4 ms·

Only if you preserve or scan your brain

by cblconfederate 5y ago

andy_ppp 5y ago
You’re just a set of weights and biases right?
- cblconfederate 5y ago
  you would need gene expression and epigenomics too. And still be an approximation, but probably good enough
- tasty_freeze 5y ago
  I don't see a sarcasm tag, so I'll assume you are being straight. No, things are far more complex than that. Perhaps, knowing the connectivity of all the connections and the "weights" of excitation and inhibition one could model the short term behavior of the brain it came from. But brains aren't static -- they learn and grow and remodel; they have all kinds of feedback loops (eg metabolic and hormonal); their response to conditions is undoubtedly far more complex than "fire if the sum of the weighted inputs is above a certain threshold".
  - blovescoffee 5y ago
    I’m not sure your rebuttal is sufficient. Weights and biases in the form of a neural network aren’t static either. Deep Reinforcement Learning algorithms exhibit learning and growing. Besides who says complexity is necessary or that ANNs are not complex enough?
    - tasty_freeze 5y ago
      The idea being discussed is that a person could live on if the connectivity and weights of the neurons in their brain was captured. "You’re just a set of weights and biases right?" I pointed out that a brain is dynamic; it depends on the biology of that person, and there are many other control loop mechanisms which are not captured by a network of weights. We aren't "just a set of weights and biases". As practiced today, neural networks are trained, and then the trained network is statically deployed in recognition tasks or whatever. They aren't continuously evolving. Yes, one can come up with algorithms that retrain and reshape a network continuously, but (and here is the key point) it is very likely to quickly diverge from the changes that the original, organic brain would have made.
kozikow 5y ago
The "materialism" consciousness theory is primarily what they are arguing against and people in this video gathered lots of solid scientific evidence against it. If not "brain is a biological computer" then what? We don't know yet, but some things in the right direction are Donald Hoffman's model, Penrose and Hammerhof quantum processing in the brain, Kastrup analytic idealism, maybe it's some form of radio? Authors of this conference through some theories in "beyond physicalism" book.
- cblconfederate 5y ago
  Those are tangents that someone might want to ponder about but i wouldn't want neuroscientists wasting their time looking for mythical quantum qualia. The biggest question is why people object to a materialist theory of the mind
  - yetihehe 5y ago
    And the biggest "hmm" is why/for what reason do we have a specific neuronal circuit/capability to tell us that some god/presence is near us[0]? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet
    - cblconfederate 5y ago
      our brain is the sole source of our thoughts, and most of our thoughts are baseless conjecture.
    - rpastuszak 5y ago
      Do we? The theory you mention is widely disputed, plus even the article you shared mentions issues with reproducibility, blinding etc…
      - yetihehe 5y ago
        That's why I said "capability". Yes, "god helmet" device may not be really working, but participants were reporting having a feeling (false reading, but a reading nonetheless). I compare it to a broken voltage detector which sometimes show a reading of voltage. That reading suggests there may exist a voltage. Yeah, counterargument could just be a signal of "beware, there is something out there going to kill you" being mistranslated as "there is god out there", but still, "god presence detector" seems to at least exist.
simon_000666 5y ago
What about the neurons in your heart and gut? The brain isn’t the only place your body has processing capacity.
- hulitu 5y ago
  Those are the peripherals. (i.e. keyboard, usb dongle)
  - oogetyboogety 5y ago
    A motherboard or SOC's design has a lot to do with the peripherals it's intended to connect with. Interrupts directly influence control logic, for example.

Only if you preserve or scan your brain

andy_ppp 5y ago

You’re just a set of weights and biases right?

cblconfederate 5y ago
you would need gene expression and epigenomics too. And still be an approximation, but probably good enough
tasty_freeze 5y ago
I don't see a sarcasm tag, so I'll assume you are being straight. No, things are far more complex than that. Perhaps, knowing the connectivity of all the connections and the "weights" of excitation and inhibition one could model the short term behavior of the brain it came from. But brains aren't static -- they learn and grow and remodel; they have all kinds of feedback loops (eg metabolic and hormonal); their response to conditions is undoubtedly far more complex than "fire if the sum of the weighted inputs is above a certain threshold".
- blovescoffee 5y ago
  I’m not sure your rebuttal is sufficient. Weights and biases in the form of a neural network aren’t static either. Deep Reinforcement Learning algorithms exhibit learning and growing. Besides who says complexity is necessary or that ANNs are not complex enough?
  - tasty_freeze 5y ago
    The idea being discussed is that a person could live on if the connectivity and weights of the neurons in their brain was captured. "You’re just a set of weights and biases right?" I pointed out that a brain is dynamic; it depends on the biology of that person, and there are many other control loop mechanisms which are not captured by a network of weights. We aren't "just a set of weights and biases". As practiced today, neural networks are trained, and then the trained network is statically deployed in recognition tasks or whatever. They aren't continuously evolving. Yes, one can come up with algorithms that retrain and reshape a network continuously, but (and here is the key point) it is very likely to quickly diverge from the changes that the original, organic brain would have made.

kozikow 5y ago

The "materialism" consciousness theory is primarily what they are arguing against and people in this video gathered lots of solid scientific evidence against it. If not "brain is a biological computer" then what? We don't know yet, but some things in the right direction are Donald Hoffman's model, Penrose and Hammerhof quantum processing in the brain, Kastrup analytic idealism, maybe it's some form of radio? Authors of this conference through some theories in "beyond physicalism" book.

cblconfederate 5y ago
Those are tangents that someone might want to ponder about but i wouldn't want neuroscientists wasting their time looking for mythical quantum qualia. The biggest question is why people object to a materialist theory of the mind
- yetihehe 5y ago
  And the biggest "hmm" is why/for what reason do we have a specific neuronal circuit/capability to tell us that some god/presence is near us[0]? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet
  - cblconfederate 5y ago
    our brain is the sole source of our thoughts, and most of our thoughts are baseless conjecture.
  - rpastuszak 5y ago
    Do we? The theory you mention is widely disputed, plus even the article you shared mentions issues with reproducibility, blinding etc…
    - yetihehe 5y ago
      That's why I said "capability". Yes, "god helmet" device may not be really working, but participants were reporting having a feeling (false reading, but a reading nonetheless). I compare it to a broken voltage detector which sometimes show a reading of voltage. That reading suggests there may exist a voltage. Yeah, counterargument could just be a signal of "beware, there is something out there going to kill you" being mistranslated as "there is god out there", but still, "god presence detector" seems to at least exist.

simon_000666 5y ago

What about the neurons in your heart and gut? The brain isn’t the only place your body has processing capacity.

hulitu 5y ago
Those are the peripherals. (i.e. keyboard, usb dongle)
- oogetyboogety 5y ago
  A motherboard or SOC's design has a lot to do with the peripherals it's intended to connect with. Interrupts directly influence control logic, for example.