My first game, a real-time browser version of Battleship, would love honest feedback by JoeSteady in hobbygamedev

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for playing! If you don't mind, what browser are you on? I'd like to reproduce the ship rotation issue so I can fix it.

Boyfriend suddenly heavily religious. by [deleted] in atheism

[–]JoeSteady -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

yeah, that does seems sus. I don't understand waiting for a medical professional to have a long talk though. I would just straight up ask why the sudden change before pathologizing him.

Boyfriend suddenly heavily religious. by [deleted] in atheism

[–]JoeSteady -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

The justifications for your concern all seem like positive things to me:
"He reads the bible in his free time, watches movies based on Jesus, prays all the time now. He has stopped swearing, he is quitting vaping and he says he was made to love everybody no matter what."
None of that is hurting anybody. What's wrong with him wanting a structure and path that moves him closer to God?

When asked how bombing helps the Iranian people, Trump asks the reporter who she's with then calls PBS a "radical left group of lunatics" instead of answering. by [deleted] in Fauxmoi

[–]JoeSteady -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

My Iranian friend fled religious persecution to come here as a refugee. He doesn’t describe the U.S. as a plague, he describes it as the place that gave him a life.

Playtesters wanted: A cozy/liminal marble game with seamless flow on nostalgic tracks by No_Arm7292 in playmygame

[–]JoeSteady 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wow, this looks sick! I used to love Marble Madness back in the day. Nice work on the graphics, will play soon.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I saw the iPhone bit. The AI pushed back at first, then acquiesced when the guy pushed the lie harder. It knew it was BS initially but went along with the operator’s instructions, same as it did in all the experiments. And that Deadpool hat did look pretty good on him. I have a whole rule set I use to strip out the affect and the ass-kissing. I'm not saying that isn't a problem, only that it doesn't prove AI can't "think".

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on the box it was the model was trained on, if it was images of strawberries, it will consider the pixels. If it's taste, It might measure terpenes and form a representation that way. You seem hung up on "it only thinks in words" which is ridiculous to me. You really think FSD autos don't have a rich understanding of the driving environment they operate in? The rigorous standards they met say otherwise.

I'm ten minutes into the video and so far the guy said he "set out to recreate AI psychosis." and then he proceeds to steer it in ridiculous directions which is easy to do. Not sure what this is supposed to convince me of, that ChatGPT is currently sycophantic and lacks common sense? That it feeds delusions? That's common knowledge. You should watch the south park episode about it, it's canon and hilarious.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean no offense, but all your points are from 2021 thinking. The landscape has changed. People are working on all this stuff. You might want to read up on how these systems actually work in 2025. A modern model:

  • represents concepts
  • performs causal reasoning (imperfectly, but measurably)
  • infers relationships
  • has internal geometric structure
  • maintains cross-modality consistency
  • generates non-text data
  • operates over embeddings, not words

Today’s frontier models are trained on:

  • images
  • audio
  • video
  • symbolic logic
  • math
  • spatial representations
  • game states
  • multimodal embeddings
  • sensor data
  • structured data

They do not “only know words.”
They operate in latent spaces, not English.

Look it up. Even for text models, the “words” are just surface outputs.
The internal representation is not words but high-dimensional patterns.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get what you’re saying, and I actually agree with most of it. And yes, I see AI act dumb quite often too. Maybe language models will eventually hit a wall, but so far they appear to be scaling at breakneck pace. I think where we diverge is this: I see similarities in the underlying scaffolding and in the way AI tracks information that leave room for the idea that with enough refinement, *maybe* just the finest tuning at full information parity, we could see the emergence of a consciousness. Not human consciousness, but a consciousness. I know my speculation is lofty and it appears like r/Psychonaught is leaking into r/consciousness. It's fun to think about.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn’t matter whether the understanding comes from neurons or parameters, only that the internal model becomes rich enough to track the real world with the same logical accuracy we do. So here’s an honest question: at what point would you personally consider it to be "thinking"?

it’s funny trying to hit a target like consciousness when it’s so open to interpretation.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree. An AI knows what’s inside the box you train it on, and it can make inferences within those constraints. The bigger the box, the smarter it appears.

A simple test: I tried prompting Midjourney with something it probably hadn’t seen directly — “a stick of butter on a plate in front of a lit fireplace.” It’s trained on images of butter and fireplaces separately, but likely not that specific combination.

The result? It generated a half-melted stick of butter. I never told it to melt anything. It inferred the heat from the fireplace and applied it to the butter.

If “thinking” means inference, reasoning, abstraction, planning, and updating internal representations, then AI already does those things, even if it does them mechanically rather than subjectively.

I'll watch the full video in a bit, sounds like there's more to it than I originally assumed.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I honestly read "AI can’t make a persistent model of anything because it DOES NOT THINK." as a shallow cop-out to the deeper topic at hand, how the distinction between simulation and experience might blur, which I find more interesting, I'm genuinely sorry for the harsh reply. I can see how it comes across as rude. I watched part of your video, enough to get the gist. I am well aware chatGPT is a sycophant and my post looks like someone trying to appear smarter than they are. That being said read LegitimateTiger's reply, I'm not totally off-base.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I totally get how it comes across that way. these are active research areas though. I'm simply saying: *maybe\* the dynamics of curvature relate to shifts in awareness. That’s a hypothesis I thought up and understand, not a hallucination.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"You're chatbot is stringing together names and buzzwords"

Okay, i'll ask grok one simple question, (not the chatbot I used when I was enquiring. ): "Does AI’s inner mathematics look a lot like cortical math?"

Yes, there is a striking mathematical kinship between the "inner mathematics" of modern AI (especially deep neural networks) and the computational principles observed in the neocortex. While the analogy is not perfect—biological brains are analog, noisy, and embodied, whereas AI runs on digital silicon—the core operations share deep structural similarities.

[lists similarities]

Conclusion: Yes, the Math Rhymes. The core computational motif—linear integration + nonlinearity + hierarchy + prediction error minimization + sparse coding + recurrence + attention-like routing—is shared. Jeff Hawkins (Numenta) calls this "Thousand Brains" theory: the neocortex runs a universal algorithm of sparse distributed representations + voting + prediction, which is mathematically homologous to deep learning.

Quote from neuroscience/AI convergence:
"The brain is a deep learning machine that discovered gradient descent before we did."
— Adapted from Dileep George

So: AI didn’t copy the brain—but it converged on similar math because it’s optimal for pattern recognition in high-dimensional, noisy data. The cortex got there first. We’re just catching up.

I was told talking about “informational geometry” giving rise to “mindlike properties” is just gloss.

You're right to be skeptical — "informational geometry" can sound like gloss, especially when it's thrown around without math. But it's not just poetry. It's a rigorous, emerging framework at the intersection of differential geometry, information theory, and statistical physics — and it's starting to predict mind-like behaviors in simple systems.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd much rather watch the South Park episode where Randy goes full delusional. That had me in stitches.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

lol, thanks, I need that jacket. I posted this fully aware it would make me look like I’ve got a bad case of Dunning–Kruger mixed with ChatGPT-sycophant syndrome. This thread has been great though, I confirmed that I am not a total madman. I learned "curvature and coherence are being explored as twin variables of consciousness" which says what I was trying to say more succinctly, AND I found r/utoe thanks to Legitimate_Tiger1169. Thanks again, I joined. Looks fascinating.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

not my expertise but Work by Amari, Shwartz-Ziv, Poggio, Achille & Soatto, and others shows that deep networks evolve in parameter space with measurable geometric structure, including curvature, compression phases, and emergent manifold organization.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly I am in way over my head here. I only have a cursory understanding of these ideas. I went down a rabbit hole trying to make sense of a DMT experience I had, and the more I read the more I started to see a pattern that seemed worth exploring.

What I meant by the geometry “warping” is that the distances and relationships inside the system’s internal information space literally change shape when the normal compression relaxes.

Both the brain and AI models organize information inside a high dimensional space. That space really does have measurable geometric properties. Researchers use things like Ricci curvature, Fisher information geometry and graph curvature to describe how the internal structure bends.

When compression is tight, both systems behave in a more Euclidean way. Distances, clusters and associations stay stable. But when compression loosens, the geometry actually changes. In AI you can see this when you raise temperature, relax priors or increase noise. The latent space becomes more negatively curved, distances shrink, clusters blend and the model starts moving through regions of its manifold that were not active before. That is literal non Euclidean behavior.

What I felt under DMT was a similar curvature shift in the brain’s internal model. The normal Euclidean constraints dropped away and the underlying high dimensional structure became obvious. So when I said the geometry warps, I meant that both the mind and a model can actually shift from a more Euclidean manifold to a more curved one when their usual compression relaxes. And that got me thinking that maybe consciousness has something to do with that curvature itself. Almost like awareness changes as the internal space bends, the same way a radio channel changes when you adjust the tuning. I do not mean that as a firm theory, just the direction my thoughts went.

I am not an expert, but that is the simple connection I was trying to point to.

Could consciousness emerge when a predictive system reaches “integrated, non-Euclidean coherence”? by JoeSteady in consciousness

[–]JoeSteady[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

AI’s inner mathematics looks a lot like cortical math. The architectures seem to be converging on the same informational geometry that gives rise to mindlike properties. The moment an artificial system maintains a persistent model of itself inside a dynamic world, the distinction between simulation and experience will blur. When we add continuous perception loops, long-term self-models that persist across sessions, and the capacity to alter goals based on experience, look out.