3 ms·
Because full brain simulation would be achieving intelligence in the same way brains achieve it? Are you saying that simulating a brain is analogous to simulat
by drdeca 2y ago
Because full brain simulation would be achieving intelligence in the same way brains achieve it?
Are you saying that simulating a brain is analogous to simulating an airplane?
A simulated airplane doesn’t actually fly. A simulated brain actually thinks (for at least some senses of “think”.. some might argue that it wouldn’t have internal experience no matter the accuracy of simulation. I don’t think that’s true, but even if it is, it would still “think” in the relevant sense of its external behavior.).
- almostgotcaught 2y ago> Are you saying that simulating a brain is analogous to simulating an airplane? Am I taking crazy pills? You brought up airplanes as an apt comparison and I said well airplanes are in fact simulated. But now airplanes aren't analogous? Do you like have a single material fact regarding brains and/or AI to substantiate your arguments or is it all only conjecture and metaphor?
- drdeca 2y agoI brought up making airplanes, not simulating airplanes. You brought up simulating airplanes. The point I am interested in making is primarily based on metaphor/precedent. Seems like a good basis for estimating how hard a task that hasn’t been done before is. For a variety of things that various animals do, it is easier for us to make a machine that accomplishes the same kind of thing in a substantially different way than it is for us to make a machine that accomplishes the task in the same way. Why would this pattern not hold for intelligence as well?