Likely not as far as most people think . . . [humanbrainproject.eu]

Awareness and a truly thinking robot are two different things.. Awareness can be achieved with sensors that mimic our five senses... That sounds easy enough...

@Cutiebeauty Hmm...As I see it conscious SELF awareness can not be achieved with sensors. You can get sentience with sensors but no robot has true awareness.

Thinking is done by computers all the time and is no big deal. You (or a computer) can think all day long without having conscious awareness. When people meditate they experience pure conscious awareness without thoughts.

That’s how I see it.

Artificial intelligence learns, and, what it learns is not always decipherable by humans. Humans THINK that they are unique, and, their reality that they experience is nothing but small slices of time, not some constant, unbroken thread as they themselves think it is . . . . so they are just like switches but currently happen to have far more neurons than any computer could muster, but that is going to change, computers will catch up. When I was in college, one of my chemistry professors tried to contradict me when I said that some day, computers would be able to store a whole college text book on them . . . nowadays, they can easily store thousands of them. Machine conscious is coming, and it is not as far off as most people believe, because most people are NOT on the cutting edge of technology.

@Archeus_Lore People were saying that conscious computers were just around the corner when I was in college. They have been just around the corner ever since, and IMO will always be just around the corner. It is because conscious awareness is a different and higher order of existence than brains and computers. IMO brains do not create consciousness.

How can anyone program a computer to be conscious when no one even knows what consciousness is?

How can anyone program AI when it does things that they themselves cannot explain? Your argument is the same type of argument that preceed many leaps in technology that have done things that no one thought possible . . . . and, if the mind does not create reality as you so put it, what does? It sounds like christian blather to me, mystify what you do not understand, attribute it to some supernatural force, claim that humans are not capable of understanding it so as to reinforce a belief in a higher power, but then provide no evidence whatsoever to back up what you are attempting to assert.

@Archeus_Lore There is nothing supernatural about nature—nothing is supernatural and the word is meaningless.

There are absolutely aspects of nature that are inexplicable and ineffable and if you can’t see that then you are wearing a blindfold. The greatest physicists have said as much.

Here’s Einstein:

“Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernible concatenations, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in point of fact, religious.”

Edwin Schrodinger:

“Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else.”

Max Planck said in 1944, "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter".

All quotes from people long since dead and gone, who knew nothing about what is happening today. 76 years ago was a long time ago, and technology has been progressing faster than just a linear scale.

@Archeus_Lore Please tell me about this modern technology that explains conscious awareness.

Maybe you believe that a computer can be set running and that through AI it will someday acquire conscious awareness, even though no one knows what that is.

I would put that belief in the category of blind faith.

@Archeus_Lore For a more modern scientific perspective read about Donald Hoffman and his Conscious Realism.

Hoffman is a cognitive scientist and an acclaimed computer expert.

[popsci.com]

[cnet.com]

[haaretz.com]

[livescience.com]

You can claim that rats are not conscious, but if you do, I will laugh at you. They may not have human consciousness, but they are not that many steps away from human consciousness, and the framework is built from the same basic principles.

@Archeus_Lore I just looked at all your links Not one of them addresses the hard problem of conscious awareness. You cling to the idea that consciousness is brought into existence through electro-chemical means and that mimicking that process electronically can also create consciousness.

There is absolutely no explanation as to how such a thing occurs. In my opinion. Unless you get past the materialist/physicalist philosophy you will not see the staggering implications of reality.

Donald Hoffman is one who has leapt out of the traces and is marching to his own drum. Here’s a good introduction:

[en.m.wikipedia.org]

"Unless you get past the materialist/physicalist philosophy you will not see the staggering implications of reality." That tells me all I need to know about you. This is the exact same kind of thinking that is espoused by religions, and, obviously by you. People who think like this have done their best to hold back progress and did a very thorough job of it during the inquisition. Your belief in some type on non physicalist / materialist view is no different than the views of religions who have done their best to stifle and hold back scientific progress for millenia. Don't try to pedal you poison on me, it will not work.

@Archeus_Lore You are not addressing the issue, just diverting with personal attacks. Your position is not scientific—it’s just the opposite.

You are not attacking just me but a vast number of esteemed scientists and other great intellectuals as exemplified by my quotes above. Those deeply aware and creative geniuses are the ones who, far from holding back scientific progress, have been in the forefront of scientific progress.

It is you doing the pedaling sir, by making your post and defending it vociferously. Apparently no one is permitted to present alternate opinions. Your world view must feel very shaky. Maybe it’s time to open your mind

Long since DEAD scientists for the most part, with your views being just outmoded, and I might add, extremely similar to people who support religious "faith" and all that other unprovable chicanery . . . if you cannot handle the heat, stay out of the kitchen.