HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

sage92

no profile record

comments

sage92
·năm ngoái·discuss
You’ve stated this so matter of factly that I imagine you have knowledge that somehow has alluded most people.

You mention gradients, which implies you can measure the delta/change of conscious, which implies you have a solid working definition, AND a static still point that does not change which this “consciousness” gradually changes.

From my perspective, which is first person pov, if I can detect changes in my “consciousness”, then where am I looking from to _notice_ this change? Is consciousness not the requirement of change detection?
sage92
·năm ngoái·discuss
Safe to say you tend to lean towards your second presentation of consciousness.

I tend to lean towards the idea that conscious is akin to a field in the sense of an electron field - that what we can measure are simply “excitations” of a more subtle field. Not a perfect metaphor, but it’s the closest thing to what matches my meditative experiences. IMO, it’s illogical for me to let another subjective being define what my substrate is, so I primarily rely on meditation and then supplement with objective observations.

All in all it really depends on what you define as consciousness. The issue that I have with most “objective” interpretations of consciousness is that we can only measure the excitations of this mysterious “life” thing is. If there is more to us than can be measured, e.g, that there are first person experiences that can be felt subjectively but not measured objectively, then any objective measure of consciousness will likely be limited. Consciousness seems from my pov to be the Achilles heal of the axiomatic assumptions of our scientific paradigm (at least in the west)

In response to your question, it depends on your definition of consciousness. Is neural activity the source of consciousness, or is neural activity the result of consciousness? How can we know for sure which?
sage92
·năm ngoái·discuss
Begs the question: by what metric are you using to track the change/staticity?

I don’t see how one can concretely come to the conclusion of whether it changes or stays the same, when the presence of consciousness itself is a prerequisite of making that very claim
sage92
·năm ngoái·discuss
Would you really call that a side effect? Nocebo is more akin to the opposite effect. We wouldn't say negative is a side effect of positive
sage92
·năm ngoái·discuss
The human body is driven by a small percentage of the overall genome. It remains to be seen if that small percentage really doesn’t play a part… we tend to remember those who scored the goal, but often forget about what it took for the scorer to have a shot in the first place…
sage92
·2 năm trước·discuss
They mention "tuning millions of expert adapters", not 100k
sage92
·2 năm trước·discuss
```

total_plastic = 8.3e9 # total plastic in tons degradation_rate = 0.05 # degradation rate per day in percentage

# Calculation of daily degradation in tons daily_degradation = total_plastic * degradation_rate / 100

# Estimation of time taken to degrade all plastic in days total_days = total_plastic / daily_degradation

# Conversion of total days to years total_years = total_days / 365

# Print the result print(f"It would take approximately {total_years:.2f} years to degrade all the plastic.")

```

It would take approximately 5.48 years to degrade all the plastic.