4 ms·
I don't really understand this perspective. Are you arguing that we shouldn't try? Of course it'll be extremely difficult and the work will take place over deca
by aerovistae 10y ago
I don't really understand this perspective. Are you arguing that we shouldn't try? Of course it'll be extremely difficult and the work will take place over decades, not months or years, just like Spacex and Tesla. Nobody's expecting Iain Banks's neural lace tomorrow. But if someone doesn't start working on it tomorrow, we won't have it in a hundred years, either.
- JabavuAdams 10y agoNo, I agree we should try. It was just an "aha" moment for me. It highlighted to me the inconsistency in answer these two questions: 1) How soon do you think we'll be able to tap every neuron? 2) How soon do you think we'll understand the galaxy in terms of each and every individual constituent star (not aggregates).
- JabavuAdams 10y agoEDIT> We can hand-wave estimates for the number of constituents in each of these systems. But it's interesting that we don't really know how many neurons there are in your individual brain, or in mine, etc. We can't yet look across the scales required to e.g. count and localize every single cell in your brain. Also, at what time? It changes. Just interesting questions when you get to a fine scale...
- hprotagonist 10y agoabout 80 billion. Fortunately, glial cells matter, too! (don't tell anyone)