3 ms·
> It's a shame also in the sense that while Jeff Hawkin's overall paradigm is certainly too simplistic. In what ways is the paradigm too simplistic? Frankly, t
by closetnerd 12y ago
> It's a shame also in the sense that while Jeff Hawkin's overall paradigm is certainly too simplistic.
In what ways is the paradigm too simplistic? Frankly, the fact that there is simplicity in his theories of intelligence makes more of case for him than against him. Most modern neuroscientists trying to understand intelligence have taken such an extreme reductionist point of view that they seem to be increasingly befuddled.
By the way the Ted Talk is from 2003 which is around the time that his theory of intelligence more or less reflected what he proposed in his book, On Intelligence, about Hierarchical Temporal Memory.
Since 2007 I think they've made significant progress. Have you read Numenta's white paper on the Cortical Learning Algorithm. He's also given a much more recent Google Talk on Sparse Distributed Representations.
- sitkack 12y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNMbsvK8Q8Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNMbsvK8Q8Y
- joe_the_user 12y agoI have followed the progress of Hawkins and Numenta to an extent. The videos (the Google and sitkack's video) still have the same theme - it's all about prediction and pattern recognition in the simplistic sense. What missing from this? Off the top of my head: * Language, * Goal-oriented interaction with the environment * General purpose reasoning - things generating novel behaviors based on observations of the environment. Especially, dealing with multiple interacting constrai nts on an ad-hoc basis and deciding which is most important. And I'm not arguing for human behavior being all rational deduction - pattern recognition and such are a huge part of human behavior but all the ways humans or even animals can change their behavior are where biological intelligence really goes past current versions of computer intelligence. The thing with Jeff's talk is that it may well be that the bulks of raw brain activity is focused on just processing raw streams of data. The truth of this doesn't mean this is the thing that makes the brain seem intelligent in a different fashion from a video camera.
- chetan51 12y agoI believe the basic building blocks (prediction, pattern recognition, attention, etc.) give rise to the higher-level phenomenon that you mentioned. I think we need to first understand those fundamental principles, and we'll be able to infer most of the rest from that point. Emergent phenomenon can seem complicated and impossible to understand, but the mechanisms that give rise to them are usually simple (for example, evolution creating diverse and intricate life).