Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There is no logic in that comment.

Your counter to life being machines is just baselessly discrediting those of the opinion. Ad-hominem.

Considering a cell to be a single machine does not make it equivalent to another machine (a computer), and certainly doesn't make that other machine equivalent to the millions of cells we just saw divide. "A is a machine, B is a machine, therefore A is B" - a false equivalence.

Cells are conclusively machines, by the definition that they execute a fixed purpose dictated in whole by the parts it was made of - parts that we can change to modify the operation of the machine, a well studied subject used extensively in e.g. pharma (reprogrammed bacteria is how people get insulin).

That conscious life is poorly understood does not somehow change the fact that the only building block used to make it in nature is a small biomechanical automaton.

While we love to glorify our own existence and capabilities, our recent advances in LLMs also show how simple machines - even if significantly flawed due to practical resource limitations and intentional design limitations - can end projecting a convincing mimicry of our conscious behavior, despite having a simple, phrase-completing nature. It might make you wonder what simple initial purpose might dictate our behavior.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: