinking when I'm feeling in a particularly Anglishy mood.
I believe we should view consciousness (not to be confused with awareness) as something that does not emerge from brain activity. Instead, it functions as a user of software, which we can think of as the mind, and hardware, which is the brain. In other words, consciousness should be regarded as a player in a game, rather than the game itself. It is an ever-present observer, which is a well-known and observable fact.
@ It's interesting that you mentioned him. He had a very engaging conversation with Roger Penrose. More and more intelligent people are realizing that something deeper lies beneath our so-called reality. That's a very positive sign. 👌
Perhaps, Consciousness (from the viewpoint of the nowness bubble) is the observed difference between 2 patterns (in its simplest form, eg a trigger)? 🤔 I like JBs insights.
Is Joscha making any attempt to test some of his theories with some practical experiments/simulations? It becomes hard to ground beautiful stories to reality otherwise...
Does caring reflect a willingness to sacrifice? As sacrifice is necessary whenever there is scarcity? Seem depression occurs when it not worth sacrificing the present for the future.
For the first half an hour while I listened to the video without looking at it, I've been thinking: Is it this Joshua Bach guy interviewing Bernardo Castrup?😂
Years ago I was listening to Joscha in a car, on a dirt road in rural China, stuck behind an old man pulling a creaky wooden cart with what looked like a heavy load. The man’s back curved with the shape of the cart as if he were born pulling it. All I could think of was what this man would think of what Joscha was saying? From that moment on, that little man with a strong back and heart has become my BS-filter for all this theoretical talk on the meaning of life and consciousness.
1:38:09 When do we know when regulation is adequate? In another context, Bach claimed, "We already do that", in response to a proposal that we charge fees proportional to pollution. If the fees are nominal, if they don't result in the reduction of pollution down to levels that most people would say are acceptable, then they are inadequate, if the point is to embody in reality the idea that we have a shared right to define limits to environmental impacts. (The fees charged today are also not fair. If they are at all substantial, they have an impact on prices. Charging the fees without returning the proceeds to the people at large is a tax on the people that mostly impacts those who are least well-off. Industries are being charged for use of something that can be said to belong to all. Fee proceeds should be shared equally to all. IF we charged fees proportional to emissions, resource extraction or habitat destruction, we would motivate efforts to reduce harm to the environment. Behavior of individuals and corporations would change in ways that tend to reduce harm. This means we transform from something like cancer cells of Earth to brain cells for the planet. (The idea is expanded on at 'gaiabrain' at alphabet's favorite blog platform.) This transformation happens by embodying in practice respect for truth and fairness as primary values. Constraining behavior to respect primary values will expand human possibilities farther into the future. 1:46:26 Think how much regulation could be eliminated, or prevented from coming into existence, if we manage environmental impacts effectively, so pollution, resource depletion and other harm is limited so that it aligns with average opinion about what is acceptable. Making an honest market by using Fee-and-Dividend can *replace* current regulations. It's not a proposal to *increase* regulation.
When I create a microservice, such as generating a bank statement PDF file based on a JSON request body, I am creating an emergent phenomenon. In computer science, emergence is a key concept underlying so-called 'object-oriented programming.' Outside of OOP, whether it's modular programming, operating systems, compilers, or device drivers, defining an interface is fundamentally similar to creating emergence. We developers just use a more toned-down term: 'abstraction.'
Thoughts are expressed by language and all languages are public property generated by the human collective and none can be attributed to any individual.
He talks about people just "making contracts with each other" but doesn't seem to understand that people have unequal positions in a capitalist market economy. The uber driver isn't really exercising his freedom (usually) when he decides to become an uber driver. He is compelled by the specific economic conditions and the mode of production we live in. Perhaps the only way he is exercising his freedom is deciding between driving for uber or working for an equally miserable low wage job. This is true for just about every worker. You do not have the freedom to stop working. Because you are denied access to the means of production, you are economically compelled to sell your labor power for a wage.
@@Dri_ver_ i dunno man, i just used internet to gain a skill and am working a well paying and fulfilling job on my PC. My pc being the "means of production".
@@Walter5850 LOL your PC is not a means of production. You sell your labor power for a wage. You are by definition, working class. You don't own land which can be used to produce anything, you don't own factories or machines, and you don't own the products of your labor. It actually is really frustrating people don't understand the most basic concepts of capitalism and class. This is why we're so lost and why all the greatest utopian dreams of the tech sector will never happen.
DO YOU WANT WORK ON ARC with the MindsAI team (current ARC winners)?
MLST is sponsored by Tufa Labs:
Focus: ARC, LLMs, test-time-compute, active inference, system2 reasoning, and more.
Future plans: Expanding to complex environments like Warcraft 2 and Starcraft 2.
Interested? Apply for an ML research position: benjamin@tufa.ai
this was a fascinating discussion - was arguing with someone on reddit about "agents having agency" this settles it. I was wrong on some fronts, opponent was too
It was very informative , many terms i didn't understand but it will help in growth pattern of learning anyway . So i watched whole video just get get basic idea .
I would be humbled, in good faith though,
I would need to be confident that I have crafted a scenario for you that I myself in your position would take time to believe was any better a candidate than the typical TH-cam ne’er-do-well.
I zero corporate ML experience. I’ve never been taught by a non-self institution. On paper my credentials are a vending machine retailer and know how to make digital media that businesses need.
I have no chance Eddie Silicon Valley job if I were not willing to prove myself worthy as a team member and passionate
Believer in this automation era.
I’m not sure if you need affiliates or you want a long-term partner employee. non-understanding it was worthwhile, I would work for whatever you thought I had earned and no more.
I have gave serious🎉 thought too in interning for a few operations. I’ve been looking Rilee for one that I believed would be taking the path in which I believe future gains would be worth the sacrifice it’s long as I could afford my otograph subscription.
(this is the disclosure that this message was NOT written with or aided by artificial intelligence)
We do not exist except as individualize sparks of consciousness. Consciousness is fundamental. Mind is elemental and the elements; macro and micro are elemental; a denser elemental than mind. Three dimensions: Consciousness: Mind; and Elements. It is not the one dimension of matter posited by materialists. All is projection from consciousness through mind. Religion always knew that and science is catching up.
حافظه ماشین را همانند درختی fractal شگل داد که دادها وقتی زیاد می شود به بعد های کوچکترین انتقال داد همانند حافظهی انسانها فقط چکیدهای را ضبط کند تا زمانی که احتیاج است دوباره اشکال پیچیده را از شکلهای هندسی اولیه درست کند .
This is the type of person who you can't listen at 2x, only 1x with pauses
And ChatGPT to simplify things for me :)
Anything beyond 1x speed is at the perils of losing information.
are we watching the same thing...?
like, when does this super vital unskippable content come on so i can skip to that? people know this is gradeschool level knowledge..
I mean I don't listen to this at 2x because it would be hard to understand with his accent, but I don't think the content itself precludes it from being played at 2x.
This man is hugely impressive. Still relatively young. Keep a very keen eye on his progress. A genuine public intellectual.
he spend whole decades to write his cognitive architecture book, you can tell he really passionate with how human mind works
@@mrizNeurologists do Not know the source of human Consciousness.
scary. fringe human. maybe new species. no joke. asperger awakened. asperger in full bloom (not disabling 'autism') blows humans' minds coz its one octave higher, one step further, next notch.
@@steveflorida5849neurologists can't tell their ass from their forehead most of the time. It's computational biologists that will crack this.
One of if not the most important scientists of the modern day. A man who not only knows his stuff but knows how to effectively communicate his knowledge, especially in such a way that is profound and awe-inspiring. Thanks for hosting Joscha again.
Grow up😅
I don't feel bad that my girlfriend left me now. There's a new Joscha Bach video!
greatest coming out of all times!
same.
Good for her maybe she can finally be happy without you dragging her down. Lol just kidding but betting you heard something close to that.
N'ah mean?
i.e., you know what I mean.
I know he has a lot of repeating topics and ideas he always talks about, but not only are they brilliant and very much worth be emphasized and repeated, but whenever you get Joscha off the course of his current topics of interests, you still just get these tremendous(!) often-times spontaneous feeling incredibly insightful opinions and ideas. Just brilliant to listen to this man.
real, even he keeps advocating this ideas it takes years for me to internalized it and comprehending it at my own capacity. Also dualist and enactivism failed to acknowledge his significant view (or maybe they pretend to not understand)
@@mrizNeurologists still do not know the source of human Consciousness.
@@steveflorida5849 philosophers also don't know
“…whenever you get Joscha off the course of his current topics of interests, you still just get these tremendous(!) often-times spontaneous feeling incredibly insightful opinions and ideas.”
What is striking to me is not only that what Joscha Bach says is incredibly insightful but that it’s a coherent, seamless whole, perfectly qualified in such a way that there are no contradictions. I honestly can’t think of anyone else who speaks so cogently so consistently.
Whenever he veers off into a different topic, let's say - Christianity, he always somehow provides the best inisght about the topic that I have heard to-date. Almost as if he'd been thinking about it for decades. It's honestly mind-blowing.
My man, you have been on fire with both content quality and quantity lately.
I see "Joscha Bach" in the title, I click! Looking forward to this...
Same! 😂
I see Joscha Bach in the title, I sigh and reluctantly add the video to my watch later playlist, hoping I will at some point be able to bear the psychological and emotional anguish of listening to his ideas.
exactly
@@pooroldnostradamusI listen this to kill my boredom
@@mriz No, you're right. After all, anxiety is the polar opposite of boredom.
I think this is the best interview with Joscha Bach yet, which was a tall order.
For real 🎉
Idk if they count as interviews but some of his "theolocutions" on Curt Jaimungal's channel were amazing. He also did a 4+ hour interview on the demystifysci podcast, and there also exists a discussion where he somewhat takes the role of an interviewer with Stephen Wolfram... And then there's his Lex Fridman interviews that are awesome. I also highly recommend his presentation at the 37c3 conference it's one of my all time favourites
no way, the first episode he did on Lex is the best one
Another Josha Bach appearance, yippi!!🎉
*_OMG, this man blows my mind every time I set through one of his talks man. I don't really know how to describe someone that's more genius than genius. I know the model when I see it though, and it's this man. It's 100℅ Joscha!_*
Whenever Joscha veers off into a different topic, let's say - Christianity, he always somehow provides the best inisght about the topic that I have heard to-date, giving the most eloquent and coherent response, Almost as if he'd been thinking about it for decades. It's honestly mind-blowing.
Joscha is by far the most honest interlocutor when it comes to his humble approach to philosophy and the juxtaposition to honest scientific epistemology. His credibility shines bright
2 hours of JOSCHA BACH paodacst is equal to 100 hours of any other person podcast:
The WISDOM RAINS LIKE ANYTHING, its not knowledge but the knowledge distilled into wisdom.
After a time people becomes repetetive and you know what they will say next and you Transcedent them.
But with Joscha Bach, I have been hearing him for some 5 years and not being able to TRANSCEDENT him. ONE OF THE GREATES MIND HAVING WISDOM.
HIS THOUGHTS ARE SO COHERENT AND SO DEEPFUL INSIGHTS.
One of the few people who I cannot watch without pausing the video every now and then to really think what he’s saying - amazing stuff!
Also: A BIG HAND for his brutal characterization of the pathologies of Gary Marcus 😍
Joscha needs to write a book with these ideas. I'd be ready to pre-order as soon as he says that he'll write a book.
he did write book about his cognitive architecture conception
Just read Marx
Uber wins by offloading costs to the drivers, paying them less, providing no benefits, then charging just enough to force competitors out of business, then raising the price back up to what they know the market will bear, the pocketing the difference just for making an app.
Sure the medallion system needed an overhaul, but not sure that Uber is the terrific example he thinks it is.
Otherwise, this was a terrific and thought provoking interview.
Loved it.
It is fascinating, Josha is one of the few people I can fully agree with on pretty much any topic.
Tim, your channel is my best source for everything AI. Keep up the good work, your channel is invaluable. Thank you.
PS I love listening to Joscha Bach.
gonna need to watch this 50x times to even try to understand - first time I've seen him act out the coherence as a conductor notion and that was adorbs haha
This channel never disappoints! Every video is packed with useful insights and presented in a way that keeps me engaged from start to finish.
I've always had high admiration for joscha Bach's mind. His thoughts flow so smoothly
This is one of my favorite people. He's super smart and level headed. Thank you for having him on. Thank you for being you, as you are one of my favorite people too.
Guys your channel is the ice on the cake of the ML community
These interviews have the vibe of being like stuff that will be referenced historically, pretty cool
The first fifteen minutes of this interview are so good already. That it blows my mind.
I like how simply he puts everything, so clearly and concisely. We have to be able to formalize and quantify language before we can turn it into logic for a computer.That's beautiful, but you have to say it out loud before you realize the truth of it.
Been listening to Joscha for years love him he so gets it he knows what's up thank you for this conversation
Really enjoyed this! Says he's not a philosopher but has clearly already arrived at a really robust and coherent philosophy. Around 1hr20 he touched on multilingual language formalisation and building a knowledge graph, I'm particularly looking forward to that!
I feel like my intelligence increased by 1000% and then the video ended and I went back down to baseline.
Micheal Levin is the natural counter balance for this perspective, as it is very important to remember that the brain is composed of living cells.
The activation patterns are the cells communicating implementations.
The brain and body (i.e. consciousness) are a community of living things interacting and collaborating.
Very important to keep in mind
Joscha Bach. Instant thumb up.
Very very interesting. I am not quite on board with the characterization of animism as a Japanese concept that disappeared with the Enlightenment. Bach's description sounds a hell of a lot like Helge's spirit maybe as a materialistic realization (imagine us to be a little cell in the organism of the planet). However, I am not convinced that self-observation leads to consciousness. As the sociologist Luhmann thought, social systems are also self-observing, e.g. the media reports on the media, but would we call the media conscious? The concept of "second-order perception" seems to very similar to the idea of "second-order observation" (or second-order cybernetics), a concept already introduced by Heinz von Foerster. I also really like his concept of coherence. I think of it as connectivity (Anschlussfähigkeit) of operations. A thought has to allow further thinking, a report of the media should generate more reports and so on. So it is not the same. Bach's notion is more similar to the law in society that exists for stabilization of expectations.
The best interview I’ve listened to, ever! The quality of the questions and topics are second to none
When I am giving a lecture on a familiar topic, and I'm not exhausted, I sometimes go into a mode where I step back, listen to the right words coming out and think to myself "this is going pretty well, but where are all these words coming from??". It's an odd feeling.
And where did the thought of "this is going pretty well, but where are all these words coming from?" come from? and where did that come from and and and and... :-)
@@SQAProd Sadly (or perhaps fortunately!) the recursion only goes one level deep for me. 😄
They come from your bodily/brain conditioning.
You don't exist beyond a collection of narratives thoughts.
Thank you for this episode! Greetings from eastern europe!
Your interviews are great, especially the way you get these smart guys talking about things that they don’t talk about all the time in all their other interviews
1:46:30 Very sophisticated answer, Joshua.
The beauty of this argument is that it applies to everything from sweat shops to human trafficking to child labor then, since apparently everybody is free to choose their employer and there isn't such a thing as exploitation under capitalism.
No matter how many times I hear his thoughts I pay attention and my jaw drops open 🐒
Yes Joscha, implemented is a good way of thinking about it. Emulated, transduced, abstracted, synthesised have been what I have used so far but implemented suggests a set of instructions leading towards the end result, this works much better.
Damnit, I'm supposed to be studying for a midterm tomorrow and you had to drop a Joscha Bach episode. 😂
I am learning how to keep good vibes while exchanging opinions about smart ess topic, thanks to these two wonderful persons
I don’t agree with everything Joscha claims, but I always find it extremely interesting and intellectually stimulating to listen to him. Thanks a lot for having him on-great discussion between you guys! 🤩🙏🏻
(Please have Bernardo Kastrup on as well.)
I am grateful to be hearing Joscha Bach. Thanks to Machine Learning Street Talk.
Yay to Joscha Bach!
im too dumb to understand, but I keep listening.
Same 😂
Same 😂
Same 😂
Keep cranking out the material man. Loving it!
Jiddu Krishnamurthy: Attention of the content of consciousness removes the self contradiction. Insight can act / use the memories but it is not born of memory. I can relate with Bach, he makes sense to me.
Such an intellectual joy, every time! - and yet, I wish JB would give sources and citations much more diligently and as frequently as he quotes them in his dense assemblies of mindblow.
Nice long format interview. Thanks a lot.
I no longer use the Gregorian day/week/year calendar, everything is now measured by the J.Bach orbit.
17:40 There is no emergence between software and hardware because hardware is (still) completely immune to anything software does. If software could influence hardware in some way, like thought patterns can influence brain structure, we would witness emergence.
But I always love and appreciate Joscha's perspective.
a hacker can, under certain circumstances, permanently damage hardware or render it permanently dysfunctional without physical access.
@@Aryankingz How does that relate to what I said?
@@MarkoKraguljac Hi , you said, " hardware is (still) completely immune to anything software does". Are you sure about this, because my claim seems to undermine this idea....unless I have misunderstood your statement.
@@MarkoKraguljacit doesn't, and bravo for catching that... I thought something was off with that statement...
You can have virtual machines. Doesn't really matter for computational ability, it is still "just" Turing complete computation. Makes more sense to just update weights or graphs or whatever in response to sensory data or let the AI extend itself with code.
11:35 Agency is a physical and materialistic property of a system, the mechanisms and neurological substrates of agency do in fact exist for most of us without neuropsychiatric disorders.
he lost the plot
maybe we should start a Joscha Bach fan club, I see a devoted community here!
Please we need a conversation with both Joscha and Philip together
Considering the notion that consciousness happens in the now. Maybe a missing piece next to agency in the current CoT is the ability to get interrupted from the outside and inside
2:02 That is very well said and how I feel too.
47:42 - Panpsychism is relevant to philosophy because existing models of physics (at least non-idealist quantum interpretations) can perfectly explain the evolution of empirical consciousness in the brain as adaptive functional processes (emulating some function/software for example a perceiver/agent model), without the need to suppose the existence of phenomenological consciousness (an actual subjective or first person perspective rather than simply a model of one).
8:23 - Intelligence & Agency, 33:34 - Software running on our 🧠! 52:48 why we are conscious, 56:59 - how software works.
43:05 - Where & when is consciousness, 51:14
3:00 Hahaha, that scene is hilarious! There’s a guy from the ‘80s standing next to Scotty, thinking he’s crazy. Then McCoy hands him the mouse as if it were a microphone, and Scotty says, “Hello, computer.” 🤣
Josha makes me feel like I am just some sort of sentient rodent :D
Fire fire fire I mean Joscha Bach bends your brain in real time reminds me of David deustch these guys are amazing thinkers
Joscha red pilling! More Please... Finally MLST facemask has slipped.
@ 57:50 Very interesting discussion.
I perceive this as warping the state/action (Q*) grid to optimally fit with experience (much like using k-means clustering to focus attention nodes on a grid generalized into triplets) over regions of interest.
Note that the two optic nerves generalize, and split their signal, between the two hemispheres of the brain (like a de-fuzzification process in Fuzzy Logic) and that the nerves in the body have a larger volume than the brain and look just like the roots of a tree. I suspect the synapses move, via micro-tubules, to optimize entropy for energy efficiency. Micro-tubules also help guide the separation of chromosomes during cellular division.
When you hear that people in Japan believe that everything is conscious, you should try to understand what they really mean. Consciousness is a completely separate entity. The body has no consciousness, that is the consciousness that lives in the body. The body dies because the consciousness has decided that it is time to move on. But feel free to call it nonsense, because you are actually right, the idea of "Japanese belief", "everything is conscious except dead bodies" etc, as you understood it is indeed nonsense.
And you'll be amazed how close you've come to discovering Buddhism101, good job!
Amazing interview with extremely informed questions. I'm a new subscriber. But essentially doesn't this amount to an academic explanation of a simulation within a simulation? I think I'm going to put the transcript into AI and try to find some way to summarize this more succinctly.
Thank You from Oslo, Norway!
SO, there is only now, and now ongoing. We share now but also are only now, hence we are all "conscious" metaphysicaly
28:40 oh mannn, he even breaks down science into relatable stories like on his cyber animism and using Genesis to describe newborn's consciousness awakening
Solomonoff, Kolmogorov, Chaitin, and others following on these ideas, also have conceptialised evolution in terms of programs, and selection is based on simplicity (formalisation of Occam's razor, algorithmic information, Kolmogorov complexity, who knows maybe even Aristotle said something similar, or maybe even presoctatics, like Heracletus)
This man doesn't speak for common mortals, and I consider myself one. His words are simply incomprehensible to me.
Highly knowledgeable individuals should strive to communicate in simple terms, making their expertise accessible to a broader audience, rather than only addressing a select elite. By simplifying complex topics, they foster understanding and inclusivity, instead of isolating themselves through intellectual posturing
I find the density of ideas in his speech to be at times challenging, while at the same time admiring how concisely phrased it is. Much could be elaborated upon, but the audience here is probably for the most part has the necessary context in order to be ready to take most of it in. I wouldn’t fault him for making such assumptions in the interest of brevity.
@@stevo-dx5rrI agree that some thinkers aim for brevity, but it often comes at the cost of accessibility. Take Roger Penrose, for instance. He's equally brilliant, delving into deep concepts, but his explanations are far more approachable. He has a talent for guiding his audience through complex ideas without losing them, which is a rare and much-needed skill in intellectual discourse
Title redo: "oscha Bach - Why Your Thoughts Aren't All Yours." - people can think outside of language and people can innovate within a language. Besides many others, there is an empirical and a subjective side to thinking. In Jungian typology these two are known as Extraverted and Introverted thinking. I don't use those terms. I use Empirical thinking and Subjective thinking. I also sometimes use Outward thinking and Inward thinking when I'm feeling in a particularly Anglishy mood.
I believe we should view consciousness (not to be confused with awareness) as something that does not emerge from brain activity. Instead, it functions as a user of software, which we can think of as the mind, and hardware, which is the brain.
In other words, consciousness should be regarded as a player in a game, rather than the game itself.
It is an ever-present observer, which is a well-known and observable fact.
Are you familiar with Federico Faggin? He talks on consciousness as both the observer and the observed. Very intuitive mind and a brilliant scientist.
@ It's interesting that you mentioned him. He had a very engaging conversation with Roger Penrose. More and more intelligent people are realizing that something deeper lies beneath our so-called reality. That's a very positive sign. 👌
@@11solus11 absolutely 👌
Perhaps, Consciousness (from the viewpoint of the nowness bubble) is the observed difference between 2 patterns (in its simplest form, eg a trigger)? 🤔 I like JBs insights.
Perfectly preposterous! I love it😅
Personally, I think the biggest takeaway in a sociological context are thoughts on the need to rethink the way democracy works.
Such a great mind
Best one yet!
Yes! He knows all about GM.
Joshca is right about Uber.
The old system of regulation is no different than nepotism and yes it's very ugly.
Getting early JBP vibes and I likes it
Amazing listen 🎧
Is Joscha making any attempt to test some of his theories with some practical experiments/simulations? It becomes hard to ground beautiful stories to reality otherwise...
Came for the machine intelligence talk, stayed for the existential crisis
Does caring reflect a willingness to sacrifice? As sacrifice is necessary whenever there is scarcity? Seem depression occurs when it not worth sacrificing the present for the future.
Very sharp minded man
The ai talk is good but I’m really here for the backwards peaky blinders cap
For the first half an hour while I listened to the video without looking at it, I've been thinking: Is it this Joshua Bach guy interviewing Bernardo Castrup?😂
They had a disagreement online some time ago, right? It would be spectacular to see them in some debate...
Years ago I was listening to Joscha in a car, on a dirt road in rural China, stuck behind an old man pulling a creaky wooden cart with what looked like a heavy load. The man’s back curved with the shape of the cart as if he were born pulling it. All I could think of was what this man would think of what Joscha was saying? From that moment on, that little man with a strong back and heart has become my BS-filter for all this theoretical talk on the meaning of life and consciousness.
I rarely comment, but that is mindbogglingly stupid.
Tyvm! ❤
1:38:09 When do we know when regulation is adequate? In another context, Bach claimed, "We already do that", in response to a proposal that we charge fees proportional to pollution. If the fees are nominal, if they don't result in the reduction of pollution down to levels that most people would say are acceptable, then they are inadequate, if the point is to embody in reality the idea that we have a shared right to define limits to environmental impacts. (The fees charged today are also not fair. If they are at all substantial, they have an impact on prices. Charging the fees without returning the proceeds to the people at large is a tax on the people that mostly impacts those who are least well-off. Industries are being charged for use of something that can be said to belong to all. Fee proceeds should be shared equally to all.
IF we charged fees proportional to emissions, resource extraction or habitat destruction, we would motivate efforts to reduce harm to the environment. Behavior of individuals and corporations would change in ways that tend to reduce harm. This means we transform from something like cancer cells of Earth to brain cells for the planet. (The idea is expanded on at 'gaiabrain' at alphabet's favorite blog platform.) This transformation happens by embodying in practice respect for truth and fairness as primary values. Constraining behavior to respect primary values will expand human possibilities farther into the future.
1:46:26 Think how much regulation could be eliminated, or prevented from coming into existence, if we manage environmental impacts effectively, so pollution, resource depletion and other harm is limited so that it aligns with average opinion about what is acceptable. Making an honest market by using Fee-and-Dividend can *replace* current regulations. It's not a proposal to *increase* regulation.
Never been ripped off in a foreign city by a driver if they were uber.
This is dope
Story time with Joshua Bach
"I don''t know how mater can be conscious." What do you think you are made of? Otherwise, so far great video, so thanks very much.
When I create a microservice, such as generating a bank statement PDF file based on a JSON request body, I am creating an emergent phenomenon. In computer science, emergence is a key concept underlying so-called 'object-oriented programming.' Outside of OOP, whether it's modular programming, operating systems, compilers, or device drivers, defining an interface is fundamentally similar to creating emergence. We developers just use a more toned-down term: 'abstraction.'
See plato.stanford.edu/entries/properties-emergent/
DUDE DIDNT MOVE HIS BODY POSITION FOR 2 HOURS.
At 19:00 is he including our subjective experience in this equivalence of emergence in machines and minds.
Thoughts are expressed by language and all languages are public property generated by the human collective and none can be attributed to any individual.
He talks about people just "making contracts with each other" but doesn't seem to understand that people have unequal positions in a capitalist market economy. The uber driver isn't really exercising his freedom (usually) when he decides to become an uber driver. He is compelled by the specific economic conditions and the mode of production we live in. Perhaps the only way he is exercising his freedom is deciding between driving for uber or working for an equally miserable low wage job. This is true for just about every worker. You do not have the freedom to stop working. Because you are denied access to the means of production, you are economically compelled to sell your labor power for a wage.
You are a victim.
@@Dri_ver_ i dunno man, i just used internet to gain a skill and am working a well paying and fulfilling job on my PC. My pc being the "means of production".
@@Walter5850 LOL your PC is not a means of production. You sell your labor power for a wage. You are by definition, working class. You don't own land which can be used to produce anything, you don't own factories or machines, and you don't own the products of your labor. It actually is really frustrating people don't understand the most basic concepts of capitalism and class. This is why we're so lost and why all the greatest utopian dreams of the tech sector will never happen.
@@lefthookouchmcarm4520 We all are victims of capitalism. Even the capitalist
@@Dri_ver_ are you a victim of history?
Imagine living with his belief system. I would get depressed and die.