To identify what the author feels is missing in neuroscience: in order to understand something, you need to figure out how to describe two things about it (1) w

To identify what the author feels is missing in neuroscience: in order to understand something, you need to figure out how to describe two things about it (1) what its state is at any point in time, and (2) how that state evolves in time. Connectomics gives you the beginnings to solve (1), but it doesn't go the whole way. There's a fundamental misunderstanding that you can collect exabytes of data and glean understanding from it just because how much you had to sweat getting the storage and collecting it. That's not how it works, it needs to have structure too. I wish more biologists / neuroscientists understood this.