<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Matthias Gruber — Blog</title>
    <link>https://matthiasgruber.com/blog/</link>
    <description>Recent content on Matthias Gruber — Blog</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://matthiasgruber.com/blog/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Can AI Be Conscious? What a Theory of Consciousness Actually Predicts</title>
      <link>https://matthiasgruber.com/blog/can-ai-be-conscious/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://matthiasgruber.com/blog/can-ai-be-conscious/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, recently said he thinks there&amp;rsquo;s a 15–20% chance Claude is conscious. The Pentagon awarded Anthropic a contract weeks later. Google has an internal &amp;ldquo;model welfare&amp;rdquo; team. The AI consciousness question has moved from philosophy seminar rooms to boardrooms and defense budgets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And almost nobody is answering it with any precision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here&amp;rsquo;s the problem: most people debating whether AI is conscious don&amp;rsquo;t have a theory of consciousness that makes testable predictions. They&amp;rsquo;re running on intuition, and intuition is what got us the Turing test — a behavioral measure that tells you nothing about experience.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Four-Model Theory of Consciousness — An Introduction</title>
      <link>https://matthiasgruber.com/blog/four-model-theory-introduction/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://matthiasgruber.com/blog/four-model-theory-introduction/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;You are not conscious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something inside your skull is running a real-time simulation of you, and &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; is conscious. The real you — the neurons, the electrochemistry — has never experienced a single thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the core claim of the Four-Model Theory (FMT). It sounds radical, but it follows from a structural observation about how brains work — an observation that dissolves the so-called &amp;ldquo;hard problem&amp;rdquo; of consciousness and generates testable predictions, several of which have been independently confirmed.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Why Global Workspace Theory Explains Nothing About Consciousness</title>
      <link>https://matthiasgruber.com/blog/why-gwt-explains-nothing/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://matthiasgruber.com/blog/why-gwt-explains-nothing/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Global Neuronal Workspace Theory (GNW) is the most empirically productive framework in consciousness science. It has generated more experiments, more replicated findings, and more clinical applications than any competitor. It is also a theory of information routing that explains nothing about consciousness itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That&amp;rsquo;s not a contradiction. GNW identifies the neural signatures that &lt;em&gt;accompany&lt;/em&gt; conscious access — ignition thresholds, P3b components, fronto-parietal activation patterns. This is genuinely useful science. Clinicians use GNW-derived measures like the Perturbational Complexity Index (PCI) to assess disorders of consciousness. Experimentalists use GNW&amp;rsquo;s predictions to design rigorous studies.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
