That is not making an artificial bird, that is making a plane that flies people around. They are not even slightly the same.
The goal of a plane is to fly. The goal was never to mimic a bird. Similarly, the goal is to make a computer that can do tasks that our brain can do, but we don't have to make it run on ham sandwiches and milk.
Imagine throwing that i7 on somebody's desk in the 60's, and asking them 30 or 40 years later why it's not been duplicated yet. Nobody's denying that the brain is big and complicated, and duplicating the essential functions will take a lot of resources and certain level of technology that we don't have yet. However, there's no indication that there's anything that's impossible by principle.
And what makes you think that weather is more chaotic than neural activity?
Even if neural activity is chaotic, that only means we can't perform the same thing as a brain with 100% accuracy. But that's okay, because it also means that your own brain can never perform the same task again with 100% accuracy, and that is rarely a problem.
You can't imitate something that you don't understand. Understand?
That's not true. See genetic algorithms for instance.
You might want to compare the efficiencies and aeronautic abilities of aircraft vs birds.
That may be interesting, but that's not really the point. I'm not arguing that aircraft and birds are equivalent, rather that they can both fly, even though very smart people once claimed that machines would never be able to do that. Now, other smart people are saying machines will never be able to think. And the only argument is from incredulity.
Because there are far too many things happening at too small a scale to even measure, let alone imitate. The unknowns in neurosicence far outnumber the knowns.
Take an intel Core i7 in a time machine, and drop it on someone's desk in the 60's. Ask him to imitate it. You'll probably get the same reply.
You can model certain brain functions with software to see what happens if you alter inputs to a neural circuit, but it will only be as good as weather predictions done in silicon.
Irrelevant. The reason we can't do good weather predictions is because weather is chaotic by nature.
You will need to make it out of nerve cells and glia then, because silicon won't cut it.
Just like air planes need to be made from bone, muscle and feathers, because otherwise they won't fly ? Seriously, what's so special about nerve cells that we can't duplicate on a functional level ? And how do you know that to be true ?
but trying to make computers act more like brains is just not a sound scientific concept.
You may not think it's useful, but there's nothing unscientific or unsound about it. It's a matter of understanding how the brain works, and throwing enough hardware at it to duplicate the essential operations.
I don't have one. Of course, neither does anyone else. That said, beating on long disproved approaches isn't exactly going to get us anywhere.
Computationalism is as dead as spontaneous generation. You don't need an alternative to find out that something doesn't work, and is never going to work. You'd have us repeat the same failure over and over rather than work toward finding a new approach because... you can't personally think of any alternative so the provably wrong approach must be correct?
If you don't have a better plan, then it doesn't hurt to keep working on the old one. How long have people worked on human powered helicopters before they finally had some success ? I don't see you offering any fundamental reason why computationalism is dead.
The only "further operation" needed is to look at the higher word of the result which takes zero extra effort. For example, if you multiply two 16-bit words then you get a 32-bit result. The "extra effort" is taking the upper 16-bits of the result and ignoring the lower 16-bits.
So, multiplying 100 by 100 equals 0, but starting at 0 and adding 100 for 100 times equals 10000 ?
Because we can only make things in layers. So it you want to stack a million layers of silicon, and each layer is a dozen process steps, manufacturing a wafer will take years. Even with current 2D designs, the process already takes many weeks. The chance of a tiny error in one of the layers messing up the whole chip will be huge.
Solution seems simple to me. If you look like a woman, go into the women's restroom. If you look like a man, go into the men's restroom. Once inside, go into a stall, and do your business in private.
Irrelevant, because at some point LONG before we run out of relatively easy to extract oil,we'll be using mostly solar and nuclear power in various ways
If not for shale oil, we'd be running out of easy oil right now. And shale oil has fairly dramatic per-well depletion rates so it's not going to help for very long. Like I said, electric is not anywhere near being a viable replacement.
How much of the energy consumption is wasted on the mining of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies that force lots of useless and discarded computation to be performed?
Bitcoin mining is fixed at 25 bitcoins per 10 minutes combined globally. At the average price of $400 per bitcoin, that's about $1.5 million per day. Later this year, the mining reward will be reduced to 12.5 bitcoins per 10 minutes.
As technology advances we'll always find new ways to get at oil.
We are using oil faster than we are finding new sources, a temporary blip in shale oil notwithstanding.
In reality there is no "peak oil", eventually solar will get good enough to replace many uses of oil,
While I'm a big fan of solar, we're still a long way away. Solar is not even close to being a viable substitute for transportation fuel right now, and we'll need to move quickly if we want to get there before hitting peak oil.
For me, unlimited internet access mean 'all I can download' Full stop.
If it's throttled at 64 kbps, or even 128 kbps, you can't download everything you want. Most web sites will time out before they're done loading, and video streaming becomes impossible.
For you it seems unlimited means 'all I can download at maximum speed
And that on a day when other people were doing the same thing as he: binging on downloads. Had there been true infrastructural limitations on what he COULD download, his speeds would have slowed to a crawl.
Or maybe he's just lucky to be the only one close to the tower in a certain sector that's interested in binging on downloads that day.
Slashdot Mirror
Imaging also doesn't get you the details about interconnection strengths.
Large parts of our brains perform mindless tasks all day without getting bored.
That is not making an artificial bird, that is making a plane that flies people around. They are not even slightly the same.
The goal of a plane is to fly. The goal was never to mimic a bird. Similarly, the goal is to make a computer that can do tasks that our brain can do, but we don't have to make it run on ham sandwiches and milk.
And what makes you think that weather is more chaotic than neural activity?
Even if neural activity is chaotic, that only means we can't perform the same thing as a brain with 100% accuracy. But that's okay, because it also means that your own brain can never perform the same task again with 100% accuracy, and that is rarely a problem.
You can't imitate something that you don't understand. Understand?
That's not true. See genetic algorithms for instance.
You might want to compare the efficiencies and aeronautic abilities of aircraft vs birds.
That may be interesting, but that's not really the point. I'm not arguing that aircraft and birds are equivalent, rather that they can both fly, even though very smart people once claimed that machines would never be able to do that. Now, other smart people are saying machines will never be able to think. And the only argument is from incredulity.
Because there are far too many things happening at too small a scale to even measure, let alone imitate. The unknowns in neurosicence far outnumber the knowns.
Take an intel Core i7 in a time machine, and drop it on someone's desk in the 60's. Ask him to imitate it. You'll probably get the same reply.
You can model certain brain functions with software to see what happens if you alter inputs to a neural circuit, but it will only be as good as weather predictions done in silicon.
Irrelevant. The reason we can't do good weather predictions is because weather is chaotic by nature.
You will need to make it out of nerve cells and glia then, because silicon won't cut it.
Just like air planes need to be made from bone, muscle and feathers, because otherwise they won't fly ? Seriously, what's so special about nerve cells that we can't duplicate on a functional level ? And how do you know that to be true ?
but trying to make computers act more like brains is just not a sound scientific concept.
You may not think it's useful, but there's nothing unscientific or unsound about it. It's a matter of understanding how the brain works, and throwing enough hardware at it to duplicate the essential operations.
I don't have one. Of course, neither does anyone else. That said, beating on long disproved approaches isn't exactly going to get us anywhere. Computationalism is as dead as spontaneous generation. You don't need an alternative to find out that something doesn't work, and is never going to work. You'd have us repeat the same failure over and over rather than work toward finding a new approach because ... you can't personally think of any alternative so the provably wrong approach must be correct?
If you don't have a better plan, then it doesn't hurt to keep working on the old one. How long have people worked on human powered helicopters before they finally had some success ? I don't see you offering any fundamental reason why computationalism is dead.
and since no so-called 'AI' has actual emotions
Please explain what emotions are and why they can't be represented by AI.
The only "further operation" needed is to look at the higher word of the result which takes zero extra effort. For example, if you multiply two 16-bit words then you get a 32-bit result. The "extra effort" is taking the upper 16-bits of the result and ignoring the lower 16-bits.
So, multiplying 100 by 100 equals 0, but starting at 0 and adding 100 for 100 times equals 10000 ?
Because we can only make things in layers. So it you want to stack a million layers of silicon, and each layer is a dozen process steps, manufacturing a wafer will take years. Even with current 2D designs, the process already takes many weeks. The chance of a tiny error in one of the layers messing up the whole chip will be huge.
Solution seems simple to me. If you look like a woman, go into the women's restroom. If you look like a man, go into the men's restroom. Once inside, go into a stall, and do your business in private.
This is well known among demographers: it's called the "demographic transition."
It's also temporary. This is well known to anyone familiar with evolutionary fitness.
That's like saying it's okay that your house is on fire, because 7 million years ago there was an active volcano in that same spot.
I always wait for my boss to make the suggestion. They like feeling smart.
I do know a ton of women that go into feel good majors that are vital to society and help people but unfortunately don't pay well.
Yes, if only they could be paid as well as a garbage man.
No one seems to mind Gender Studies is mostly filled with women though.
If they all switched to CS instead of complaining about it, their problem would be solved.
Irrelevant, because at some point LONG before we run out of relatively easy to extract oil,we'll be using mostly solar and nuclear power in various ways
If not for shale oil, we'd be running out of easy oil right now. And shale oil has fairly dramatic per-well depletion rates so it's not going to help for very long. Like I said, electric is not anywhere near being a viable replacement.
How much of the energy consumption is wasted on the mining of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies that force lots of useless and discarded computation to be performed?
Bitcoin mining is fixed at 25 bitcoins per 10 minutes combined globally. At the average price of $400 per bitcoin, that's about $1.5 million per day. Later this year, the mining reward will be reduced to 12.5 bitcoins per 10 minutes.
As technology advances we'll always find new ways to get at oil.
We are using oil faster than we are finding new sources, a temporary blip in shale oil notwithstanding.
In reality there is no "peak oil", eventually solar will get good enough to replace many uses of oil,
While I'm a big fan of solar, we're still a long way away. Solar is not even close to being a viable substitute for transportation fuel right now, and we'll need to move quickly if we want to get there before hitting peak oil.
For me, unlimited internet access mean 'all I can download' Full stop.
If it's throttled at 64 kbps, or even 128 kbps, you can't download everything you want. Most web sites will time out before they're done loading, and video streaming becomes impossible.
For you it seems unlimited means 'all I can download at maximum speed
Not maximum, but a useful speed.
And that on a day when other people were doing the same thing as he: binging on downloads. Had there been true infrastructural limitations on what he COULD download, his speeds would have slowed to a crawl.
Or maybe he's just lucky to be the only one close to the tower in a certain sector that's interested in binging on downloads that day.
You may want to check a dictionary before posting. Just saying.
If it's throttled at 64kbps, then there's a limit of 21GB per month.
With proper scheduling, you can fairly distribute bandwidth on a millisecond basis. Why not let "hogs" makes use of idle bandwidth?
Because then everybody would be hogging, and there would be no idle bandwidth left.