That would be neat.
“I know Kung Fu!” 
Wow that does seem pretty cool. And it makes the main character in my Prometheus Scorned manuscript abit more realistic (given that he is a robot with a brain with roughly human ability), not that I will bother detailing the tech used in him in the book..thats not the issue really.
I like how the author ended it with:
“But you should never stop going ahead with technology, because it could be of great benefit.”
Lets hope that this is not ignored and that people do not get too paranoid about this technology…
Got a question: how difficult would it be, in your view, to be able to trace the operation of a single program, on the hardware level, based on observations of the hardware and the output? (suppose you have the right equipment to detect electrical changes in the components, but have no prior knowledge of how a computer works).
Well that is the main problem in brain research. Even if connecting neurons to a chip or electrodes can last, this chip would have to know how to interpret the signals correctly, and send back an input in the “neuron language”. It would be like trying to improve some software, and add more features to it by connecting more chips to it’s track inside the hardware. How hard would that be?
Wow that is fascinating and good news but I saw no indication of Matrix-style brain ports in that article. The author never once mentioned the Matrix or anything from it. The only science fiction reference was Skynet from the Terminator movies. So why did you use the heading, “Matrix-style brain ports could be on the way”?
Wow that does seem pretty cool. And it makes the main character in my Prometheus Scorned manuscript abit more realistic
I like how the author ended it with:
“But you should never stop going ahead with technology, because it could be of great benefit.”
Lets hope that this is not ignored and that people do not get too paranoid about this technology…
Indeed he would be more realistic and I like the way it ended too. And I do hope it won’t be ignored. I hope some of the non-warp technology from Star Trek becomes real. I say non-warp because I do not think we wi8ll ever be able to achieve that speed. I just don’t think it’s possible. It would be nice to be wrong about that , though. Anyway the only way i think this would be possible is no to stop going ahead with technology. We also need to never forget that for that to happen we need to be rational and capitalistic. Star Trek has it pretty unrealistic that we could accomplish that level of technology by abandoning capitalism.
Got a question: how difficult would it be to trace the operation of a single program, on the hardware level, based on observations of the hardware and the output? (suppose you have the right equipment to detect electrical changes in the components, but have no prior knowledge of how a computer works).
How difficult would it be to add more features to some software, by connecting more chips to it’s track inside the hardware?
I really am looking for an answer to these questions, they aren’t rhetorical.
I really am looking for an answer to these questions, they aren’t rhetorical.
Well that is great. As soon as you have answers please post them here. I would love to see them.
Got a question: how difficult would it be, in your view, to be able to trace the operation of a single program, on the hardware level, based on observations of the hardware and the output? (suppose you have the right equipment to detect electrical changes in the components, but have no prior knowledge of how a computer works).
Hm. You’d have to know how exactly the components work. You’d need to have a map of the entire circuit. And from there on you’d have to get through all the states the circuit could be in, which rises exponentially with the complexity of the circuit. So unless you can build simpler models for parts of the circuit, I’d say that for complex circuits, you’re basically screwed.
So to analyze the brain you’d have to find out how certain clusters of neurons act and build a model for that that’s simpler than just a model of mixed neurons. Then you try to build a simpler model for larger clusters based on that, etc. …
I think the objectivist term for this would be “concept formation to beat crow-epistemology”.
For something as complex as the brain this is a daunting task.
Ahh yes, you make some good points there Felix, some that I should have realized myself. I do not know alot about recreating neurons or such things..however I do know its very difficult especially as they would need so many countless connections between each other. Even if you tried something vastly less complex I do not think it will be something we will see anytime soon…
Seems to me from the article that they have a small wafer that works, if so clearly they have some interconnectivity sorted out. That is a good start.
Seems to me from the article that they have a small wafer that works, if so clearly they have some interconnectivity sorted out. That is a good start.
Some interconnectivty worked out..but however are they close to their final goal? I do not think at this stage. They need to do ALOt more yet.
Hm. You’d have to know how exactly the components work. You’d need to have a map of the entire circuit. And from there on you’d have to get through all the states the circuit could be in, which rises exponentially with the complexity of the circuit.
Are you talking about a final state machine?
(BTW there is a theory that that is what the brain is)
So to analyze the brain you’d have to find out how certain clusters of neurons act and build a model for that that’s simpler than just a model of mixed neurons. Then you try to build a simpler model for larger clusters based on that, etc. …
I think it wouldn’t work, Felix. The reason is that there is no such “basic thinking unit” that repeats itself in the brain. If you randomly take out a piece of the brain and examine it, do not expect any other piece you pull out to work the same.
Different regions have completely different “language”, and each neuron encodes something different.
Every wiring has a specific meaning, and if you take it out and ignore the system’s output and the meaning of the wiring, I don’t think it has a lot of value.
For example: Certain cells in in the vision cortex respond best to a line of light in a certain orientation and length and thickness in space. You pull it out, and what do you see? an ordinary cell that has inhibitory synapses on some locations, and excitatory synapses on others. Doesn’t tell you ****!
I really think that taking a basic course in Neurophysiology contributes a whole lot to the understanding of how to approach brain research.