Artificial brain 'ten years away'

@odenskrigare,

So what do you think the implications are for philosophy of mind? I mean it has many opportunities yes? It holds memories, it can help with the cure for disease, interesting stuff.

1 Reply

@odenskrigare,

I think it will really shake up the definition of "personhood"

Would we have the right to turn off the finalized Blue Brain if it doesn't want us to?

0 Replies

@Caroline,

The crucial phrase was, it might even have emotions.A mammalian brain type computer does not get even come close to resembling a human brain.It may help solve brain disorders but it will never be able to conceive of its own being or have an original thought.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;79049 wrote:

The crucial phrase was, it might even have emotions.A mammalian brain type computer does not get even come close to resembling a human brain.It may help solve brain disorders but it will never be able to conceive of its own being or have an original thought.

Why

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, and sh*ts like a duck, it's ... not a duck?

If an artificial brain which mirrors a human brain entirely can't conceive of itself or have an original thought, then neither can we.

1 Reply

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;79050 wrote:

Why

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, and sh*ts like a duck, it's ... not a duck?

If an artificial brain which mirrors a human brain entirely can't conceive of itself or have an original thought, then neither can we.

Well if you think that your ability to shii,quack,and swim makes you a duck then im happy for you.The claim is not that it will be a human brain, its the claim that a mammalian or reptilian brain will be possible.
As we have been promised by scientists for over a century that life can and will be reproduced without them even get close,ide say dont hold your breath.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;79053 wrote:

The claim is not that it will be a human brain, its the claim that a mammalian or reptilian brain will be possible.

Hold the boat

A detailed, functional artificial human brain can be built within the next 10 years, a leading scientist has claimed.

That's straight out of the article

xris;79053 wrote:

As we have been promised by scientists for over a century that life can and will be reproduced without them even get close

huh? who? when?

This assertion is too vague for me to address (I really don't even know what it means, or what your source is), but would you have said at the turn of the 20th century that heavier-than-air-flight is impossible simply because people tried and failed to achieve that goal well over a century before?

1 Reply

@odenskrigare,

If it truly tried to function like a human brain wouldn't it get stuck in a loop or something?

0 Replies

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;79057 wrote:

Hold the boat

A detailed, functional artificial human brain can be built within the next 10 years, a leading scientist has claimed.

That's straight out of the article

huh? who? when?

This assertion is too vague for me to address (I really don't even know what it means, or what your source is), but would you have said at the turn of the 20th century that heavier-than-air-flight is impossible simply because people tried and failed to achieve that goal well over a century before?

Then read some more because it does not even wager it will have simple emotions.
When Leonardo had drawn pictures of a helicopter five centuries before i would think many thought it a certainty.
Are you saying you have never heard of science claims of life's secrets being discovered and it being reproduced?
I know your intentions you are by one article trying to win a war on the question of consciousness.

1 Reply

@xris,

chad3006;79060 wrote:

If it truly tried to function like a human brain wouldn't it get stuck in a loop or something?

Huh? Why?

xris;79062 wrote:

Then read some more because it does not even wager it will have simple emotions.

Uhhhh ... pay attention to what Markram says in the audio

[indent]Interviewer: "Will it have emotions?"
Markram: "Em, well, in principle, if we built it correctly, it should speak, it should have an intelligence, it should behave very much as a human does."[/indent]

And that entails emotion obviously

You can't even have rational agency without emotion. Emotion is a part of intelligence

The project isn't just going to skip over those parts of the brain, be serious

xris;79062 wrote:

Are you saying you have never heard of science claims of life's secrets being discovered and it being reproduced?

What "secrets"?

I mean we've already cloned animals

Are you referring to vitalism?

People stop believing in that years ago

(Don't tell me you believe in phlogiston too)

xris;79062 wrote:

I know your intentions you are by one article trying to win a war on the question of consciousness.

The Blue Brain project and the whole fields of neuroscience and artificial intelligence are more than one article affairs...

1 Reply

@odenskrigare,

Em well...is that an answer?..As you say if they cant confirm it will have emotions, its not a human brain.
No i dont believe in the creationists claims, im saying that reproducing simple life forms is not anywhere near being created as many scientists have claimed.Cloning aint reproducing life its making a copy.
As for consciousness science can not prove its point of existance nor can you.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;79072 wrote:

Em well...is that an answer?..As you say if they cant confirm it will have emotions, its not a human brain.

Time will tell.

Markram's tone and the way he beat around the bush in his answer suggested that he was tip-toeing around a statement that might seem overly ambitious or shocking to listeners.

But you can kind of tell that he believes his project will emote.

xris;79072 wrote:

No i dont believe in the creationists claims, im saying that reproducing simple life forms is not anywhere near being created as many scientists have claimed.Cloning aint reproducing life its making a copy.

Ok, but vitalism isn't creationism and regardless we're not even talking about those things, we're talking about an artificial brain. I have no reason to believe that the culmination of this project will not be self-aware.

xris;79072 wrote:

As for consciousness science can not prove its point of existance nor can you.

Well but I think the more behaviorist hoops something can reliably jump through, the more likely it is to be conscious.

1 Reply

@odenskrigare,

I think its great. Although, the intended release date of the completion of Blue Brain -fully functional with emotions- may not come as soon as expected, but there's nothing wrong with optimism right? It's unfortunate that I cant find the video of Markram from TED because his lectures are always fascinating.

1 Reply

@Kielicious,

Kind of interesting news... but I'm quite skeptical of the Blue Brain project. For one, it seems to go counter to my own position that you need to understand how the brain works before you model it, not the other way around. And did this strike anyone as odd...

To make the model come alive, the team feeds the models and a few algorithms into a supercomputer.
"You need one laptop to do all the calculations for one neuron," he said. "So you need ten thousand laptops."
Instead, he uses an IBM Blue Gene machine with 10,000 processors.

One laptop's power for one neuron? Give me a break! This is clumsy, bull headed science at its worst. They *might* get there eventually, but I don't see any real intelligence being demonstrated by this approach. The fact that they say it "may" have emotion is equally telling... they don't have a clue what emotion is, functionally speaking, so they can't say if they can model it or not. This is just throwing as much silicon and money as possible at the problem to see what happens, they need more money for more silicon so they do this "in ten years time" piece for the BBC [edit - for TED, but same difference] to get more publicity. Anyone else agree?

PS. Sorry for the angry post, I feel strongly about this Surprised

0 Replies

@odenskrigare,

Anyone agree? It's good to see both sides of the coin, I agree with xris in that they cant create consciousness.

1 Reply

@Caroline,

To be honest i think he is an opportunist fool.When we cant even invent a single cell living organism,how in the hell he expects to replicate a brain with all its hidden depths is beyond reasonable response.

1 Reply

@xris,

Kielicious;79180 wrote:

I think its great. Although, the intended release date of the completion of Blue Brain -fully functional with emotions- may not come as soon as expected, but there's nothing wrong with optimism right?

Markram's Swiss, right? Expect punctuality.

EDIT - ah no nvm he's from South Africa apparently but still I see no reason not to assume his timeframe is accurate

Oh and look and video.google.com for any videos involving this project, it's the best because it scours every other video site.

Hermes;79195 wrote:

Kind of interesting news... but I'm quite skeptical of the Blue Brain project. For one, it seems to go counter to my own position that you need to understand how the brain works before you model it, not the other way around.

Reverse engineering - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hermes;79195 wrote:

One laptop's power for one neuron? Give me a break! This is clumsy, bull headed science at its worst.

BRAVO BRAVO YOU TELL THESE SO-CALLED "EXPERTS"

More seriously:

Fallacy: Appeal to Ridicule

Hermes;79195 wrote:

They *might* get there eventually, but I don't see any real intelligence being demonstrated by this approach. The fact that they say it "may" have emotion is equally telling... they don't have a clue what emotion is, functionally speaking, so they can't say if they can model it or not. This is just throwing as much silicon and money as possible at the problem to see what happens, they need more money for more silicon so they do this "in ten years time" piece for the BBC [edit - for TED, but same difference] to get more publicity. Anyone else agree?

WELL I FOR ONE AGREE CLEARLY YOU ARE VERY WELL ACQUAINTED WITH THE SCIENCE OF THE BRAIN AND OUGHT TO START WRITING ANGRY LETTERS OF PROTEST TO SCIENTIFIC BODIES AND MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS TO PUT A SWIFT END TO THIS AMATEURISH RUBBISH AND TRANSPARENT GRAB FOR MONEY AND PUBLICITY

Caroline;79200 wrote:

Anyone agree? It's good to see both sides of the coin, I agree with xris in that they cant create consciousness.

Why

You guys never say "why"

You'd be surprised at how many beliefs don't even stand up to "why"

xris;79209 wrote:

To be honest i think he is an opportunist fool.When we cant even invent a single cell living organism,how in the hell he expects to replicate a brain with all its hidden depths is beyond reasonable response.

Oops...

Complete Chemical Synthesis, Assembly, and Cloning of a Mycoplasma genitalium Genome -- Gibson et al., 10.1126/science.1151721 -- Science

1 Reply

@odenskrigare,

Im not a scientist so I wouldn't know the details but so far they've only managed to copy life not create it, they may sometime in the future make a copy of me but it wouldn't be me, it wouldn't have my conscioussness. They cant do it, I dont know why, I suggest you ask them.

1 Reply

@Caroline,

Caroline;79219 wrote:

Im not a scientist so I wouldn't know the details but so far they've only managed to copy life not create it

What's the difference

Caroline;79219 wrote:

they may sometime in the future make a copy of me but it wouldn't be me, it wouldn't have my conscioussness.

Well it would be you initially, although the copy would eventually diverge from the original

Caroline;79219 wrote:

They cant do it, I dont know why

Good time to start asking questions then

1 Reply

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;79221 wrote:

What's the difference

Well it would be you initially, although the copy would eventually diverge from the original

Good time to start asking questions then

You think I should ask scientists why cant they create life?
Yes why not any suggestions on how to go about it?
The difference is that it's a copy of me and not actually me, i imagine it to have no soul that it'd be more robotic then human, (hell I dont know!), and that isn't life is it, it's just copying, it's more dead than an imitation of me. Dont get me wrong i think it's good in that it advances medical science.

1 Reply

Artificial brain 'ten years away'

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know