3 ms·
You're talking about a philosophical debate whether the brain is computable, the other commenters are pointing out that even conservative estimates point to a b
by formerly_proven 4mo ago
You're talking about a philosophical debate whether the brain is computable, the other commenters are pointing out that even conservative estimates point to a brain-like NN requiring over a quadrillion parameters.
- red75prime 4mo ago...assuming that modelling the physical structure of the brain is the only way to model its functions.
- formerly_proven 4mo agoBuilding a "NN with similar capability as the brain" is not modelling its physical structure. The assumption is not made.
- red75prime 4mo agoLet's define the terms. What does it mean "with similar capacity"? As far as I understand xvilka was taking about the number of artificial neurons required to model a biological neuron times the number of biological neurons in the human brain. It is modelling its physical structure (on a neuronal level).
- Chu4eeno 4mo agoYou vastly overestimate how much we know about how our brains work. Look up the neural correlates replication crisis, and e. g. the "dead salmon" study by Bennett et al.
- red75prime 4mo agoThat is we have unknowns that might increase or decrease estimates of computational demands of a functionally equivalent ANN. Not everything that happens in the brain contributes to information processing.