5 ms·

I don't think anyone knows. You might simulate the chemistry and then realize you need quantum mechanical effects. And then add those and realize something is s

I don't think anyone knows. You might simulate the chemistry and then realize you need quantum mechanical effects. And then add those and realize something is still missing. I don't think anyone knows how deep the rabbit hole is.

chii 5y ago
Or it turns out, the simulated neuron brain is not smarter than a regular human.
- wmf 5y ago
  By definition a simulated brain is intended to be exactly as smart as the meat brain being simulated. Once you get the simulation working you might be able to run it faster though.
  - nradov 5y ago
    If my brain ran in simulation for the equivalent of 1000 years it still wouldn't accomplish what Albert Einstein did in 10.
    - pharmakom 5y ago
      But once we can spin up 1000 container images of your brain…
      - mise_en_place 5y ago
        Yes I like this, parallelism for simulated brains. Basically Kardashev scale levels can be skipped rather quickly.
- dogma1138 5y ago
  If a simulated brain would be even remotely comparable to a human brain in terms of computation it would be immediately the smartest thing on the planet simply by virtue of having immediate or near immediate access to all recorded knowledge. But we might not need to simulate anything.. In the end it’s quite possible that AGI would end up being brains in vats with some machine brain interface for IO. I literally might be more cost effective to do it this way. And this is what people that dismiss AGI often miss. They assume the advancement would only come from one place and that programming would be the only way to solve the problem. Analogue computers are making a comeback in many areas, and an analogue computer for an AGI might just be a bunch of brain tissue rather than some neuromorphic chips or some other nonsense. If we get to a point in which we can clone meat for food and organs for transplant making a brain isn’t out of the realm of possibility if we can get BMIs working then a lot of the problems might be solved by just leveraging existing solutions already.
  - DSingularity 5y ago
    Why do you spell analog as analogue?
    - shric 5y ago
      Because they prefer the British spelling, presumably?
    - dogma1138 5y ago
      I live in the UK, iPhone is set to UK English.
      - DSingularity 5y ago
        Oh! I didn’t even know there was another spelling. Now I feel dumb for asking such a googleable question.
  - hooloovoo_zoo 5y ago
    Non-simulated brains already have immediate access to all recorded knowledge and few are the smartest things on the planet.
    - heckerhut 5y ago
      True. Now imagine those brains are not attached to people but to high bandwidth io. Ie Futurama.
    - dogma1138 5y ago
      Those brains have to do a lot of other things and our input bandwidth is limited and overall our i/o isn’t particularly efficient. We’ve already have had limited success in transferring memories - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-019-0389-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-019-0389-0 and general purpose brain to machine interfaces are being actively worked on.
      - 5y ago

chii 5y ago

Or it turns out, the simulated neuron brain is not smarter than a regular human.

wmf 5y ago
By definition a simulated brain is intended to be exactly as smart as the meat brain being simulated. Once you get the simulation working you might be able to run it faster though.
- nradov 5y ago
  If my brain ran in simulation for the equivalent of 1000 years it still wouldn't accomplish what Albert Einstein did in 10.
  - pharmakom 5y ago
    But once we can spin up 1000 container images of your brain…
    - mise_en_place 5y ago
      Yes I like this, parallelism for simulated brains. Basically Kardashev scale levels can be skipped rather quickly.
dogma1138 5y ago
If a simulated brain would be even remotely comparable to a human brain in terms of computation it would be immediately the smartest thing on the planet simply by virtue of having immediate or near immediate access to all recorded knowledge. But we might not need to simulate anything.. In the end it’s quite possible that AGI would end up being brains in vats with some machine brain interface for IO. I literally might be more cost effective to do it this way. And this is what people that dismiss AGI often miss. They assume the advancement would only come from one place and that programming would be the only way to solve the problem. Analogue computers are making a comeback in many areas, and an analogue computer for an AGI might just be a bunch of brain tissue rather than some neuromorphic chips or some other nonsense. If we get to a point in which we can clone meat for food and organs for transplant making a brain isn’t out of the realm of possibility if we can get BMIs working then a lot of the problems might be solved by just leveraging existing solutions already.
- DSingularity 5y ago
  Why do you spell analog as analogue?
  - shric 5y ago
    Because they prefer the British spelling, presumably?
  - dogma1138 5y ago
    I live in the UK, iPhone is set to UK English.
    - DSingularity 5y ago
      Oh! I didn’t even know there was another spelling. Now I feel dumb for asking such a googleable question.
- hooloovoo_zoo 5y ago
  Non-simulated brains already have immediate access to all recorded knowledge and few are the smartest things on the planet.
  - heckerhut 5y ago
    True. Now imagine those brains are not attached to people but to high bandwidth io. Ie Futurama.
  - dogma1138 5y ago
    Those brains have to do a lot of other things and our input bandwidth is limited and overall our i/o isn’t particularly efficient. We’ve already have had limited success in transferring memories - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-019-0389-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-019-0389-0 and general purpose brain to machine interfaces are being actively worked on.
    - 5y ago