4 ms·

The article just says what we already know: we can't upload people right now. This is obvious: there are no available systems for mind uploading, commercial or

The article just says what we already know: we can't upload people right now. This is obvious: there are no available systems for mind uploading, commercial or otherwise. But why would that always be the case? And why should we assume that the reasons the author states are even true right now, much less whether they will actually impede the development of uploading? As we have plainly seen with artificial neural networks over the course of the past decade, major progress in technology can happen overnight, and that overnight progress can lead to completely unexpected new directions in research, consumer products and social consequences. I also just don't buy the arguments to begin with. No, our brains are not static connectomes – has anyone ever seriously argued this? Obviously, our brains and our minds are dynamic. Any system we build to represent a human mind would necessarily require the capacity for dynamism and change. Another argument form the article: we can't measure synapse strength without a barrage of tests for each individual synapse. Is this even true? And why should we believe that will remain impossible? Machine learning techniques seem like a great match for this. We need a lot more data and a lot better instruments, but those will come. And, of course, everyone understands that you can't make a completely detailed map of anything without some form of simplification or abstraction. The first uploaded minds and the first simulations would surely be crappier than the ones that follow. This has been covered in a dozen sci-fi works: Stephenson's Fall (2019) is the most recent big name example I can think of. We're never going to know until we try. And people are definitely going to try this... a lot. Constantly. Until the end of our civilization. So no, we can't upload anyone right now. But we should probably assume that it will happen, with varying levels of quality, before many of us die. Compared to other fantastic scenarios, like contact with aliens, human brain simulation seems like a sure bet.

d_tr 4y ago
Yeah, I believe that it will be possible at some point, possibly by using a combination of several techniques to extract as much information as possible. We change as we age anyway, so some loss should be perfectly acceptable. It is just more complex than some people might be imagining. Searching for "a connectome is not enough" on Google brings up a few interesting articles and papers including studies on C. elegans and the fruit fly. If the goal is continued existence there are other possible ways to achieve it. I 'd say "scanning" an already dead brain will probably end up not being the most desirable one.

d_tr 4y ago

Yeah, I believe that it will be possible at some point, possibly by using a combination of several techniques to extract as much information as possible. We change as we age anyway, so some loss should be perfectly acceptable. It is just more complex than some people might be imagining. Searching for "a connectome is not enough" on Google brings up a few interesting articles and papers including studies on C. elegans and the fruit fly. If the goal is continued existence there are other possible ways to achieve it. I 'd say "scanning" an already dead brain will probably end up not being the most desirable one.