If we assume that nature is fundamentally computational, and that our brains are 100% physical (no supernatural soul or whatever) then our consciousness is computational physics.
In other words, yes AI's could in principle have consciousness.
I am using AI at work. And it definitely makes me (say) 10% more effective.
However my #1 productivity tool is still a custom code generator I have been using for years. It routinely generates 90+% of the code needed to write a typical biz web application, leaving just the business logic.
No AI. Just straightforward high-level-spec-to-server-client-DB code that is 100% trusted and proven in battle.
A great overview of the problems we all know we have. And zero new ideas on how to fix it.
Developing a "new kind of programming system" has been done many times before. Think case tools, functional programming, object oriented programming, CORBA, DDD, etc. etc. etc.
So best of luck but I highly recommend not investing your time unless you have at least one truly new idea that will change the outcome for the better.
The vast majority of people using UI's want predictability. Not "guess how this UI works!" games where you have to click on things at random to figure out how the UI works.
If you are an UI designer and want to create art then fine do that in your spare time. But at work be a professional and make the UI predictable and functional above all else.
"The two bugs that were found both sat outside the boundary of what the proofs cover. The denial-of-service was a missing specification. The heap overflow was a deeper issue in the trusted computing base, the C++ runtime that the entire proof edifice assumes is correct (and now has a PR addressing)."
In other words, the code was proven correct according to spec by LEAN. Which is exactly what LEAN claims to do.
In other words, yes AI's could in principle have consciousness.
reply