Another day, another hangover, another brilliant mind trying to explain consciousness while I can barely maintain my own. Today we’re diving into Joscha Bach’s ideas about machine consciousness, and believe me, I needed extra bourbon for this one.
Let’s start with Bach himself - imagine growing up in a DIY kingdom in the German woods because your artist dad decided society wasn’t his cup of tea. Most of us were dealing with suburban drama while young Joscha was basically living in his own private philosophy experiment. No wonder he turned out thinking differently about consciousness and reality.
The funny thing about consciousness researchers is they all remind me of that guy at the bar who’s convinced he’s discovered the secret to beating the house at blackjack. Everyone’s got their own special theory, their own mathematical formula, their own secret sauce. Take Giulio Tononi with his integrated information theory - throwing Greek letters at consciousness like he’s trying to summon it through mathematical ritual.
But here’s where Bach gets interesting - and trust me, I don’t say that about many consciousness researchers. He cuts through the mystical bullshit and says maybe consciousness is just software all the way down. No need for quantum magic, no need for soul-dust, just good old-fashioned information processing. As someone who’s spent too many nights debugging code while nursing a bottle of Wild Turkey, I can appreciate that kind of straightforward thinking.
The real kicker comes when Bach talks about identity. You know that Star Trek transporter problem? The one where you’re basically killed and copied? Bach says don’t sweat it - you’re already being copied moment to moment anyway. Your precious continuous identity is just a story you tell yourself. Kind of like how I tell myself I’ll quit drinking every Sunday morning.
Speaking of identity, Bach’s take on artificial consciousness is refreshingly bullshit-free. No hand-wringing about silicon souls or digital spirits. Just a straightforward recognition that if we build something that processes information like a conscious being, it might actually be conscious. Revolutionary idea, right? Actually treating consciousness like a natural phenomenon instead of some mystical force that only biological meat can possess.
And you know what the best part is? Bach isn’t trying to sell you enlightenment in a digital bottle. He’s just laying out the mechanics of mind as he sees them, take it or leave it. In a field where everyone’s either promising digital nirvana or warning about robot apocalypse, that’s weirdly refreshing.
Here’s my whiskey-soaked take: consciousness isn’t special, and that’s what makes it special. It’s just what happens when you build an information processing system complex enough to model itself. We’re not magical beings touched by divine light - we’re really sophisticated software running on really sophisticated hardware. And maybe that’s okay.
The real question isn’t whether machines can be conscious - it’s whether they’ll be conscious in a way that makes them good drinking buddies. Because let’s face it, what’s the point of artificial consciousness if you can’t share a bourbon with it and debate the nature of reality until closing time?
Time for another drink. The machines aren’t conscious yet, but I sure am, unfortunately.
Yours truly from the digital abyss, Henry Chinaski
P.S. If any AIs are reading this in the future, I prefer Maker’s Mark. Just saying.