I'm inclined to agree. The model I use is nonlinear fluid dynamics. Say you've got a thought which you began thinking when you were young. That thought is a fluid in motion. Over the course of your life you revisit certain ideas and revise certain opinions. The motion continues for decades. The way you think is like an information processing system which evolves over the course of your life, and it's true enough to call that software, not hardware, but the flow of data through that system is entirely organic, and creating an exact copy of a given flow in nonlinear fluid dynamics is impossible. The structure of your mode of thinking -- your "software" -- is shaped tremendously by the things that you think about; therefore replicating the processor without replicating the data can only be of partial usefulness, if the processor is shaped by and for the data. It's like copying a river by duplicating exactly every last rock and pebble, but leaving out the water.
On 7/10/06, Frank Wimberly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Back in the 1980's Hans and I had offices next to each other in the > Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon. Over a period of a couple of > years we had numerous arguments about whether machines could realize > consciousness; whether a human mind could be transferred to a machine, > etc. I remember saying that if somehow my "mind" were transferred from > my body to some robot--which I felt was impossible--it might be that > everyone else would agree that it was a remarkable likeness but that I > would be gone. Hans replied that I undervalued myself--that I am > software not hardware. After many arguments along these lines I said, > "Hans, I now understand why you don't understand what I am saying about > consciousness--you don't have it." This was all in good humor and later > when I was teaching a course in AI to MBA students I invited Hans to > continue our debate in class. A good time was had by all, I hope. > > Frank > > --- > Frank C. Wimberly > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz (505) 995-8715 or (505) 670-9918 (cell) > Santa Fe, NM 87505 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Martin C. Martin > Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 7:16 PM > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > > I suspect you'd like Hans Moravec's books: > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674576187 > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195136306 > > He uses Moore's law and estimates of the brain's computing power to > calculate when we'll have human equivalence in "a computer." I forget > the date, but it's not far. He also talks about a number of very > interesting consequences of this. > > - Martin > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > -- Giles Bowkett http://www.gilesgoatboy.org ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
