Comments on: Downloaded Brains versus VGER http://decafbad.com/blog/2005/06/10/downloaded-brains-versus-vger It's all spinning wheels and self-doubt until the first pot of coffee. Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:52:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-beta3-9771 hourly 1 By: Edward Vielmetti http://decafbad.com/blog/2005/06/10/downloaded-brains-versus-vger/comment-page-1#comment-1670 Edward Vielmetti Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=650#comment-1670 <p>Les, one thing I've noticed about the computer-as-a-brain idea is that computers do a lousy job at forgetting. Your brain can hide away some useful fraction of your total memory from easy recall so it's not impinging on your day to day consciousness, but computers when the lose their memory or storage have nasty things like disk crashes.</p> Les, one thing I’ve noticed about the computer-as-a-brain idea is that computers do a lousy job at forgetting. Your brain can hide away some useful fraction of your total memory from easy recall so it’s not impinging on your day to day consciousness, but computers when the lose their memory or storage have nasty things like disk crashes.

]]> By: colin_zr http://decafbad.com/blog/2005/06/10/downloaded-brains-versus-vger/comment-page-1#comment-1671 colin_zr Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=650#comment-1671 <p>I agree that cycles are clearly no substitute for understanding the algorithm. That said, though, I believe we're quite likely to create consciousness (or things that look conscious) without really understanding the mechanisms of consciousness. I imagine that at some point we'll build a model of a human brain -- which might model operations at the neuron level or at the molecular level -- and it will act as if it's conscious. However, we won't actually understand what it's doing that makes it conscious.</p> <p>I think that's a more likely scenario than us understanding consciousness prior to building it.</p> I agree that cycles are clearly no substitute for understanding the algorithm. That said, though, I believe we’re quite likely to create consciousness (or things that look conscious) without really understanding the mechanisms of consciousness. I imagine that at some point we’ll build a model of a human brain — which might model operations at the neuron level or at the molecular level — and it will act as if it’s conscious. However, we won’t actually understand what it’s doing that makes it conscious.

I think that’s a more likely scenario than us understanding consciousness prior to building it.

]]> By: fluffy http://decafbad.com/blog/2005/06/10/downloaded-brains-versus-vger/comment-page-1#comment-1672 fluffy Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=650#comment-1672 <p>IMO, consciousness forms from random interactions in massively connected systems. Consciousness will evolve out of systems which allow the random noise to exist and feed back on itself. It doesn't need to be fast, just large and patient enough to let things emerge.</p> <p>A randomly-seeded instance of Conway's Game of Life (with additional data injected now and then based on some sort of "sensory input") running on a slow computer would be much more likely to generate a (very slow-thinking) sentient being than a blazing-fast large-scale cluster of supercomputers which is programmed for a specific task.</p> IMO, consciousness forms from random interactions in massively connected systems. Consciousness will evolve out of systems which allow the random noise to exist and feed back on itself. It doesn’t need to be fast, just large and patient enough to let things emerge.

A randomly-seeded instance of Conway’s Game of Life (with additional data injected now and then based on some sort of “sensory input”) running on a slow computer would be much more likely to generate a (very slow-thinking) sentient being than a blazing-fast large-scale cluster of supercomputers which is programmed for a specific task.

]]> By: l.m. orchard http://decafbad.com/blog/2005/06/10/downloaded-brains-versus-vger/comment-page-1#comment-1673 l.m. orchard Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=650#comment-1673 <p>fluffy: The notion that seems most attractive to me so far, with regards to the origins of consciousness, is that you need to have a reason to predict the future behavior of other critters. So, to the degree that you can model and simulate other critters--competitors and co-conspirators--you gain survival advantages.</p> <p>And then, one day, you start taking a shot at predicting your own behavior. Then, it's like pointing a camera at its own monitor, and all hell breaks loose.</p> fluffy: The notion that seems most attractive to me so far, with regards to the origins of consciousness, is that you need to have a reason to predict the future behavior of other critters. So, to the degree that you can model and simulate other critters–competitors and co-conspirators–you gain survival advantages.

And then, one day, you start taking a shot at predicting your own behavior. Then, it’s like pointing a camera at its own monitor, and all hell breaks loose.

]]>