On Jun 1, 2008, at 1:44 PM, Mark Waser wrote:
So . . . . given that the biological neurons have all this additional complexity that I have listed before, are you going to attempt to implement it or are you going to declare it as unnecessary (with the potential that, if you are wrong, you may doom your AGI effort before you ever get started)?
You presume that all this "additional complexity" is actually complex in a meaningful way. Since it is relatively trivial to derive analogous behaviors and structure with understood function in other non-biological models (even if they look biological), I am not sure what to tell you. You are positing unimaginable complexity with a Disneyland of functionality, but you need nothing like that to get the same structure, behavior, and utility out of the system (*cough* Occam *cough*).
This appears to be a variant of the "analog is fundamentally different from digital" category error.
J. Andrew Rogers ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=103754539-40ed26 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
