[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Lack of meaning and purpose of life are common among people with secular values, like a tweet below. But they would hinder coordinated actions and make those values less attractive and less competitive than the others.

Who else finds comfort in knowing life has no meaning or purpose, and there’s nothing after death?

https://twitter.com/katebizosauthor/status/1560217874106662913?t=nRlr88YgGk8F73VPqbnGRA&s=19

First, it's a selfish and pessimistic way to see life. Death of previous generations mean freeing resources for the next generations. Previous lives are meaningful if they make future lives easier and more reliable.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

https://youtube.com/shorts/vRGun6z4xGw?feature=share

Many scout ants died before they can find any food. But it doesn't mean that they are meaningless. If they don't exist, the whole colony might end up starved to death.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Here's an update on predictions for technological singularity.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2022/09/lex-fridman-talks-singularity-with-ray-kurzweil.html

Ray still asserts that computer artificial intelligence will pass the Turing Test in 2029 and the Singularity will happen around 2045. In the past, Ray has clarified that his predictions date are usually with an implied plus or minus one decade. A Ray Kurzweil prediction with a date can be plus or minus 10 years and Ray would consider it a good prediction.

An interesting point is found in the comments section. I think the word singularity is used too loosely here.  The time line below should not be called singularities, but milestones of progress towards singularity instead. 

A technological singularity is sufficient implementation of a new technology that will begin to make such irreversibly huge changes in human society that it is difficult, if not impossible, to foresee what will come after. Each one usually appears in about half the time it took for the one to occur after the one previous to it. Bear in mind that singularities aren’t events like light switches but, instead, can span a substantial period of time.

PAST SINGULARITIES (3 most recent)
1815 – The Industrial Revolution (240 years after printing press)
1935 – Electronics & Computers (120 years after previous)
1995 – World Wide Web (60 years after previous)

FUTURE SINGULARITIES
2025: Full Automation (Cognition based) capital-based income grows hugely and in inverse proportion to wage-based earnings as a percentage of all earnings. (30 years after previous)

2040: AI – More than just AI, this is SI, synthetic intelligence, in that it is not a workaround to achieve results similar to what a human could produce, this is the real deal, it’s just not made of animal flesh and it might not have any internal motivations (no lizard brain conflict) (15 years after previous)

2047: Biological (advancements that make average lifespan estimates useless) (7.5 years after previous)

2050: Mind-to-Mind? Man-Machine? Nano replacement of cells? (3.25 years after previous)

2052: Singularity (with a capital S) (1.6 years after previous)

2053: … in 1.3 years
2053: …. 7 months
2053: ….. 14 weeks
2053: …… 7 weeks
2053: ……. 24 days
2053: …….. 12 days
2053: ……… 6 days
2053: ……. 3 days
2053: …….. 36 hours
2053: ……… 18 hours

“Life moves pretty fast. If you don’t stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.”
— Ferris Bueller

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Here's a short video from a philosophy professor.

https://youtube.com/shorts/HeXPAGMcHgY
Hedonism : Pleasure is good as an end

And here's my comment on it.

Some pleasures are good as shortcut to make decisions. It just happens that individuals seek for pleasure had better chance to survive, compared to those who don't, or those whose sources of pleasure are misplaced.

If someone's sources of pleasure somehow reduce their chance to survive and reproduce, such as substance addiction, then they (and their copies) are less likely to exist in the future.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

This link popped out when I searched for instrumental goal.

https://arbital.com/p/terminal_vs_instrumental/#:~:text=%27Instrumental%20goals%27%20or%20%27instrumental,want%20to%20drive%20somewhere%20else.

Terminal versus instrumental goals / values / preferences
written by Eliezer Yudkowsky (Dec 18, 2015)

'Instrumental goals' or 'instrumental values' are things that an agent wants for the sake of achieving other things. For example, we might want to get into a car, not because we enjoy the act of opening car doors for their own sake, but because we want to drive somewhere else.

'Terminal' goals, values, or preferences are those where the preference is derived locally rather than by looking at further or distant consequences. If you enjoy eating chocolate (and otherwise approve of this enjoyment, etcetera) then you aren't deriving your preference based on what you believe to be the further consequences of eating chocolate.

Imagine reality as an enormous web of events, linked by cause and effect. "Terminal value" is usually local and be evaluated at a single event inside the graph; even if it's a nonlocal good thing, we'd evaluate it by evaluating the history up to some point, and then we'd have a chunk of definite goodness that would stand on its own no matter what happened later.

"Instrumental value" is a nonlocal property of an event, depending on its real or expected future, and contingent on that future; if you add up all the instrumental values on the graph, you don't get a meaningful sum because you may be double-counting some value.

On a moral or ethical level, instrumental values are justified by appealing to their consequences, while terminal values are justified without appeal to their consequences.

https://arbital.com/p/frankena_goods/

AI alignment domain
William Frankena's list of terminal values
"Life, consciousness, and activity; health and strength; pleasures and satisfactions of all or certain kinds; happiness, beatitude, contentment, etc.; truth; knowledge and true opinions of various kinds, understanding, wisdom; beauty, harmony, proportion in objects contemplated; aesthetic experience; morally good dispositions or virtues; mutual affection, love, friendship, cooperation; just distribution of goods and evils; harmony and proportion in one's own life; power and experiences of achievement; self-expression; freedom; peace, security; adventure and novelty; and good reputation, honor, esteem, etc." -- William Frankena's list of things valued in themselves rather than only for their further consequences.

Here are what we get from inductive thinking, through analogy. In the highlighted example above, we can scrutinize further that eating chocolate activates some neurotransmitters which we prefer. Our preferences were in turn shaped by evolutionary process through natural selection. If it happened that we or our ancestors have preferences which were detrimental to our survival, we won't be here to discuss about them in the first place. 

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Here's an older post from the same author, distinguishing between terminal and instrumental values.

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/n5ucT5ZbPdhfGNLtP/terminal-values-and-instrumental-values

On a purely instinctive level, any human planner behaves as if they distinguish between means and ends.  Want chocolate?  There's chocolate at the Publix supermarket.  You can get to the supermarket if you drive one mile south on Washington Ave.  You can drive if you get into the car.  You can get into the car if you open the door.  You can open the door if you have your car keys.  So you put your car keys into your pocket, and get ready to leave the house...

...when suddenly the word comes on the radio that an earthquake has destroyed all the chocolate at the local Publix.  Well, there's no point in driving to the Publix if there's no chocolate there, and no point in getting into the car if you're not driving anywhere, and no point in having car keys in your pocket if you're not driving.  So you take the car keys out of your pocket, and call the local pizza service and have them deliver a chocolate pizza.  Mm, delicious.

I rarely notice people losing track of plans they devised themselves.  People usually don't drive to the supermarket if they know the chocolate is gone.  But I've also noticed that when people begin explicitly talking about goal systems instead of just wanting things, mentioning "goals" instead of using them, they oft become confused.  Humans are experts at planning, not experts on planning, or there'd be a lot more AI developers in the world.

In particularly, I've noticed people get confused when - in abstract philosophical discussions rather than everyday life - they consider the distinction between means and ends; more formally, between "instrumental values" and "terminal values".

Instrumental values live in (the network structure of) the conditional probability function.  This makes instrumental value strictly dependent on beliefs-of-fact given a fixed utility function.  If I believe that penicillin causes pneumonia, and that the absence of penicillin cures pneumonia, then my perceived instrumental value of penicillin will go from high to low.  Change the beliefs of fact - change the conditional probability function that associates actions to believed consequences - and the instrumental values will change in unison.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I've uploaded a video about universal terminal goal, which could be the answer to the most important question ever. It's the summary of what I've discussed here.

This thread has gone so long, and those who didn't follow it from the start might face difficulties in understanding the core ideas. I hope the video can help.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Right now, if you type "universal terminal goal" in search engines, such as Google, Bing, or Duckduckgo, the Youtube video will be among the top results. This thread is also found there.

After finding that the universal terminal goal is to extend the existence of consciousness into the future, the next topic would be defining consciousness itself as the central point. But before that, I'll try to approach it using inductive reasoning through analogies.

[Origin]

After finding that the universal terminal goal is to extend the existence of consciousness into the future

You have not found that is the universal terminal goal, you have assumed that is the universal terminal goal.

I would like to see you supply a succinct definition of "universal terminal goal".

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

After finding that the universal terminal goal is to extend the existence of consciousness into the future

You have not found that is the universal terminal goal, you have assumed that is the universal terminal goal.

I would like to see you supply a succinct definition of "universal terminal goal".

My second video will answer your concern. It will also address your misconception about the universal terminal goal.
Most of the main points are already posted here somewhere, but they are scattered in random places. The video will collect them into a single place. Some visualization aids are also added to make the concept easier to understand.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

While preparing my next video discussing about consciousness as the central concept of this thread, let me share what neuroscientists have to say.

The Phantom God: What Neuroscience Reveals about the Compulsion to Believe (with Dr. John Wathey)

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

My next video will describe what consciousness is, as it's the core concept in discussing about terminal goal.
It will show how this word is commonly used, and what characteristic that it has.
It will also describe components of consciousness and its key parameters.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

here it is.
Defining consciousness as the core concept in the universal terminal goal using only the requirements from the phrase and some basic knowledge of computational process.

[alancalverd]

The Phantom God: What Neuroscience Reveals about the Compulsion to Believe (with Dr. John Wathey)

Not a good start. There is sometimes a need to act on incomplete evidence, but no inherent compulsion.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The Phantom God: What Neuroscience Reveals about the Compulsion to Believe (with Dr. John Wathey)

Not a good start. There is sometimes a need to act on incomplete evidence, but no inherent compulsion.

Some have inherent/instinctive compulsion. Some others don't.
Young human kids, just like young chicks and kittens generally have instincts to imitate their parents' behaviors.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

here it is.
Defining consciousness as the core concept in the universal terminal goal using only the requirements from the phrase and some basic knowledge of computational process.

My next video will describe how functionalities and key parameters required for consciousness can emerge from natural processes.
The next will be about extended consciousness, followed by artificial consciousness.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

here it is.
Defining consciousness as the core concept in the universal terminal goal using only the requirements from the phrase and some basic knowledge of computational process.

If you think that the definition and model of consciousness in the video can be improved, or even if you have your own definition or model which you think is better in any way, please let me know. We can discuss further to get the best possible definition and model that we can come up with.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

My next video will describe how functionalities and key parameters required for consciousness can emerge from natural processes.

I found out that this topic is quite complex and I may have to split it up into several videos. I haven't decided yet if it will be split based on functionality, or by increasing complexity.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I'll make a preview for the next videos of naturally occurring conscious systems. Starting with the simplest things that are required for a system to become conscious, but not enough yet to be called conscious. It's the prerequisites to a system, as shown in the video above at 2:40.
Any system, regardless if it's conscious or not, starts with a boundary between its inner part and outer environment. This boundary can occur naturally in a natural system, or defined by a conscious system in an artificial system.
Surface of a rain drop is an example of a natural boundary.

Why do things exist? Setting the stage for evolution.
This video kicks off the evolution series by going broad and thinking about why things - including non-living things - exist at all. The first in a series on evolution.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Living systems need a better boundary than surface of raindrops.

Lipid World hypothesis proposes the existence of self-aggregating lipid vesicles that have the heredity potential in terms of generating 'daughter' vesicles through fission and fusion interactions.

The Birth of Cells at Hydrothermal Vents

Hydrothermal vents in deep ocean rifts have generated a lot of excitement as the starting place for life on our planet.  Hydrothermal vents represent a dynamic environment which would favor the formation of organic compounds, the “molecules of life,” using simple chemicals in the early oceans.  Most recently, scientists have gained insight into the creation of the cell membrane—a structure common to all life forms.  Hydrothermal vents may be present in the oceans of moons or rocky planets in our solar system, for example Europa and Enceladus, raising the possibility that life may have started there too.