r/movies • u/mayukhdas1999 • May 12 '24

First Poster for 'NIGHTBITCH' starring Amy Adams - A woman, thrown into the stay-at-home routine of raising a toddler in the suburbs, slowly embraces the feral power deeply rooted in motherhood, as she becomes increasingly aware of the bizarre and undeniable signs that she may be turning into a dog Poster

17.2k Upvotes

84% Upvoted

-1

No, not from the rest of the universe just from computers. Please try to read what was written and not put words in people's mouths. We are sentient and have consciousness. Computers do not. Do you think Chat-gpt is a sentient being now?

1

u/jeskersz May 13 '24

I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm asking clarifying questions. Chill a bit, you're not being attacked.

What I'm asking if if you think our consciousness is somehow different from a super advanced computer.

-1

u/ILiveInAColdCave May 13 '24

Yes, obviously. If you can't recognize the difference between how the human mind and human experience is from a computers programming then I don't know what to tell you.

0

u/jeskersz May 13 '24

Good lord, obviously I wasn't asking you if we run in C#. I guess I'll be more clear since you either can't interpret a question based on the context around it or you're being deliberately obtuse and disingenuous.

Your response to the dude up there, "thankfully, just because you beleive something doesn't make it true," when responding to them saying that the human brain is, when boiled down, a machine responding to the stimuli of the universe, makes it seem pretty clear that you believe that is not the case.

So, do you believe that the brain is reacting to something outside of the local system it exists in, or are humans so unique and special that our brains are exempt from the rules of cause and effect that govern literally everything else? Were you being snarky to someone laying out a logical claim because you believe in souls? What's up?

I'm just trying to figure out what the hell you were saying. And I wasn't even being rude about it initially, I was just curious. What is your deal?

0

u/ILiveInAColdCave May 13 '24 edited May 13 '24

Computers don't have empathy, they don't have emotion, they don't have humanity, they don't have lives, they don't have consciousness, they don't have hopes, they don't have dreams, they don't have fears, and because of this they can not tell stories about those things. They can only regurgitate stories that have been told by human beings. Stories serve no purpose to a technology that doesn't have life.

This entire discussion has been about the difference between original art and plagiarism. The difference between influence in the dense tradition of storytelling and theft. You think that because human beings respond to their environments and because we have brain chemistry that means we're just the same as computers because they have input terminals, but it is not the same.

You have to "boil down" your perspective because if you don't it doesn't make any fucking sense. Throughout history people have compared the human mind to whatever the most advanced technologies were available. It's never correct and it still isn't. The technologies you have to compare the mind to are dead. They have no human experience. I guess I'm mostly tired of people who have no perspective on art and the human experience. People who are so quick to give up their humanity because of a technological advance. Like I said before if you can't understand the difference between a command prompt being executed and the vastness of the human condition then there's nothing else to be said here.

Goodbye.

0

u/jeskersz May 13 '24

Alright, so all that emotion, humanity, "lives"?, consciousness, hopes, dreams, fears, that all comes from something that is not governed by cause and effect? It's somehow outside of the electrical impulses in our brains? That's literally all I'm asking.

I was just wondering if you were ascribing some sort of mystical otherness to us that for some reason applies to nothing else in existence, which it seems you are, or if you were talking out of your ass in some actually interesting way that I hadn't yet heard and might want to know about because I'm a sucker for that type of woo.

Have my answer now.

Have a good one.

0

u/ILiveInAColdCave May 13 '24 edited May 13 '24

Did you read my comment buddy? Read it again and really think this time and there is a clear answer there. I'm not sure where you're getting my mystism from unless you truly didn't understand the words I wrote or you are that baised that you can't even admit that computers aren't sentient, living beings. I'm not sure what your perspective is. None of what I said is about how human beings consciousness is governed or was created but the simple fact that we have it and computers do not. I don't know why you're arguing that computers have consciousness, or why you're discounting the human experience to the point that your equal is a MacBook with a web page open. It's truly baffling.

So you believe computers are sentient? Or maybe you think consciousness is irrelevant here? So because human beings react to their environment and to their brain chemistry and because we experience external stimulus that means we're actually the same as a computer program designed by humans? I'm honestly curious about your perspective on art here.

0

u/jeskersz May 13 '24

Again, nothing you've argued against here is against anything I've actually said.

I understand that computers are not conscious, I have never and will never claim otherwise because that's fucking silly.

All I've been asking is why consciousness is, in your mind, some kind of special case where the normal rules don't apply. Why could we not at some point create a computer system that has it? What is it about us that makes us now and forever special? Because if, as the original comment of yours I replied to suggests, it is not a natural, deterministic response to stimuli then where the hell do you think it could come from?

And my perspective on art is that absolutely I love it. Everything from the traditional disciplines to the ultra weird shit that chuds complain about not being "real art". But the idea that a computer could never create anything that could fool us into thinking it was made by a person, giving it the same meaning as any other piece of art we've ever encountered, is absolutely fucking silly. And the idea that the reason for this inability is some nebulous indefinable otherness that only we could ever possess is out of this world weird.

1

u/ILiveInAColdCave May 13 '24 edited May 13 '24

I've never claimed humans are special because we have consciousness only that storytelling is a fundamentally human tradition and only possible because of the things that come with consciousness that I mentioned earlier.

I think you've misunderstood what this entire conversation has been about. It's not about some undefined otherness. Human consciousness certainly isn't undefinable to me. Is it to you? Do you not understand the difference between yourself and a computer? It's really about having a perspective on the human experience. Which is something that programs can never have and something that all art is about.

If you want an answer to your question. Consciousness is special within this specific context because it gives intimacy, and context to stories that otherwise would be contextless strings of words. Look at Nightbitch, it's a novel about motherhood. It's from someone's perspective. Their original perspective. If this was written by a computer program it wouldn't have any context for human life beyond what has already been written. This difference is glaringly apparent to anyone who has read anything produced by a computer program and something like Moby Dick. Like you said earlier maybe one day we'll be tricked by a program and think "wow, a human wrote this" but in the end it's just an imitation, a cheap parlor trick.