Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Increasing the speed and complexity of computing will not cut it, it will always be incomplete.
So it leaves the door open for quantum computing but how do you design something that is an enigma.
If consciousness was easy to understand, we would be too simple to understand the explanation.
And how do you emulate what cannot be fundamentally grasped.
...snip...
There is a theory that consciousness comes by itself when calculations reaches a high enough complexity. But no one knows of course, it's one of the last complete mysteries.
And as the others already said, consciousness itself isn't IMO needed for a technological singularity.
There is a theory that consciousness comes by itself when calculations reaches a high enough complexity. But no one knows of course, it's one of the last complete mysteries.
And as the others already said, consciousness itself isn't IMO needed for a technological singularity.
One of the things I see in peoples attraction to the singularity is the ability to download mind into a computer. Perhaps as their way of escaping their fear of mortality.
How do you download what you don't understand ?
I just watched a video by Hammerhof, he described a brain experiment where they designed a worm brain (because its a lot simpler than designing a human one) and expected it to act like a worm, it did nothing.
All they had was simulated neurons and synapses, switches.
Hamerhof explained why they failed, they didn't account for the immense underlying complexity in the neurons themselves.
THere is also much to suggest consciousness is primary not emergent. That would be very odd but I'll follow the evidence, interesting stuff.
Penrose said it occurs at the gap between the quantum realm and the classical realm we know as reality.
Each collapse of the wave function is a moment of consciousness. Whilst this occurs everywhere in the universe most of it just dissipates because its not orchestrated. Hence his Orch OR idea.
Orchestrated Objective Reduction.
Which begs the question , do we evolve to create our consciousness or did consciousness direct our development to best tune in to what already exists "out there".
The sub particle structure of neurons, micro tubules will "self arrange" if placed in petri dishes, self arrange ?
As Einstein quipped "something is moving".
One of the things I see in peoples attraction to the singularity is the ability to download mind into a computer. Perhaps as their way of escaping their fear of mortality.
How do you download what you don't understand ?
I just watched a video by Hammerhof, he described a brain experiment where they designed a worm brain (because its a lot simpler than designing a human one) and expected it to act like a worm, it did nothing.
All they had was simulated neurons and synapses, switches.
Hamerhof explained why they failed, they didn't account for the immense underlying complexity in the neurons themselves.
THere is also much to suggest consciousness is primary not emergent. That would be very odd but I'll follow the evidence, interesting stuff.
While do we not understand how consciousness works now that should changes once we reverse engineer the brain.
This is a important step to becoming transhuman and is actually much ahead of what I thought it would be. Meaning at fitst I heard in the 2030's then it was by 2030 not it looks to be around 2020. WOW just WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Elon Musk's new company wants to link human brains with computers in 4 years
Tesla founder and chief executive Elon Musk said his latest company Neuralink is working to link the human brain with computers by creating micron-sized devices.
I read the Article. Good stuff! I have been predicting that in the future people will transform from biological beings to a more advanced robot-like form. This would lend support to the simulation existence that we might live in now. Our robot-like (for lack of a better word) descendants create this simulation to learn how they evolved, much like we create experiments and simulations to learn how something works. This is one possibility anyway.
I hope, though, that we live in real universe. It's much more exciting that way.
There is a good documentary series on NATGEO about the coming singularity called Year Million. Now they have a time table that is more conservative but everything they talk about will happen and what I argue and people like Ray Kurzweil in the next 10 to 30 years.
Heart Of The MachineOur Future In A World Of Artificial Emotional Intelligence by Richard Yonck
The author argues that it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to create an AI that thinks exactly like a human mind. You are switching from a biological brain to a different substrate. If it is possible, it may be a long way off.
In the meantime, we may see AIs that have a form of intelligence, but an intelligence that is alien to humans. We must not assume that we will easily create AIs that have values and goals that align with ours. And these AIs might be dangerous without even approaching a Singularity level.
Heart Of The MachineOur Future In A World Of Artificial Emotional Intelligence by Richard Yonck
The author argues that it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to create an AI that thinks exactly like a human mind. You are switching from a biological brain to a different substrate. If it is possible, it may be a long way off.
In the meantime, we may see AIs that have a form of intelligence, but an intelligence that is alien to humans. We must not assume that we will easily create AIs that have values and goals that align with ours. And these AIs might be dangerous without even approaching a Singularity level.
That could be true why I want to merge with the tech ASAP so I can keep up with AI.
As a side note this is a example as to how I will.
Here Are the Microsurgeons That Will Soon Roam Our Bodies
"If human beings, all created from the same biological cloth-the same DNA instructions-are so immensely varied, why should we expect machine intelligences to be otherwise? Particularly if they arise from different designs, schemes, and eventually replication methods that lead not only to unique entities, but to actual unique species. How many variations on intelligence are possible across such a domain....?
"...it's very likely the world and universe the AIs would inhabit wouldn't be conflict-free. An ecosystem, be it natural or technological, involves players vying for limited resources. This is unlikely to be different for an ecosystem of machine intelligences. ...some of these may not be very bright or flexible, while others could be nearly omniscient...."
Last edited by Tim Randal Walker; 06-11-2017 at 11:41 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
book, copyright 2017
