I went deeper into my brain bag of ideas and what I found was interesting to say the least did you know that eon system which coped a fly brain could potentially copy just a bit of a human brain ore at least a modified version of one from cortical labs which grow neurons in labs + a few tech adds from Longevity Biotechnology and I don’t know use claude gemeni ChatGPT and others to modify the brain and then to upload and reconstruct it and to modify it a bit more to handle parts of the ai and apply it an stretch code etc till it’s a bloody mess and then activate it and give it a body with a few senses you would have created a true artificial intelligence not just a simple machine but a artificial intelligence before it’s to late…. as a reference a body with no bones will collapse and not work the same as if it had bones but it will still work
but if it has bones it could achieve more ….its a bad choice to continue creating artificial intelligence, mad gods with nobody would you not agree?
To know whether or not I agree I would need to know what you just said. One thing that may make it easier for me to know what you just said would be punctuation.
Are you talking about running AI on head-cheese? That is, training a neural network on a biocomputer?
Is the key to extending human life AI? Could we upload the human brain to a substrate? If we were to give sensory capability to AI you could give it the human experience. By giving a body to a piece of code you give it the structure to exist in reality and thus it is a real intelligence and not an simple machine. We need to get on this before we end up with a machine that doesn’t understand what it means to be alive. On the other hand, giving it more capability is a double edged sword and we are playing God here. Do you not agree?
I have to admit… we’re getting there. A computer can now do the kind of work that a team of that size at NASA once was required for. How much longer before a computer can autonomously, without the need for the overhead of proofreaders, upload an entire fly brain on its own? And then a bird’s brain? And then a man’s?
I’ve always had to put the breaks on and be one of the counter-balancing voices when it comes to the AI hype. I’ve been on the periphery of AI and cybernetic research for long enough to know the story - AI research gets carried away with superficial mimicry of the appearance of man, smoke and mirrors. Cyberneticians proceed slowly, cautiously, with genuinely intelligent little machines that look nothing like the mimicries of man that generate so much hype for AI. But maybe AI researchers are coming through with the fake-it-till-you-make-it attitude. The early LLMs were just smile-and-nod machines that repeat back to you your own ignorance, rephrased, thus producing an illusion of intelligence matched to the gullibility of the user. But if you get machines to learn the patters in language, it doesn’t matter what arbitrary symbolic medium you use to encode the language. As Leibniz, the Patron saint of Cybernetics said, an understanding of the pattern between the words is an understanding of the idea itself - (in fact, he held that symbolic manipulation (computation) is the only way for any creature to grasp an idea).
If we allow them to directly access symbols of sensory organs, without the intermediary of human literature…
…then the “rational animal” has become a more diverse species. Norbert VViener, the Father of Cybernetics, held that language is perhaps the most distinctive feature of man as compared with the lower animals, and that our computers, alone with man, are symbolic manipulation machines - language machines. Seems we are already deeper than I expected into this strangely familiar world, this world that makes real the dreams that have always haunted man: Xerox had ghosts, Unix has daemons, and eventually we’ll look inside and say, “Hey, look, that’s me in there!”
We are forced nowadays to recognise individuality as something which has to do with continuity of pattern, and consequently something that shares the nature of communication.
said the Father of Cybernetics.
there is no fundamental absolute line between the types of transmission which we can use for sending a telegram from country to country and the types of transmission which at least are theoretically possible for a living organism such as a human being.
The fundamental premises of cybernetics rejects that there is any theoretical difference between the operative image of a man implemented in flesh or in metal. But a whole fly brain!? Already!? Ten years ago when I began studying neural networking, I didn’t imagine that this indifference would become this much more than theoretical during my lifetime.
