Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Cat [chat]

18182848687100

Posts

  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    Organichu wrote: »
    PLA wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    how does someone even interface with a thousand+ tabs? do you occasionally cycle through them all to remember what you have open? certainly many hundreds of those you forget even having open. maybe it's like, as i occasionally purge my tabs every few months i'm reminded i had this thing open and i then consume it?

    *trembles*

    Months? I never have tabs open when I go to bed. I'm bad at going to bed, though.

    i don't think this is the case with someone who has over a thousand tabs tho

    Yeah, I think I'm staying below twohundred.

  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo But do you really believe him? Registered User regular
    I have two tabs open. Chat and Facebook.

    Also intend not to use bookmarks and just use my history or researching for things.

    Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    how do you even handle more than like

    20 tabs without going crazy, do you guys just leave your pcs running 24/7 with all your apps running 24/7 too?

    I do pretty much leave my PC on all the time. I realize I should probably stop doing this.

    When Corsair hurries up and sends me the check for my cooler I'll get right on that.

    Gotta razor blade off the thermal paste and buy a new CPU cooler I guess. Corsair 250D, looks like I can get a nice single radiator cooler thing for the front fan.

    I'd not use razors, sounds like a good way to cause scratches. Isopropyl and microfiber disposables easily gets it all off.

    PSN: Honkalot
    ChanusSniperGuy
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    Honk wrote: »
    I'd rather use bookmarks than tabs for stuff I plan on checking later.

    i do have like 500 bookmarks of things i've never looked at

    Better than 500 things eating up your memory making your computer run like shit because you think you'll look at the other 700 tabs soonish.

    Ladies.
    ChanusMsAnthropy
  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.

    Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P

    This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles

    Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!

    Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?

    I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P

    But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...

    the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.

    Hmm

    I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"

    On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.

    (I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)

    to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy

    i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness

    i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though

    I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P

    I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with

    *this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff

    Unrelatedly, grading is hard.

    The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.

    Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.

    Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.

    Inquisitor wrote: »
    I fucking hate you Canadians.
  • ChanusChanus Sugoi! ^_____^Registered User regular
    Honk wrote: »
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    how do you even handle more than like

    20 tabs without going crazy, do you guys just leave your pcs running 24/7 with all your apps running 24/7 too?

    I do pretty much leave my PC on all the time. I realize I should probably stop doing this.

    When Corsair hurries up and sends me the check for my cooler I'll get right on that.

    Gotta razor blade off the thermal paste and buy a new CPU cooler I guess. Corsair 250D, looks like I can get a nice single radiator cooler thing for the front fan.

    I'd not use razors, sounds like a good way to cause scratches. Isopropyl and microfiber disposables easily gets it all off.

    or you can just lick the paste off

    **Winner Softest and Most Comfy Hugs Award Summer 2018**

    Blueberrywerewlf on the Sony Anime Games Box | BluberryWerewlf on the BroBone
    Mojo_JojoPLAHonk
  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo But do you really believe him? Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    Honk wrote: »
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    how do you even handle more than like

    20 tabs without going crazy, do you guys just leave your pcs running 24/7 with all your apps running 24/7 too?

    I do pretty much leave my PC on all the time. I realize I should probably stop doing this.

    When Corsair hurries up and sends me the check for my cooler I'll get right on that.

    Gotta razor blade off the thermal paste and buy a new CPU cooler I guess. Corsair 250D, looks like I can get a nice single radiator cooler thing for the front fan.

    I'd not use razors, sounds like a good way to cause scratches. Isopropyl and microfiber disposables easily gets it all off.

    or you can just lick the paste off

    It's full of vitamin J

    Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
    Chanus
  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    Oh, yeah, no, I absolutely don't trust tabs enough to use them instead of bookmarks. But I probably have more than a thousand bookmarks.

  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    I have hundreds of thousands of bookmarks

    wandering
  • IlpalaIlpala Just this guy, y'know Texas booniesRegistered User regular
    I usually have like ten tabs open but the browser deloads 'em if I haven't looked at 'em in a while so whatever. Lot of 'em are video game research tabs like if I need to find a specific item in XIV and want to see when/where the gathering node it's in spawns. Or in the case of DQ8, a big ass text walkthrough that I want to save my current spot in. Or else just shit someone's linked me and I eventually get around to looking at.

    FF XIV - Qih'to Furishu/Auldhaerz Swygkhansyn (both on Mateus), Battle.Net - Ilpala#1975
    Switch - SW-7373-3669-3011
    Fuck Joe Manchin
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    99% of it is porn

    The other 1% is TV Tropes

    wandering21stCentury
  • SurfpossumSurfpossum A nonentity trying to preserve the anonymity he so richly deserves.Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.

    Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P

    This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles

    Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!

    Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?

    I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P

    But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...

    the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.

    Hmm

    I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"

    On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.

    (I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)

    to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy

    i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness

    i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though

    I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P

    I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with

    *this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff

    Unrelatedly, grading is hard.

    The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.

    Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.

    Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.
    But what about when you sever your corpus callosum and have a consciousness residing in each hemisphere and then reconnect the two hemispheres and go back to having one consciousness.

    icon.png facebookIcon.png tumblrIcon.png
    is this how nations are born
  • BogartBogart I Will Cure You Registered User, Moderator mod
    220 tabs open at once is crazytown, but not in a knifey stabby way, more a hoarding newspapers for fifty years way.

    Mojo_JojoSir LandsharkChanusHonkA Kobold's KoboldMsAnthropy
  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    I don't experience my consciousness as particularly continuous.

    AresProphet
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Facts about this D&D game that i learned last night:

    - the bard knows a lot of ways to insult insects
    - the barbarian occasionally does enough damage to actually erase a monster from the rulebook
    - you can make the wizard happy by giving him a pet sword
    - you can make the wizard abandon the party in search of a shower by spraying bug goo all over him
    - druids love rust monsters
    - if you say "resistance potion, perhaps to acid", no one in the party will believe it's an acid resistance potion until one of them has been nearly melted into the floor


    @Delmain @Belasco32 @Ludious @cptrugged

    PLASir LandsharkDelmainbowenChanusamateurhourBogartAresProphetronyaSniperGuyA Kobold's KoboldMsAnthropyBelasco32
  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo But do you really believe him? Registered User regular
    Bogart wrote: »
    220 tabs open at once is crazytown, but not in a knifey stabby way, more a hoarding newspapers for fifty years way.

    It starts with fifty tabs open and a week later you're keeping jars of wee just in case

    Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
    Bogart
  • cptruggedcptrugged Time Dilated Registered User regular
    I have very few bookmarks / tabs open cause I just don't surf that much.

    I'm pretty much covered by the "most used sites" on my new tab front page on chrome.

    Mojo_Jojo
  • visiblehowlvisiblehowl He/Him Neutron Nerd Registered User regular
    It is possible that bookmarks would have been a good solution before I got used to using tabs so much.

    I'm used to my system by now, though. Bookmarks seem less convenient.

    I have 16GB of RAM, so I don't worry about the memory usage.

    vxsHp3F.gif
    I die evry tiem in Sekiro on Twitch
  • BogartBogart I Will Cure You Registered User, Moderator mod
    PLA wrote: »
    I don't experience my consciousness as particularly continuous.

    Some of us don't have murderous blackout spells.

  • TL DRTL DR Not at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered User regular
    Organichu wrote: »
    i read reddit a lot. almost as much as i read these forums.

    What subs do you follow?

    Now that r/altright is banned I mean.

    wanderingAresProphet
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    Number of Tabs the Human Brain can Effectively Concentrate On at a Time:

    ONE

    wandering
  • DelmainDelmain Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Facts about this D&D game that i learned last night:

    - the bard knows a lot of ways to insult insects
    - the barbarian occasionally does enough damage to actually erase a monster from the rulebook
    - you can make the wizard happy by giving him a pet sword
    - you can make the wizard abandon the party in search of a shower by spraying bug goo all over him
    - druids love rust monsters
    - if you say "resistance potion, perhaps to acid", no one in the party will believe it's an acid resistance potion until one of them has been nearly melted into the floor


    Delmain Belasco32 Ludious cptrugged

    "Hey buddy, how's it going? oh, no, no metal here. These guys have lots though, maybe try them?"

    syndalis wrote: »
    Apple is a terrible company.
    spool32cptrugged
  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    Surfpossum wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.

    Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P

    This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles

    Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!

    Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?

    I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P

    But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...

    the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.

    Hmm

    I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"

    On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.

    (I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)

    to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy

    i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness

    i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though

    I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P

    I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with

    *this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff

    Unrelatedly, grading is hard.

    The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.

    Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.

    Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.
    But what about when you sever your corpus callosum and have a consciousness residing in each hemisphere and then reconnect the two hemispheres and go back to having one consciousness.

    It does seem that consciousness, as a physical process, is manipulable and divisible. I don't know that that is really an objection to the idea of continuity, though.

    Inquisitor wrote: »
    I fucking hate you Canadians.
    Surfpossum
  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    Bogart wrote: »
    PLA wrote: »
    I don't experience my consciousness as particularly continuous.

    Some of us don't have murderous blackout spells.

    I'm not murderous when I'm blind.

  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    It is possible that bookmarks would have been a good solution before I got used to using tabs so much.

    I'm used to my system by now, though. Bookmarks seem less convenient.

    I have 16GB of RAM, so I don't worry about the memory usage.

    At 500+ tabs, you should.

    Ladies.
  • OnTheLastCastleOnTheLastCastle let's keep it haimish for the peripatetic Registered User regular
    Organichu wrote: »
    sometimes i'll open 25 porn tabs and then use hot keys to switch between them while jacking it, conducting my own little erotic symphony to crescendo with my favorite clip during climax

    or if i'm researching something i'm buying i might have 10 or 15 different reviews open

    but i'm fairly sure i've never had as many as 30 tabs

    1500?

    those nights when you stay up way too late trying to find the perfect one

    >_>

    is this how your dick went raw

    I'm a published writer and have a very unique and interesting writing style. I'm also sharp and witty. My profile is well-written and hilarious. My messages are likewise brilliant. And I've been doing this stuff for...four or five years. I know what "works" in terms of good internet dating writing. "Works" in the sense of leading to a "date" with a human female.

    twitch.tv/onthelastcastle
  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Eastern coastal temptressRegistered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.

    Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P

    This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles

    Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!

    Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?

    I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P

    But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...

    the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.

    Hmm

    I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"

    On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.

    (I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)

    to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy

    i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness

    i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though

    I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P

    I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with

    *this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff

    Unrelatedly, grading is hard.

    The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.

    Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.

    Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.

    Right - I'm saying that this is constantly happening every moment. In the case of cloning, you both will have the perception of continuity. You could argue that it doesn't exist in one case, and is only a perception... but I think that equally applies to the non-cloned case, and our treatment of them as different cases is a mental kludge to make things easier. The me of yesterday had different knowledge, different feelings, would react to situations (slightly) differently based on a host of things... and for a while, this meat bag was unconscious! I'm not sure why I should think that I'm the same person of yesterday, and if I do, I'm not sure why, in a case where I was killed and rebuilt at the end of sleep as though I'd slept, I should think that it's any different.

    I think this is an easier, clearer case, but I also think that it applies moment to moment as our memories, emotions, and thoughts change. Reducing the time on that to zero changes nothing, we are still beings that exist only through change. Given that, the particular structure and changes are all that matters.

    I actually do have a weird gut feeling about this, I just think that gut feeling is wrong.

    (incidentally, I don't think that continuity exists. I think during sleep the body is basically someone else - it's so different, how could it be me? I wake up with the hallucinations of a different being, who's affected deeply by me, in my mind.)

  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    PLA wrote: »
    I don't experience my consciousness as particularly continuous.

    so you all felt like you were different people while writing this post, or

    Inquisitor wrote: »
    I fucking hate you Canadians.
  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo But do you really believe him? Registered User regular
    Today in trainer the instructor said "lol" a surprisingly amount. Especially given he's a lawyer. Good stereotyping breaking by him

    Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
    wanderingPLA
  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    Houn wrote: »
    Number of Tabs the Human Brain can Effectively Concentrate On at a Time:

    ONE

    I evidently can't. This is me watching a video. The video is paused.

  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Eastern coastal temptressRegistered User regular
    Surfpossum wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.

    Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P

    This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles

    Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!

    Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?

    I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P

    But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...

    the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.

    Hmm

    I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"

    On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.

    (I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)

    to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy

    i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness

    i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though

    I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P

    I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with

    *this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff

    Unrelatedly, grading is hard.

    The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.

    Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.

    Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.
    But what about when you sever your corpus callosum and have a consciousness residing in each hemisphere and then reconnect the two hemispheres and go back to having one consciousness.

    This is another issue, which is that our identity is more fragmented than even we know.

    I am legion, for we are many.

  • cptruggedcptrugged Time Dilated Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Facts about this D&D game that i learned last night:

    - the bard knows a lot of ways to insult insects
    - the barbarian occasionally does enough damage to actually erase a monster from the rulebook
    - you can make the wizard happy by giving him a pet sword
    - you can make the wizard abandon the party in search of a shower by spraying bug goo all over him
    - druids love rust monsters
    - if you say "resistance potion, perhaps to acid", no one in the party will believe it's an acid resistance potion until one of them has been nearly melted into the floor


    -Delmain -Belasco32 -Ludious -cptrugged

    Ain't nobody trusting no GM. Also, I have a feeling we aren't the best at "preparation".

    Delmain
  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    PLA wrote: »
    I don't experience my consciousness as particularly continuous.

    so you all felt like you were different people while writing this post, or

    I don't remember.

  • amateurhouramateurhour One day I'll be professionalhour The woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered User regular
    shit I'm tired.


    Arch wrote: »

    I never expected this burn from captain bushmeat
    Jubal77
  • visiblehowlvisiblehowl He/Him Neutron Nerd Registered User regular
    Wait, are people still talking about the 1000 or 500 tab thing like it's real? 21stCentury said it's more like 200+ and the vast majority of that is porn tabs in a single window, which hardly counts.

    Did someone else make a post I missed?

    vxsHp3F.gif
    I die evry tiem in Sekiro on Twitch
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    @spool32 I peeded out a fire in my D&D group 3 weeks ago.

    It was a 10/10 experience.

    The week before that I picked up our gnome warlock and threw her up an embankment ... she didn't stick the landing and came tumbling back down which set off a trap.

    The pee night I also did a sick ninja flip in chainmail armor over some bramble and landed on a cultists head killing him (I get the sickest natty 20s when I do these things). ... trying to climb back over the bramble I got stuck.

    Ladies.
    PLAspool32
  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Eastern coastal temptressRegistered User regular
    Hmm EM I am actually curious:

    Can you define what it would mean for, in the case of this transporter thing, your consciousness to cease and someone else's to be there? Especially in a way that's distinguishable from sleep and whatnot?

    I just realized that I don't even think I can do that.

  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    I generally have somewhere from 4-8 tabs at once.

    - The Forums Here
    - E-mail
    - Random things that I intend to get back to reading later. Often just get closed after a few hours when I decide I'm not going to read it after all.

  • amateurhouramateurhour One day I'll be professionalhour The woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Hmm EM I am actually curious:

    Can you define what it would mean for, in the case of this transporter thing, your consciousness to cease and someone else's to be there? Especially in a way that's distinguishable from sleep and whatnot?

    I just realized that I don't even think I can do that.

    That's (the sleep thing) is how I see teleportation.

    Like I'm not consciously aware of when I go to sleep, it's just like BAM I wake up and time has passed. Am I real? If I cut my arm is it a robot arm and the last 33 years are just memory implants?

    science...


    Arch wrote: »

    I never expected this burn from captain bushmeat
    Shivahn
This discussion has been closed.