On Tuesday 03 June 2008 09:54:53 pm, Steve Richfield wrote:
Back to those ~200 different types of neurons. There are probably some cute
tricks buried down in their operation, and you probably need to figure out
substantially all ~200 of those tricks to achieve human intelligence. If I
were an
Josh,
I apparently failed to clearly state my central argument. Allow me to try
again in simpler terms:
The difficulties in proceeding in both neuroscience and AI/AGI is NOT a lack
of technology or clever people to apply it, but is rather a lack of
understanding of the real world and how to
Well, Ray Kurzweil famously believes that AI must wait for the mapping of the
brain. But if that's the case, everybody on this list may as well go home for
20 years, or start running rats in mazes.
I personally think the millions of years of evolution argument is a red
herring. Technological
From: Steve Richfield said:
Some clues as to the totality of the difficulties are the ~200 different types
of neurons, and in the 40 years of ineffective AI/AGI research. I have seen NO
recognition of this fundamental issue in other postings on this forum. This
level of difficulty strongly
Josh,
On 6/4/08, J Storrs Hall, PhD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, Ray Kurzweil famously believes that AI must wait for the mapping of
the
brain. But if that's the case, everybody on this list may as well go home
for
20 years, or start running rats in mazes.
It just isn't all that hard.
Vladimir,
On 6/3/08, Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 6:59 AM, Steve Richfield
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that modern processors are ~3 orders of magnitude faster than a
KA10,
and my 10K architecture would provide another 4 orders of magnitude, for
a
Strongly disagree. Computational neuroscience is moving as fast as any field
of science has ever moved. Computer hardware is improving as fast as any
field of technology has ever improved.
I would be EXTREMELY surprised if neuron-level simulation were necessary to
get human-level
Josh,
On 6/3/08, J Storrs Hall, PhD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Strongly disagree. Computational neuroscience is moving as fast as any
field
of science has ever moved.
Perhaps you are seeing something that I am not. There are ~200 different
types of neurons, but no one seems to understand what
Josh,
On 6/2/08, J Storrs Hall, PhD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One good way to think of the complexity of a single neuron is to think of
it
as taking about 1 MIPS to do its work at that level of organization. (It
has
to take an average 10k inputs and process them at roughly 100 Hz.)
While
