Slashdot Mirror


IBM Working on Brain-Rivaling Computer

Obdurate writes "The first supercomputers to approach and even surpass the processing power of the human brain are to be built by IBM, under a $184M contract announced by the US Government yesterday. ASCI Purple and Blue Gene/L will be the fastest and most powerful machines built, with a combined capacity equal to the 500 best of todays computers."

25 of 560 comments (clear)

  1. uhu by ronaldcromwell · · Score: 5, Interesting

    how do they measure the processing power of the human brain?

    1. Re:uhu by e8johan · · Score: 5, Funny

      I do 1-2 flops if I get easy numbers...

    2. Re:uhu by binaryDigit · · Score: 5, Funny

      Easy, just run SPEC-brain.

    3. Re:uhu by ktulu1115 · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's difficult to estimate, because the human brain is incredibly fast at some things (recognizing a face/voice, processing multiple sounds/images simultaneously, etc...) that would take a computer much longer to do, but on the other hand, it's rather slow at performing specific calculations (How long does it take you to add 100 integers together?).

      Even so, the human brain is rated somewhere at millions of gigaflops. Quite interesting. Here are some articles (google for some more):

      http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/speeches/jt 101100.htm
      http://zinos.com/cool/zinos/scan/se=AR002649/sp=vi ew_article/rs=yes/go.html

      --
      # fuser -v /dev/attention | grep work
      #
    4. Re:uhu by scotay · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's before overclocking.

    5. Re:uhu by einer · · Score: 5, Funny

      A phaser's energy pulse doesn't travel at c--if it did, we'd never see even a little streak in any scale small enough to see the crew or the enterprise. The directed-energy weapon has at least some mass to contain the energy.

      Hate to be a dick, but.

      It's people like you that make it hard for people like me to get laid. It's not just that you know a bunch of stuff about technology. It's that you know a bunch of stuff about technology that doesn't exist. For example, last week I was forced to break up a conversation that two of my cow-orkers were having on the relative merits and drawbacks of the different types of transporters used by the different races. Had that conversation continued, it might have made it impossible for any geek to EVER GET LAID AGAIN.

      Just the hearing phrase "computer scientist" causes most women to stop ovulating immediately already. Let's not make things worse on ourselves.

  2. No match for me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    How often does it think about sex?

    1. Re:No match for me... by scott1853 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "In that particular moment, I was reconfiguring the warp field parameters, analyzing the collected works of Charles Dickens, calculating the maximum pressure I could safely apply to your lips, considering a new food supplement for Spot..."

      Looks like it's only a low priority thread.

  3. Brian's nothing special by 20goto10 · · Score: 5, Funny

    In fact he's a bit thick.

  4. Thank god by drunkmonk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now we can have computers that screw things up at a rate that rivals our own! Because seriously, we needed the competition.

  5. Hooray! by RomikQ · · Score: 5, Funny

    Perhaps now we will get the Answer to Life, Universe, Everything!

    And it damn better not be 42!

    --
    Join the elite! Post at score:2! Ghostwheel is online.
  6. Well - the Orange Catholic Bible says: by Etrigan_696 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thou Shalt Not Make a Machine in the image of the mind of Man.

    Somehow, I think that might be good advice.

  7. Re:Never, EVER more powerful by jstrayer · · Score: 5, Informative

    I once had an exercise in a business math class where half had calculators and the other had nothing. Calculator users *had* to use the calculator. The teacher then asked simple arithmetic questions - 2x2, 3 minus 1, etc. Of course, the people without calculators could answer first.

    That shows that our fingers are slower than our brains. No surprise there.

    The fastest computer in the world will always be limited to how quickly data may be fed to it. One way or another, a human will have to direct this operation - if only for safety and security considerations.

    That's just silly. Computers can already prcess data much faster than you or I (or you and I) can follow.

  8. MASPAR by .sig · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While the human brain is usually not very good at such linear calculations, hence the popularity of a calculator, its true power lies in it's massively parallel processing.

    To tie in an ever popular /. expression, the brain functions very similar to a beowolf cluster. We can design computers (very expensive ones, though) that can simulate many of the simpler activities that humans are capable of (such as complex pattern recognition, primitive conversation skills, and rule-based systems of cause and effect,) but to do all of these at once is still well on the horizion.

    --
    -Space for rent
  9. 12544 Power5 processors? Damn! by mfago · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Anyone else notice that? Power4 is the current generation, and holds the 9th spot on the top-500 list with only 1280 processors!

    I'm sure IBM is working hard on a new interconnect for this beast. Anyone know about the next-generation SP switch?

    The press release also mentions that Purple will consist of "196 seperate computers" -- which works out to 64-processors per computer. Way to go IBM: the current Power4 systems are only to 32-way!

  10. Processing power only part of the issue... by MosesJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Raw processing power of the brain is very high, but its actual effectiveness and speed is crap. The reason is the IO speeds, the network interface (spine) has poor throughput and requires lots of individual channels rather than being able to operate as a simple bus, this means loads of wasted space when a channel isn't doing anything.

    The external interfaces are even worse, these make the brain totally useless for many tasks that computers can process in seconds. As an example try raytracing a rendering a scene using crayons and doing the maths in your head.

    So the human brain totally and utterly is secondary to the computer already.

    Apart from the fact that humans can be inspired. The solution may take a computer 100 years to attack by brute force and it will get there... but a smart person will do it in minutes because "its obvious".

    Computers already outstrip us in terms of processing, but while they are just grown up calculators they miss the essence of human processing. A computer hardwired to mutate everything via /dev/random would be pretty useless, and yet the software in humans means that this is a greatest advantage.

    It will be generations before computers will have reached a stage they can start doing the obvious. The limited processing of the brain has produced the people on the Jerry Springer show and Isaac Newton, it ain't the hardware, its the software that counts.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:Processing power only part of the issue... by deblau · · Score: 5, Funny
      So the human brain totally and utterly is secondary to the computer already.

      Ah, I beg to differ. Pour orange juice on a motherboard. Totally disfunctional in a few seconds. Now pour orange juice on your head.

      Brain 1, Computers 0.

      --
      This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
  11. Government brainpower? by banda · · Score: 5, Funny

    So a computer with the processing capacity of a human brain is to be put to work by the government? Does the US government have any actual experience in managing something as powerful as a human brain? How long before the computer realizes it could do much better in the private sector?

  12. Processing power is not the issue by guacamolefoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lots of interesting things about this:

    First, the real issue is not hardware or CPU cycles -- it is software. Tired of Seti@home? Let's build a distributed processing network that has as many CPU cycle equivalents as the human brain! Oh yeah, that's already been done. Ok, so why doesn't it "think" yet? Oh yeah...software.

    The issue is how to integrate storage, processing, "RAM", etc. into a software package that can emulate a human brain's method of thinking (which may be a very bad, krufty method of developing consciousness -- why would anyone use meat for processors? What a kludgy hack!).

    (OT: what if "thinking" software is _not_ GPL'ed? That could be really frightening. So could security issues for "thinking" machines.)

    Second, the next issue is why should we compare digital thinking machines to biological ones? Maybe it is the only benchmark we can think of, but given the truly awkward way in which light-sensitive cells were adapted for inclusion a biological thinking machine (see Francis Crick's "Astonishing Hypothesis"), why can't a much more efficient independent decision making machine be developed from digital equipment (not DEC, btw) actually designed for the purpose?

    The human brain/computer comparison is really a red herring. The only reason to create a human-like digital thinking machine/emulator (and you thought WINE was hard to use...) might be to pursue immortality. I think the more likely reason is that it would be the ultimate species-wide circle jerk. Humanity getting off on creating humanity. Bleh. Let's set our sights a little higher.

    guac-foo

  13. Business Proposal by limekiller4 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dear IBM,

    I couldn't help but notice that you were hard at work developing a computer to rival the human brain to the tune of $184,000,000.

    It just so happens that I have a human brain and I would be quite happy to let you use it for a tidy sum that is far below the aformentioned $184M.

    Please give me a call at your earliest convenience to work out the details.

    Thanks,
    Jason

    ----[%snip]----

    --
    My .02,
    Limekiller
  14. There is hope for the scarecrow after all! by Joey7F · · Score: 5, Funny

    We can make mechanical hearts so the tin man is taken care of. All that's left is to give the cowardly lion a lot of booze and suddenly Dorothy is off to see the wizard by herself.

    --Joey

  15. He he he by ayjay29 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Imagine a bewul... --sssllllaaaaappppp!!!!

    --
    Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated up.
  16. The Brain: Facts by TheSync · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Neurons in adults: 2x10E9 to 5x10E9
    Synapses in adults: 10E14, a few thousand per neuron
    Neuron firings per second: max 2 Khz

    The biggest challenge in comparing brain to supercomputer is the massive connectivity of brain, with 2000-5000 synapses per neuron.

    The total processing speed of ASCII Purple sounds about right for number of neurons in brain times the maximum number of pulses per second per neuron.

    Given there are 10E14 synapses, each one with at least a byte of synpatic weight associated with it, it would need memory of at least around a petabyte of memory, although synpase memory change speeds are probably not faster than tape, and I know of plenty of installations with a petabyte on tape.

    But here is the kicker: Will those 100 teraflops be flops that can use thousands of inputs? Probably not. So I'd argue that to truly be as powerful as the human brain, you would need 100 petaflops of 1-2 input flops, with at least a petabyte tape system.

  17. Adding numbers by andyring · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Sure, it takes a while to add up 100 numbers, because you're doing a task differently than the best way a brain functions.

    Look at it this way. Go outside, on a windy day (adding more variables to the mix) and have someone throw you a football/basketball/baseball/frisbee/whatever. It probably takes 3-4 seconds at most for the ball to reach you, and looooong before that, your brain completed a monstrous calculus problem. It figured in the position of the thrower, the wind velocity and direction, direction/speed of the ball, the ball's arc of travel, and in the next split second, sent signals to your legs and feet to move your body to the ball's expected landing spot.

    But wait, it's the ball's landing spot minus about five feet, because your brain figures you want to be positioned to catch the ball when it's about 4-5 feet off the ground. It simultaneously sends signals to your hands and arms, positioning them to catch the ball, taking into account the ball's speed, size and mass.

    A lot of calculations in an extremely short period of time! And, if you think that's impressive for a human brain, the brain in that dumb mutt of yours in the back yard can do the same thing when you toss him a tennis ball.

  18. Wait a minute! by Etrigan_696 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    While the human brain is usually not very good at such linear calculations, hence the popularity of a calculator, its true power lies in it's massively parallel processing.


    Hold on there!
    Our brains are fine for huge linear calculations. Better than most calculators in fact.
    Autistic savants....
    Rain Main. That kind of thing.
    There was a kid I knew in high school that could find cube roots for eight digit numbers nearly instantly but he couldn't recognize his brother's face in a picture.

    My personal theory is this: Human brains are like a computer (about a million orders of mangitude more complex though). Most people have that all tied up in hardware dedicated to things like jobs, girl friends, football etc. etc.
    John, my autistic friend in high school, hadn't dedicated the hardware to anything in particular, but he still had it available. He was lacking in a lot of things, but sheer processing power and memory he had in spades.

    As a side story, another friend of mine in high school had epilepsy, and it kept getting worse. He eventually had brain surgery where they severed his corpus callosum. After that, he couldn't add single digit numbers if he closed his right eye. If he closed his left, he couldn't recognize faces. Just kind of shows how the brain works as a parallel system.