I am also making lists of things in my notes, to research later, there are a lot of questions, I wonder if his neurology has been fact checked by professional neurologists. His whole book needs to be fact checked, there are a lot of assumptions I think, assumption that may not based on hard evidence, or that have only anecdotal evidence. One of the big flawed ideas in neuroscience is the assumption that if something (like long term memory) stops working because something in a specific region (like the hypothalamus) is broken or damaged then that broken part is responsible for creating whatever feature has stopped working (memory) but this is correlation mixed with causation, and the result is flawed neuroscience. He may not be aware of it. I also have misgivings about the notion that "connections in pattern modules" are genetically predetermined, he cites Markram from Blue Brain as supporting this idea, but Markram released a video this year showing that neurons form connections randomly. Kurzweil also says in his book that there are quadrillions of connections, and the genome just isn't complex enough to have a genetic map for all those connections. So I really think Kurzweil is not connecting the dots right in front of his face when he claims that the connections are genetically predetermined. It's confusing, because I wonder if I'm missing the point, but I'm pretty sure he is not making the connection, I will keep reading and researching. Let me know your opinions on this please.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Alan Grimes <[email protected]> wrote: > Micah Blumberg wrote: >> >> Has anyone here read Ray Kurweils's new book? I'm a third of the way >> through it. No its not the same as Jeff Hawkins idea. Hawkins has a very >> narrow focus, he isn't building AGI, he's building software that makes >> predictions, its totally different from making an artificial mind. I'm >> just interested to hear anyone' reflections on Ray Kurzweil's new >> material. > > > I'm reading that book too. > > I'm moderately impressed with it so far. I have some concerns about his > neurology. -- I'll have to do some refreshers to see where and to what > extent dendro-dendritic synaptic connections are important... I also am > pretty sure that axions don't branch nearly as much as he seems to indicate > they do. There is basically one big stalk which will produce a few tiny > "collaterals" so the total number of synapses is limited... But then it's > been too many years since I've done serious studying on neurology. > > I wish there was more math in the book, but even still I'm finding lots of > useful inf0z that I had not previously been aware of! =))) > > > > Today, I've been hearing a lot of lip from this Chris Eliasmith character. > > http://www.nengo.ca > > I am still digging through hype with a back-hoe but if these results are > even remotely real, then all you need to do is solve the hypothalamus and > the amigdalya and you're DONE... > > > > -- > E T F > N H E > D E D > > Powers are not rights. > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23601407-ccf7ca1d > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- ~~ Warmly, Micah 7 1 4 ) 6 9 9 - 4 2 1 3 (voicemail and texting same digits) ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
