Not to mention, if your brain starts outputting Microsoft copyright code, they're going to sue the shit out of you and win, so I'm not sure how that would help even so.
This is not a fact.
The physics that gives rise to the brain is pretty much known. We can model all the protons, electrons and photons incredibly accurately. It's an extraordinary claim you say the brain doesn't function according to these known mechanisms.
Personally I believe it’s likely that the brain can essentially be reduced to a computation, but we have no proof of that.
If all you have is a hammer...
The nature of consciousness is an open question. We don't know whether the brain is equivalent to a Turing machine.
We can't even accurately model a receptor protein on a cell or the binding of its ligands, nor can we accurately simulate a single neuron.
This is one of those hard problems in computing and medicine. It is very much an open question about how or if we can model complex biology accurately like that.
You are saying "If we know how something works, we can explain how it works using math."
But we know almost nothing about how the brain works.
> The physics that gives rise to the brain is pretty much known.
...no it is not! No physicist would describe any physical phenomenon as being "pretty much known". Let alone cognition. We don't even have a complete atomic model.
Does the brain fall in into the category of “understood natural phenomenon”? Is it “understood”? What does “understood” mean in this context?
Why? Burden of proof is on you.
Source?
In this answer, you're completely ignoring the massive fact that we cannot create a human brain. Having mathematical models about particles does not mean we have "solved" the brain. Unless you're also believe that these LLMs are actually behaving just like human brains, in that have consciousness, they have logic, they dream, they have nightmares, they produce emotions such as fear, love, anger, that they grow and change over time, that they controls body, your lungs, heart, etc...
You see my point, right? Surely you see that the statement 'The brain is also just a "complex math program"' is at best extremely over-simplistic.
There is a gaping chasm between observing known physics, and saying it is the cause of consciousness.
You should read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_mind
[ Edit: better link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness ]
