3 HN users recommended this lecture4 months2018–2024score 4.5
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026
Cited as an excellent entry point to Dennett's thinking on minds, memes and competence without comprehension.
Daniel Dennett's Royal Institution lecture on whether the brain is a computer and where its software comes from. He argues that minds are built by evolution and culture, with competence arising without comprehension.
“I discovered him with the excellent Royal Institution talk” (HN, 2024)
I discovered him with the excellent Royal Institution talk "If Brains are Computers, Who Designs the Software?" [0]. And the quote which marked my mind is "How could a slow, mindless process build a thing that could build a thing that a slow mindless process couldn't build on it's own ?". [0] : [this video]
Excellent talk that introduced the commenter to Dennett
I'd recommend Daniel Dennett's talk If Brains are Computers, Who Designs the Software? as a counterpoint to this article [1]. Dennett's talk is a bit long but I mostly enjoyed it, especially when he points out the computerphobia of many of his colleagues. Of course, it's easier for me to agree with Dennett than for many other people, because I'm a computationalist in the philosophy of mind and suspect that consciousness is an emergent property of certain computations. It might in theory even be possible to realize that by analytical insight - though probably not in practice. I'm generally not a fan of the philosophy of mind, though, because it mostly consists of speculation and intuition pumping. [1] [this video]
Dennett's computationalist counterpoint on minds and software
I find Daniel Dennett's framing of competency vs comprehension a good place to start. He did a nice talk at the RI on it some time ago[1]. A previous one overlaps with similar ground[2]. [1] [this video] [2] [link]
Thanks for the link, I didn't know about that. It's kind of in the autocatalysis way, but more about "memes" in the sense of the book which introduced the term "The selfish gene" by Richard Dawkins. He says it 2 times, it's what drives his speech : At the beginning : [this video] And at the end : [this video] That's a very nice and profound speech asking good questions.
tl;dr - ants can be compared to neurons (they even use similar mechanisms) and ant colonies can be compared to consciousness (although they lack human-recognizable self-awareness). I think it's not useful to compare humans with ants and human culture with ant colonies (it's on another scale, although there are some similarities, too). - - - This type of memory can be compared to the building blocks of our memory when we look into our brains. Each neuron is basically an agent that acts on its own (comparable to an ant) - if you look into neuron behaviour, there are some pretty interesting things (e.g. they try to get to the locations where most of the activity is happening to get more energy and weaken connections based on activity - synaptic plasticity). The algorithms both employ are comparable - I see similarities between ant colonies and human brains. The human consciousness emerges from this phenomenon - the biggest difference is that all our neurons work together to create a consciousness that is self-aware (actually, it's only a small part of the brain that creates "me"). Understanding ant colonies can be beneficial for understanding human consciousness. [this video] (I don't care about the computer analogies, but the concept of individual agents acting together in the brain gets across)
Dennett on distributed agents acting together in the brain
That article reminds me a lot this sentence from Daniel Benett : "How could a slow, mindless process build a thing that could build a thing that a slow mindless process couldn't build on it's own ?" Source : [this video]
Source of Dennett's quote on slow mindless processes building builders
Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.
6 Hacker News comments
From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.
Read more
Citations, criticism and jokes
Read more