
Joscha Bach: Artificial Consciousness and the Nature of Reality [video] - TheAceOfHearts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-2P3MSZrBM
======
maze-le
He is definitely one of the most interesting people to listen to when it comes
to AI, Intelligence and Philosophy. I've seen him in Leipzig on CCC events in
the past, here are some of his other talks:

* Computational Meta-Intelligence (32C3): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRdJCFEqFTU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRdJCFEqFTU)

* Machine Dreams (33C3): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5nJ5l6dl2s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5nJ5l6dl2s)

* The Ghost in the Machine (35C3): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3K5UxWRRuY&t=2516s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3K5UxWRRuY&t=2516s)

He also did a very interesting podcast episode with Fefe and Frank from
alternativlos! (in German):
[https://alternativlos.org/42/](https://alternativlos.org/42/)

~~~
andybak
I can't absorb complex ideas very well from speech. Any good links for written
materials that offer good bite-sized introductions to his ideas?

~~~
moobsen
I'd recommending digging through his website:
[http://bach.ai/](http://bach.ai/)

Depending on what interests you, maybe also look at the abstracts of his
research papers?

[http://bach.ai/publications/](http://bach.ai/publications/)

~~~
andybak
Thanks. His tweeter feed is quite interesting also (which gives you some
indication of my attention span at the moment)

~~~
pantalaimon
His talks don’t have that level of snark he exhibits on Twitter, I guess that
comes with the platform.

------
uxcolumbo
What a coincidence - I was just watching this month old interview a few hours
before it was posted here. Maybe Youtube's algo is pushing it...

Anyway, the way Joscha explained various concepts was very interesting - the
phrases he used kept me hooked. At the very least it's entertaining.

For example:

"Social media is the world's brain hooked on dopamine - creating a permanent
seizure"

"Entropic Abyss"

"Closed Cooling Chain"

Interesting guy with an interesting upbringing (grew up in Eastern Germany -
his site [http://bach.ai](http://bach.ai)).

It's a long interview - but here is the breakdown of topics being discussed
(time stamps taken from the comments section)

0:00 - Introduction

3:14 - Reverse engineering Joscha Bach

10:38 - Nature of truth

18:47 - Original thinking

23:14 - Sentience vs intelligence

31:45 - Mind vs Reality

46:51 - Hard problem of consciousness

51:09 - Connection between the mind and the universe

56:29 - What is consciousness

1:02:32 - Language and concepts

1:09:02 - Meta-learning

1:16:35 - Spirit

1:18:10 - Our civilization may not exist for long

1:37:48 - Twitter and social media

1:44:52 - What systems of government might work well?

1:47:12 - The way out of self-destruction with AI

1:55:18 - AI simulating humans to understand its own nature

2:04:32 - Reinforcement learning

2:09:12 - Commonsense reasoning

2:15:47 - Would AGI need to have a body?

2:22:34 - Neuralink

2:27:01 - Reasoning at the scale of neurons and societies

2:37:16 - Role of emotion

2:48:03 - Happiness is a cookie that your brain bakes for itself

EDIT: clarity

~~~
08-15
I noticed the same thing and had the opposite reaction.

"Social media is the world's brain hooked on dopamine - creating a permanent
seizure"

Wow, what an insightful statement! Except it isn't. It's not even a statement.
It's just different metaphors piled on top of each other until they nothing at
all anymore.

"Entropic Abyss"

Lex Fridman actually asked for clarification here, but none came. Joscha fixed
the mispronunciation, that's all. The phrase is completely meaningless.

"Closed Cooling Chain"

And that one is a bad translation from German "geschlossene Kuehlkette",
meaning that your convenience food is frozen once at the factory and never
warms up until it's in your microwave oven. It translates to "uninterrupted",
not "closed".

I'm pretty disappointed by the onslaught of empty phrases and the dearth of
insight or arguments.

~~~
uxcolumbo
That social media statement - doesn't necessarily have to be super insightful.

The mental image triggered by that sentence is funny and there is some truth
to it.

> "Entropic Abyss" ... The phrase is completely meaningless.

Well, it wasn't meaningless to the interviewer - he actually found it poetic.

And for me it triggered an interesting mental image.

> bad translation from German... It translates to "uninterrupted", not
> "closed".

I just looked up the words. 'Geschlossene' comes from schliessen, which means
to close.

Uninterrupted in German seems to be 'ununterbrochen'.

So Closed Cooling Chain actually seems to be a good translation and it nicely
rolls off the tongue - CCC.

> I'm pretty disappointed by the onslaught of empty phrases and the dearth of
> insight or arguments.

I realized some might not get much out of it - hence why I said that at the
very least Joscha is entertaining to listen to (subjective - I know).

I got something out of it - what Joscha says makes me think - even if at the
end I won't get enlightened, I look forward to check out his other work.

~~~
08-15
> The mental image triggered by that sentence is funny and there is some truth
> to it.

Sure, but funny isn't insightful.

> I just looked up the words.

Words from one language don't map perfectly to those of another; idioms map
even less well. Are you seriously trying to lecture me about idioms in _my_
native tongue, German? Which happens to be Joscha's native tongue, too, which
is probably the reason why some of his phrases sound insightful to you and
like bad translations to me. Another example:

"A spirit is an operating system a brain runs on."

Apparently he tried to translate German "Geist", which could be "spirit",
"ghost", or "mind". The appropriate translation is "mind", then it makes
sense. The mistranslation to "spirit" makes it sound profound, unless you take
the time to think about it. But you can't, because Joscha talks so fast.

~~~
uxcolumbo
> Sure, but funny isn't insightful.

Is that an established and commonly understood fact?

To me anything that provides some understanding to a complicated matter or
situation can be insightful - even funny things.

What isn't insightful to you might be insightful to others. Don't forget not
everyone is at the same level of understanding.

> Closed Cooling Chain vs Uninterrupted Cooling Chain

When he says 'Closed' \- it implies that it's uninterrupted. Have you ever
heard of the term 'Closed Circuit'? Same thing.

I prefer his translation. It's simpler and sounds better (to me).

> Apparently he tried to translate German "Geist", which could be "spirit",
> "ghost", or "mind"

Interesting. Did he use 'Geist' originally in his German presentation?

If he meant mind - why didn't he use the German word 'Verstand' \- which seems
to be a more accurate translation for mind. But you tell me, as this is your
native tongue.

Maybe he wants to add some colour to his talks?

If so, then I think spirit is totally fine to me. It doesn't make it sound
anymore profound. I would say it makes it more interesting. And maybe the
other reason why he used the word spirit and not mind, might be to cater to a
certain audience, e.g. the viewers for the chaos computer club videos might
appreciate sci-fi like Ghost in the Shell. You wouldn't say Mind in the Shell.
Sounds dry and boring (to me). But spirit has a more positive connotation vs
Ghost - another reason why he might have chosen that word in the quote you
mentioned.

Joscha seems to have a knack for this - explaining things in a simple,
interesting and entertaining way. Just look at all the comments on the various
videos he appears in.

You might already have a deep understanding of the topics he talks about, but
not everyone has.

~~~
08-15
> Have you ever heard of the term 'Closed Circuit'? Same thing.

Of course I've heard of it! Very much _not_ the same thing. The cooling chain
is _open at both ends_. It isn't closed like a circuit, it is still _called_
"geschlossen", which is exactly why I'm trying to tell you it's a
mistranslation and "uninterrupted" conveys the actual meaning much better.

> why didn't he use the German word 'Verstand'

To sound "spiritual", literally, so he can connect with religious nutters
instead of just nerds. What do I know of his motivations?

------
jmiskovic
I was quite intrigued by semi-proposal of building a meta social network (it
starts around 1:37:45). He proposes a service where anyone can start a social
network using any features of existing ones (Facebook feed, Twitter
conversation, Reddit threads...), with each network cultivating its own rules
and reward function (criteria for what content is reshared or upvoted).

On one hand it's over-ambitious and doomed to fail, and yet it could lead to
more coherent and constructive hive mind.

~~~
rnd_74367843
I tried to do that 10 years ago. Didn't gain traction. Too complex an idea for
most to want [http://babblingbrook.net/](http://babblingbrook.net/)

------
alexshortt
I really love his emphasis on modelling as a skill. Its obviously great
applied to technical skills like computer science, but he seems to apply it to
everything else in the human experience so well.

"everything that we sense is part of the same object ... we learn it all into
one model ... we call this model the universe"
[https://youtu.be/P-2P3MSZrBM?t=1796](https://youtu.be/P-2P3MSZrBM?t=1796)

~~~
callesgg
Everything is a model. The only thing that exists to the mind And actually in
the world is models.

~~~
calebm
As above, so below

~~~
procgen
Tat tvam asi

------
motohagiography
I'm such a fan after the 33C3 Machine Dreams talk.

The podcast host, either he has a way of speaking that seems affectedly slow,
or maybe he has a speech impediment or neurological issue? Ordinarily I would
just set the speed of the video up, but Bach's normal speed of speech becomes
too fast. A few minutes in, the host seems to adapt to his guests speed a bit,
but is there some kind of trend among millennials to do some weird slo-mo lazy
talking pace? Bach seems to sense it as well and interrupts him when he starts
to wind up his mental drone.

~~~
ilaksh
Bach is rapidly firing out intriguing statements.

Lex is just trying to come up with worthy follow-up questions that also
sometimes align with his plan for the podcast. And his default is to speak
carefully because he knows that the topics are complex and algorithms are
transcribing them etc. So he is starting at a fairly slow normal just for
clarity and the high level of Bach's comments requires him to think more.

I would bet that you would not be able to do better. Actually I bet that you
would pause just as long and then often reply with something barely relevant
to what was just said, such as "wow that was deep".

Seriously, you think that Bach hasn't spent years preparing that elegant
information and philosophy? And Lex was trying to adapt on the fly. But you
casually suggest that you could have a rapid-fire intelligent back-and-forth
with Joshua Bach as he lays that stuff on you.

I would like to see it. Go ahead, record a conversation with Bach on a topic
that is slightly different from the existing podcasts/talks.

~~~
motohagiography
Sounds like I should do a podcast, thank you, I will seriously consider it. I
think Bach is one of the funniest and most entertaining people I can remember
listening to, as he's one of the few examples I know of who could meet the
definition of a stand-up philosopher.

My ideal first episode would have Bach and Daniel Dennett together talking
about whether or not they have dogs, and what they might perceive that
relationship to be like, given their respective views of consciousness and
language, and what their dogs might think of them.

------
jagrsw
I've seen the interview in June, and was following Joscha's twitter feed
since.

Although a lot of good stuff, some of his views are a bit perplexing:

* If his offspring would turn homosexual, he'd be sad about them being "evolutionary dead-end" (tho, he'd still support them in any way possible) - cannot find the tweet now, he probably deleted it

* He expresses a dim view of US' future (its institutions) esp. in the light of current events. It's sometimes visible in his tweets and speeches. But he's so vague in his predictions, that 10 years down the road I wouldn't be able to tell if he have been right or wrong no matter what the situation will be

tangent point: the company he currently works for - AI Foundation - had some
deal/interaction with our dear Deepak Chopra - who is as anti-intellectual as
a public persona can be - so my question is 'why' \- tho this could be before
Joscha's tenure there... but still it feels bad
([https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191205005164/en/Dee...](https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191205005164/en/Deepak-
Chopra-AI-Foundation-Partner-Bring-Personal))
([https://aifoundation.com/author/lars_butler/](https://aifoundation.com/author/lars_butler/))

But he loves Stanislaw Lem, and according to the interview he was the first
author that he felt was worth reading his books had profound impact on him
when he was young, so that's nice, b/c Lem is a genius - who is also a bit
underrated in the western world - as opposed to the former eastern block :)

~~~
throwaway69123
Why do you find him expressing sadness about him not being able to pass on his
genetics, perplexing? Its a primal evolutionary imperative. While possible the
rate of child having is very low in same sex relationships in comparrison to
the hetro relationships is higher.

~~~
Barrin92
something being a primal evolutionary imperative doesn't make it any more
meaningful. In fact it's kind of a stupid thing to care about because
reproduction in that sense is truly mindless and circular.

Raising a kid is a meaningful experience, but the kids haircolor doesn't
matter much.

~~~
whack
If I told you that you can never eat chocolate again for the rest of your
life, and you expressed sadness for not being able to experience the pleasures
of eating chocolate, would that be equally perplexing?

Just because our desire for chocolate is a primal evolutionary imperative,
doesn't mean that it's wrong to develop an attachment to it. Why is it ok to
express sadness over missing out on physical pleasures, but not psychological
pleasures.

~~~
Barrin92
because that's not the same thing. You can have the pleasure and meaningful
experience of raising a child (which I remarked in my post), there is no
actual pleasure or meaning to _the idea of reproduction_ as such.

The actual comparison would be for me to express sadness about the fact that I
cannot pass on my desire for chocolate to the next generation, which to be
honest I couldn't care less about.

------
masterproc
FYI, Bach accepted money by Epstein _after_ conviction. To me, someone who
does not help Science, MIT and Harvard in fact finding about money by a
convicted sex offender, is maybe not the best to read the future.

Sources: “The researcher Minsky had flagged for Epstein, Joscha Bach, declined
repeated requests from me to discuss his ties to Epstein. But a 2018 paper on
his theory of consciousness acknowledges support from the Jeffrey Epstein
Foundation, and Bach has been listed in media tallies of Epstein grantees.”
Science, At [https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/09/what-kind-
researcher...](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/09/what-kind-researcher-
did-sex-offender-jeffrey-epstein-fund-he-told-science-he-died)

“From 2014 to 2016, Bach’s primary affiliation was with MIT’s Media Lab.
Harvard never paid Bach or provided funds to support his research, and no
funds donated to Harvard supported Bach’s work. We understand that in 2014 and
2015, Bach’s work at MIT received fi- nancial support from Epstein.” (...)

“Though Harvard never paid Bach, PED’s website listed Bach as a PED research
scientist beginning in 2014. We understand that Bach left MIT in 2016, but PED
continued to list him as a PED research scientist until 2019. During that
time, Nowak continued to give Bach access to office space at PED, which he
used intermittently, and Bach often met with Epstein at PED when Epstein
visited. PED has no records of Bach’s executing a Visitor Participation
Agreement. Bach did not respond to our voice mail or email asking to speak
with him, and we were unable to determine whether Epstein provided financial
support to Bach after Bach left MIT and while he was associated with PED.”

REPORT CONCERNING JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN’S CONNECTIONS TO HARVARD UNIVERSITY. At
[https://ogc.harvard.edu/files/ogc/files/report_concerning_je...](https://ogc.harvard.edu/files/ogc/files/report_concerning_jeffrey_e._epsteins_connections_to_harvard_university.pdf)

“Epstein’s $100,000 donation in May 2013 was intended to be used at Ito’s
discretion. His donations in November 2013 and in July and September 2014,
totaling $300,000 (40% of Epstein’s post-conviction donations), were made to
support research by Joscha Bach, a former Media Lab research fellow from
Germany whom Epstein introduced to Ito in 2013. The Media Lab hired Bach in
large part because Epstein subsidized the cost.“

* Bach declined to be interviewed in connection with Goodwin Procter’s fact-finding.

REPORT CONCERNING JEFFREY EPSTEIN’S INTERACTIONS WITH THE MASSACHUSETTS
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. At [http://factfindingjan2020.mit.edu/files/MIT-
report.pdf?20011...](http://factfindingjan2020.mit.edu/files/MIT-
report.pdf?200117)

------
NotUsingLinux
Thank you for sharing! Great interview and perspectives

------
deeplearning0
do they discuss also AI ethics? Wondering about funding ethics for research
...

~~~
magnusmagnusson
AI 'ethics' is how you get China dominating AI research eventually.

All these OpenAI spooks are either doing it intentionally or accidentally and
at stake like this, what does it matter when the end result is a convincing
loss.

~~~
yboris
I think you misunderstand what AI ethics is.

Do you want facial recognition cameras on every street? That's what no ethics
oversight gets you.

~~~
antepodius
Ethics oversight won't stop there, though. The managerial class will seek to
keep expanding it more and more, with increasingly arcane and insulting
restrictions.

And is the research level the right place to stop that? I don't think so.
That's a policy question.

~~~
yboris
There's a lovely analogy I like: driving fast.

New technology is like putting more weight on the gas pedal. Until we learn to
handle the current problems, accelerating isn't a guaranteed solution. We may
be able to swerve out of the oncoming problem, but now we're going event
faster.

We now have technology that can end human civilization (aka "existential
risk"). What is the harm in going slower? Especially compared to the harm of
going faster.

~~~
antepodius
It's a coordination problem. Sure, you could slow down, and then the chinese
will just outcompete you/spawn a paperclip maximiser- or, in general, a less
scrupulous competitor will.

You'd have to get all sides to agree on an actually effective treaty.

------
ExcavateGrandMa
The day a machine is gonna try to have a conversation with me I'm gonna smash
it the concrete way! keep dreaming about the perfect creature/slave/SEXBOT :D

~~~
dane-pgp
ELIZA: That is interesting. Please continue.

~~~
ExcavateGrandMa
ELIZA??? all been already said... humanity isn't complex just ashamed by its
own moves :D

and yea we are speaking about consciousnesss OH MY HEAD...

That's too much for me, can't comment much... but keep doing I'm watching...
and guess what it's fun! :D

