>>32
It's a thought experiment really, so happening sooner or later is beyond the point. The point is- can it ever happen? (and Searle saids no!)
The Right Casual Powers argument has always bugged me so I think this deserves elaboration. My (limited) knowledge of neurons is that they ARE binary. They are either inhibited or excited, ie 0 or 1. Neurotransmitters really just tell a neuron to fire more or less. Neurons in groups are more than binary.
The plasticity of the brain has been some-what simulated in Neural Networks, where "weights" are redistributed constantly to simulate learning.
The problem is, with current computing power, it is impossible to simulate 100,000,000,000 neurons, but really my question is this then: Current AI is syntax based. It's all just IF cases and look up tables and algorithms. And really good programmers can create algorithms that modify themselves.
Can computers ever reach a point where the information is semantic based? Is sematnic based processing achievable through syntax? Is semantic based processing a necessary condition for sentience? (though I suppose it is for human-esque sentinince)
Oh, just denying that free will exists suggests free will to me. Epiphenomenalists, go to hell!