Free will?

Both for and against. It's something more than just talking, piggy thinks.
(note: piggy's old answer to such topic was "There is no free will in this cosmos. Everyone has to bow to the First Order." )
Have a lovely day.

So one vote for both. I'm probably in the both category as well Anyone else?

Against.
"Free" and "will" don't mix well together!...
(Don't let Compatiblists or the so called "Soft Determinists" tell you otherwise as they just want to maintain the current paradigm for lack of imagining a better alternative for the future organization of Society)

To the point, one HAS reasons to will what one wills, thus one is already constrained in the subjective process on how we, each of us, specifically thinks, there is nothing free about that!
Those reasons are granted by our genome, our culture, and our specific subjective phenomenological POV on how we each subjectively experience the world.

In common lingo "free will" just means your "wish" about a future state of affairs was granted by destiny...I have no qualms with the usefulness of that illusion.

But one can go a step further and question the very idea of "causation" as it is phenomenologically the result of how we experience time passing and the increase of entropy according to the 2 law of thermodynamics...one is prompted to believe that stuff causes stuff everywhere...not exactly!

What might be the case according to the block Universe hypothesis is perfect correlation of events in Spacetime, not actual causation, as they all co exist.

This would also explain away the weirdness of entanglement, or non local correlations of states of affairs between two particles or anything else for that matter that might be entangled! According to the concept of a unique Universal wave function everything should be entangled and local correlations simulate what we call "causation" when in fact what we have is a perfect correlation of events!

I love when tautologies fit the bill although almost no one seems to understand them...

Parmenides said it all three thousand years ago well before Einstein got to the idea of a Block Universe...What is IS, what is not is not!

...after Parmenides dismaying simplicity everything else is noise and an afterthought!
On the other side of the coin Heraclitus is the champion of phenomenology unlike Parmenides who was looking for the "bedrock of things" Heraclitus celebrated the "experience" of things, and with it the sense of motion and transformation that we all have as living creatures...

In the sense that phenomenological experiences are real just like dreams are real dreams when you dream them, one can champion "life" as the best possible illusion our Universe has raised so far!

Fairy feeling of oneself (自我感觉良好）, touchy and feely:

Htam9876@neila9876:
Perhaps that "best singer" feels himself is a warrior for freedom.

Neila9876@htam9876:
That’s “fairy feeling of himself –（自我感觉良好）” only.

From my view, actually he is trying to block the development of history or pull the development of history backward.

Htam9876@neila9876:
Good term of “fairy feeling of himself –（自我感觉良好）”. Me too. Sometimes piggy feels the pig is a hero trying to save the scientific research from the “standard” constraint. But from the view of some of my neighbors / relatives, piggy is only somebody unemployed / a shabby guy who has nothing to do / a redundant guy in this society.

Neila9876@htam9876:
This tramp in cosmos asks you a question: what’s the inherent PROPERTY of a “best singer”?

Htam9876@neila9876:
It’s “fairy feeling of himself –（自我感觉良好）”.
Piggy recommends Johnny Cash version of wayfaring stranger for you.

Neila9876@htam9876:
It sounds like cow boy’s voice.

AlphaZero is a new kind of computer that can play chess. It only learns by playing against itself; when it wins or loses, the connections between its "neurons" get stronger or weaker. This is the same way that people's brains learn. AlphaZero beat Stockfish, the best chess machine in the world at the time, after having trained for about four hours and played millions of games against itself.

From my book:
"Consider AlphaZero as having free will for argument's sake. What difference would it make? Give it some thought. For instance, would AlphaZero sacrifice its best moves to do what it "wants" to, inevitably inferior or even stupid? Is it possible that its free will could outperform or outsmart its neural network? Of course not. It has already surpassed human capabilities in terms of chess. Even if AlphaZero had so-called free will, there is no reason for it to use it. It would be detrimental to AlphaZero's learning and development if it had a "free will" that randomly or consistently seized control. It could never become an accomplished chess player."

I believe the same holds true for the human brain. Therefore, I cannot accept that people have free will.

What on hell are you talking about?
What does calculating a best possible move according X Y Z parameters has anything to do with volition let alone with "free will"???
Are you yet another "animist"?

You missed the point. AlphaZero doesn't do any calculations when playing chess. Electrical impulses flow through its web of neurons, and the next move instantly pops out at the other end. Its logic is wired in the neuronal structure itself. In the same way, nerve impulses flow from our senses to our muscles (and glands).

...oh God here we go...and how is that not a calculation?
Where does the expression "neural network" confused you regarding a computational process with a deep learning algorithm that gathers massive data to probabilistically calculate what the best possible next move is?

I specifically said, "AlphaZero doesn't do any calculations when playing chess." While learning, of course, it does a lot of simple calculations to adjust the strengths of neuron connections following each training session's outcome. In humans, this is very similar: hormones such as dopamine and serotonin signal good or bad outcomes of the most recent actions. This, in turn, eventually causes temporary (short-term memory) or permanent (long-term memory and learning) changes to the strength of synapses in the human brain.

Please don't make this a discussion about trivial AI concepts. There is no free will in humans, just as there is no free will in AlphaZero. If it could exist, free will would be detrimental to our development. It would certainly have no evolutionary advantage over, say, survival-of-the-fittest logic.

Everything is a fracking calculation, every motion you see is a calculation in-scripted in matter through spacetime...you don't understand a word of what you said...then you go on a diatribe on dopamine and serotonin, the two most well know brain chemicals to the wide public these days and speak about reinforcement learning...might as well start talking about Pavlovian conditioning... and obviously, very obviously the concept of free will is just an obscure useful misperception for all living creatures to have a inner world and sense of self worth...that is why no one is willing to give up on the concept no matter how dumb it is, a fracking contradiction in terms word next to word... so what? You are just mixing stuff but not making any sense at all!
AlphaZero who beat AlphaGo 100 fold is just a Touring Machine and let me give you the news so are you just a more complex kind, in spite of all the denial in neuroscience about our brains not being touring machines...
In fact, in good measure, from rocks to trees to people and computers, everything is a touring machine, as entropy increases forward...that is what a computation is, the exhaling of energy into more entropic states and with it showing the phenomenological shapes and fractals our Universe is programmed to unfold, again phenomenologically speaking, because the whole thing is already unfolded past present and future...

What ails you, and how long have you been suffering from it?

People like you and having to put up with them...
...now for a change go read something about Universal attractors, fractals, and try to peel off the concept of what a "computation" actually is if you have the minimum brain power to do it!

In this case, you should consider yourself fortunate. No one has ever asked you to put up with me. For your information, I earned a degree in differential geometry, topology, and tensor analysis. If what I already know about fractals and universal attractors was insufficient, I would read more about them, but I already read the original "The Fractal Geometry of Nature" by Mandelbrot in the 90's. Pretty elementary stuff, if you ask me, and totally irrelevant for the issue at hand.

...yeah that is the thing about technocrats you read the stuff but you don't know what it means nor how to relate it with concepts...no wonder normally you are a disaster in literature! The cacophony and word salad you make when you try to translate data and numbers into concepts and words is insufferable...also I am not impressed with degrees or arguments ad authority! What matters is what you type and how you come across on what you say...if I don't see any clear understanding nor real meat on what you say I will call you out no matter if you are the Pope himself!

I believe the majority of people here understand your comprehension issues. It does not bother me much that you cannot comprehend my writing.

By the way, just so we be crystal clear, deciding what data set fits an adequate move in Chess, Go, or for that matter feeding yourself, retrieved from deep learning, is a calculation! What the algorithm probably does is comparing what data sets were more successfully in previous games in similar ish situations, calculating a statistical probability of said next move being successful and then deciding/calculating which of potential successfully moves is the most adequate in X situation. The bigger the data set of all past successful moves the more accurate is the response...what you have there is a self optimization machine, that calculates what data chunks are adequate for a given "picture" on what is being challenged with!