3 ms·
When I look at efforts to synthesize the human brain within a computer I see an effort to make a synthetic bird rather than a machine that flies. If this analo
by ryanmarsh 11y ago
When I look at efforts to synthesize the human brain within a computer I see an effort to make a synthetic bird rather than a machine that flies.
If this analogy has any use as a model beyond a cursory observation then a focus on machines that solve hard problems will bear more fruit and earlier (maybe ever) than attempts to fully replicate the human brain.
Today is it possible to build an (outwardly) anatomically correct and functioning sparrow (in all respects) out of synthetic materials? I don't know but surely it is hard. To make one certainly would have been impossible for the Wright brothers.
Today we have things like the F22, A380, and little drones. Each is quite complex but the complexity accreted over time, each layer a pragmatic solution to a problem at hand.
If we take the same approach what kind of "thinking machine" might we end up with in 100 years time?
- AndrewKemendo 11y agoThe primary problem with the phenomenology approachieve to AGI is that we have so little understanding about the mechanism of general intelligence. Some aspects of intelligence, we understand, but as is analogous to flight it's nowhere close. Whereas with flight the Wright brothers and before them Richard pearce understood it well enough to make an approximation and thus working implementations, we don't have anything close to that kind of understanding.
- kr4 11y agoThinking (or thoughts) are different from consciousness. A simple experiment can tell you this. Sit silently and observe your mind. You'd see thoughts keep on popping up, if you don't indulge with them, each would fade away quickly. If you do indulge, you get on a ride of similar chain of thoughts. This riding is termed as "thinking". IMO the neuron pathways that exist in our physical brain are determined based on "rides of thoughts" we have taken in our life so far. But there's no visual or physical proof to locate the consciousness that does this observation and takes the ride. So uploading brains means uploading only "the experiences" you have got in your life but as long as the rider isn't there, these are just mere memories with no further rides possible.
- PhasmaFelis 11y agoAre you advocating for an immaterial soul?
- c22 11y agoIs there any other kind of soul? It sounds like kr4 is arguing for consciousness as a higher order emergent phenomenon separate from (but built atop) thoughts.
- PhasmaFelis 11y agoI mean, it sounds like they're saying that the physical (and thus uploadable) brain is not itself conscious, but only a highway for thoughts to ride on and a storehouse for memories. That clearly implies that there's a non-physical thing that is actually conscious, whose existence kr4 takes on "gut feeling" despite lack of evidence. If consciousness is an emergent phenomenon of the physical properties of the brain, then surely it will also emerge from a sufficiently accurate simulation of those physical properties.
- c22 11y ago> If consciousness is an emergent phenomenon of the physical properties of the brain, then surely it will also emerge from a sufficiently accurate simulation of those physical properties. It's possible, but it may not be the "same" consciousness, and indeed, may not even consider itself to be. Perhaps better terminology to explore this line of theory would be to replace "thoughts" with "memories" and "consciousness" with "self".
- hokkos 11y agoThis article is not about how to create an strong AI from a brain simulation, but to simulate our brain to make our consciousness and mind immortal, hence all the discussion about death.