3 ms·
We can look at efforts to stimulate the brain, which do not seem to scale easy. As I wrote in another comment, the K computer was able to simulate a seconds wor
by Chathamization 11y ago
We can look at efforts to stimulate the brain, which do not seem to scale easy. As I wrote in another comment, the K computer was able to simulate a seconds worth of brain activity. It doesn't seem to have scaled easily. I don't have experience with supercomputers, but I have a feeling that things are a bit more complicated than "just network it together with another supercomputer, and then everything will be twice as fast."
And that's just talking about a raw increase in computing power. We don't have any idea whether a human level intelligence program would even be able to put increased processing power to good use (and it could theoretically be detrimental; look at what happens to humans who have too many neuronal connections).
- rl3 11y ago>We can look at efforts to stimulate the brain, which do not seem to scale easy. Simulating the brain isn't necessarily the path to human-level AGI though. Simulating biology in digital form tends to be inefficient. Modern machine learning scales easily, or at least relatively easy. >(and it could theoretically be detrimental; look at what happens to humans who have too many neuronal connections) Perhaps a constraint of our brain's cognitive architecture and not intrinsic to cognition itself. Still, interesting point.