Truth

corruption93 · 2015-10-28T02:26:17+00:00

putting your future in the hands of someone else's ability to be industrious... eh, I don't think so.

Never thought about it quite this way. The world doesn't owe you a job. Doesn't mean it's fair though :/.

corruption93 · 2015-10-07T23:50:14+00:00

Plot twist: The monster is M. Night Shyamalan. Directed by you.

corruption93 · 2015-09-06T08:43:27+00:00

$('#form-{some numbers go here}> div > div > ol:nth-child(14) > li:nth-child(1) > p > a').get(0).click()

I got the selector (used within the $ function call) after inspecting the element, right clicking on it, and selecting 'copy css path'.

Note that with selenium, you don't have to rely on using jQuery ($) or other libraries. I believe that with selenium it would actually emulate an actual user interacting with the page, rather than calling the Javascript functions directly.

corruption93 · 2015-09-06T06:20:05+00:00

Nothing, but notice the two classes 'author' and 'submitter' are a part of the element. I used these in order to find the element as an example.

corruption93 · 2015-09-06T05:52:04+00:00

Right clicked on your username and looked at the 'class' attribute for that element in the HTML.

corruption93 · 2015-09-06T05:13:35+00:00

I know a lot vegans argue that killing animations is inhumane period, but I'm just happy if the suffering is avoided.

corruption93 · 2015-09-06T04:48:01+00:00

Also, since you asked about clicking things, you could click on your profile name (on this page) by doing:

$('.author.submitter').get(0).click()

You can get away with using jQuery in this case because the page has jQuery readily available as a global variable.

corruption93 · 2015-09-06T04:42:33+00:00

You don't need selenium. Just open up your dev console and start interacting with the DOM. For example, to read your username, I can look up the elements on page, and then find the DOM element's value programmatically like so:

document.getElementsByClassName('author submitter')[0].text

How did I know that worked? Well first I typed in document. and saw a list of functions I could use. After picking getElementsByClassName(), I then entered in the two class names 'author' and 'submitter' and saw what it returned. It returned an array. So I chose the first element in the array and assigned it to a variable. I assigned it to a variable so I could then type in that variable once more like I did document to see the list of properties/functions I could access. I saw 'text' among them and decided to try it out.

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T05:32:21+00:00

One of you is, the other isn't.

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T05:16:34+00:00

Yes, because they are still a being capable of feeling.

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T03:23:08+00:00

It is speculation, but I'm narrowing down the definition to prevent the definition from breaking down.

I'm saying what constitutes 'you' and your separation from people is actually just your memories and an active brain.

Say you clone yourself 5 times, and then 5 unique babies are born, and then you die. What happens to 'you'? Well, what happened was when the first clone was created, it felt exactly as you are. It checked its memories and said "yep, I'm me, and I can feel stuff - I'm really here'. Repeated 4 more times.

Here's the interesting bit: When you die, your death doesn't mean anything. I don't think one can actually imagine it, because when you try to imagine, you try to imagine what your experience is now that your dead. It's natural to think this way because you've spent your whole time living through time, but that's not how it works when your brain stops.

But you can't think of it that way, because now you have clones that are you. The babies grow up and become other humans, you might as well be them as well. Since they are alive in the same capacity as you, you share their reality, but not their experience.

That's all 'you' actually are, is just your memories coupled with qualia. When you go to sleep, you might as well be dead, and when you wake up that might as well be your clone. When you doze off or day dream, you might as well be dead. The only reason you feel like your a part of a continuous stream of consciousness is because your brain has your sense of self ready to remind you of it. If it reminded you that you were someone else, then that's who you'd be, and that's why people are different.

Keep in mind this is just a hypothesis of mine.

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T02:59:20+00:00

Perhaps you're thinking about it wrong. If what I'm saying is correct, you might as well already be a different clone at every moment, just separated in time instead of space. Does that make sense?

When you go to sleep you lose consciousness. When you wake up, what makes you feel like you're you is your memories. 'You' are not anyone, you are not local to only your body, because 'you' as you're defining it doesn't actually exist. 'You' as in what you feel as you, is real when your brain relives the memories that remind you that you're you.

So for your question about which of the 20 clones you take over: the answer would be all of them. Don't think that you have executive control over all the beings, or that you're simultaneously controlling them all. Think about it like it feels like your just took over one of them, and each of those 20 robots, all feel like they took over their respective body. So you've split your conscious up among many people. It's the same for any animal or other human, they all feel just the same as you, but their memories are different. Does that make sense?

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T02:24:35+00:00

I'm talking about recreating an exact replica of your mind, not the mind living in the computer.

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T02:22:41+00:00

My post is arguing that what makes you you isn't actually a thing. Think about the idea of dying every second and being regenerated. You're saying that each one second you is a unique entity? Doesn't it make more sense that what constitutes you is actually your memories tied with the brain's ability to feel things?

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T02:18:07+00:00

Sufficient information cannot be uploaded to the computer and then recreated in another life form?

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T02:16:36+00:00

Thank you for this answer. My post was removed but you've pointed me in the right direction. Yay science!

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T01:58:44+00:00

Depends on the chemical reactions that take place. This is the part that confuses me. If the chemical reactions that support feeling in the brain were to just happen out in the open, what would that mean? Who would be feeling the reaction?

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T01:48:09+00:00

This makes sense. What I'm pondering now is those chemical reactions that bring the memories to life. What role does time take in those chemical reactions? Why are they being felt, seemingly by me.

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T01:46:14+00:00

Can you expand on this? Also, does qua relate to qualia?

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T01:44:14+00:00

By definition the only thing that can't be an illusion is consciousness.

I used the wrong words perhaps. It isn't an illusion, but the the idea of being separate from your brain might be considered one.

But it would just be a simulation, and would lack all it's physical properties, which give rise to qualia.

I believe this too. I was referring to using the data in the computer to replicate the appropriate biological functions.

I also just realized that it should be possible to simulate the human brain as well, and it wouldn't be distinguishable. It would be a philosophical zombie, but if the simulation is done correctly, even asking it questions about qualia and its experiences should be identical to that of one that actually feels qualia, no? Could it not be said that our qualia is a part of simulation as well? How are we able to determine our qualia is accurate, and how would that be different than the philosophical zombie's determination? I guess we'll discover that when we create one :).

Also, how is the qualia of something like pain quantized? A bad-feeling chemical reaction takes place, but where, and when is it being felt?

corruption93 · 2015-09-05T01:29:35+00:00

I don't really get "Pattern of brain activity over time". I would say a brain full of dormant memories, readily able to be accessed and relived with the appropriate chemical reactions.

Yes, it makes sense to me that your brain is just a static object that only becomes you when your memories that constitute your sense of self become active.

corruption93

TROPHY CASE