this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
702 points (95.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

18250 readers
1819 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/14869314

"I want to live forever in AI"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 106 points 2 months ago (86 children)

Even if it were possible to scan the contents of your brain and reproduce them in a digital form, there's no reason that scan would be anything more than bits of data on the digital system. You could have a database of your brain... but it wouldn't be conscious.

No one has any idea how to replicate the activity of the brain. As far as I know there aren't any practical proposals in this area. All we have are vague theories about what might be going on, and a limited grasp of neurochemistry. It will be a very long time before reproducing the functions of a conscious mind is anything more than fantasy.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 months ago (14 children)

Counterpoint, from a complex systems perspective:

We don't fully know or are able toodel the details of neurochemistry, but we know some essential features which we can model, action potentials in spiking neuron models for example.

It's likely that the details don't actually matter much. Take traffic jams as an example. There is lots of details going on, driver psychology, the physical mechanics of the car etc. but you only need a handful of very rough parameters to reproduce traffic jams in a computer.

That's the thing with "emergent" phenomena, they are less complicated than the sum of their parts, which means you can achieve the same dynamics using other parts.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I’d say the details matter, based on the PEAR laboratory’s findings that consciousness can affect the outcomes of chaotic systems.

Perhaps the reason evolution selected for enormous brains is that’s the minimum necessary complexity to get a system chaotic enough to be sensitive to and hence swayed by conscious will.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

PEAR? Where staff participated in trials, rather than doing double blind experiments? Whose results could not be reproduced by independent research groups? Who were found to employ p-hacking and data cherry picking?

You might as well argue that simulating a human mind is not possible because it wouldn't have a zodiac sign.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (83 replies)