Unfortunately, it is very common on the Internet for anybody to believe their ill-considered opinion based on shallow understanding is as valid as experts who have spent years of research and analysis.
It's not true that new memories cannot be formed without a functioning hippocampus. From Wikipedia: "Damage to the hippocampus does not affect some types of memory, such as the ability to learn new skills (playing a musical instrument or solving certain types of puzzles, for example). This fact suggests that such abilities depend on different types of memory (procedural memory) and different brain regions." It's also not true that relevance of a pattern can only be determined by emotions. We are constantly filtering our stream of sensory data and generalizing as our senses are processed by the hierarchy of our pattern and sequence recognizers. What emotion is guiding my brain to ignore all the background noise when I am talking to someone in a crowded and noisy bar? Even in a conscious non-predictive context, "relevance" is commonly the result of a coldly logical prioritization. Examples: Evidence based information stated in a logically consistent way is more relevant than unsupported declarations and anecdotes. This blogger's opinions are irrelevant. -Steve O. On Oct 3, 2013, at 2:59 PM, Matthew Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > http://opaqueparcels.com/2013/09/30/the-brain-as-a-model-for-computers-why-jeff-hawkins-wont-lead-us-significantly-closer-intelligent-machines/ > > Any comments? ;-) > > --------- > Matt Taylor > OS Community Flag-Bearer > Numenta > > _______________________________________________ > nupic mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org _______________________________________________ nupic mailing list [email protected] http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org
