Dr. Jeff Beck

If it's doing exactly the same, I mean, this is like the standard algorithm.

If it's doing exactly the same calculations from a purely like phenomenal auto, it's like it's the same.

It's indistinguishable.

Okay, so agents need to be physical.

So I do believe that an agent needs to be physical.

Absolutely.

I don't believe, you know, I believe you can have a model of agency and not have an agent, right?

You know, you can put that model in a computer and run it and make predictions as to what an agent would do.

It might even be 100% correct, but I still wouldn't call it an agent.

But again, this is like getting into philosophy.

And philosophy frustrates the Bayesian because philosophy is not probabilistic.

Right.

Philosophy is really about drawing clear lines and distinctions.

And in my world, those don't really exist.

Right.

There's everything has an error bar.

You know, all of there isn't a clear delineation between, you know, you know, an object and an agent.

It's really, you know, from this modeling perspective, it's really just a question of degrees.

And philosophy is terrible at handling questions of degree.

Does that ring true to you?