If you ever study biochemistry, it leaves you absolutely in awe. The best engineering we can do is pretty amazing, we have computers and airplanes and all this magic stuff, but the stuff in you is a hundred, a thousand times better made. It's stunning. Comparatively speaking, it is perfect. And that's only the stuff we understand. The stuff in your brain, we do not.
In the relatively short amount of time we've had with computers we've made pretty astounding progress though. If we had had a few million years to improve those silicon brains I think we'd give evolution a run for its money!
Yea, our engineered stuff might be simplistic compared to the brain and biology, but evolution is just a combination of luck, randomness and "unguided" trial and error. There's no "thought" to evolution and that's why we end up with all these....weird quirks and flaws LMAO
It's a pretty trivial informational paradox for a mind to comprehend itself -- comprehension of its comprehension of itself then needs further comprehension... So yeah. Only a much more complex mind can understand a given mind
We don't need a single mind to understand the entirety of how the brain works. One of the powers of human knowledge is its distributed nature arising from our ability to write things down and create abstractions. What matters in the end is that we as a collective understand the brain.
But then you just have the same paradox writ large. Maybe we, as a collective, can entertain understanding of a single mind - but the generalisation of us as 'the mind' rather than 'a mind' includes all of us, and must therefore be left wanting
Actually wait this is glib as fuck and probably wrong, I retract it. You could have the capability to understand, given specific allocation of resources but only do it rarely, without violating any information theory fundamentals
I think this might be a case of expecting a fish to climb a tree. Brains are terrible in fp32 performance, and computers are so far not great at reasoning. But that's mostly because they are made for different things. I'm not sure of this, but i would expect a single neuron firing costing a similar amount of energy as a single transistor firing. The difference is in part that they work differently, but I think the most important part is that they are put together differently. Computers were made for arithmetic while brains evolved for socialising and survival.
For most other things you are 100% correct though, we could not recreate a bee or an ant even if we wanted to.
Apparent and perceptible are the key words here. Your brain makes up pretty much everything and pretends it's the real deal. Detail and consistency really aren't all that great actually, much like ai video generation
Oh, your brain is amazing, sure. Buuuut get Neuralink and let me plug my game in while you try to render the raytracing from foliage collision and I'm pretty sure you would crash like a Windows RT.
You're allowed to have a type of awe and reverence for the natural world, very much akin to religion, without needing to buy into any bullshit along with it.
It used to be pretty standard, and then the Christians (among others) fucked that up for everyone, and now you can't be anything other than an aggressive humanist atheist without people starting to make assumptions about you.
I've met a few gnostic atheists. They can be weird. Their non-believing can look very much like theism.
I once met an actual gnostic atheist missionary. He was standing on a Tesco parking lot with a self-made mobile display handing out hand-drawn leaflets about atheism. He was literally preaching on the street corner. Looked like one of them jehovas whitnesses until you got up close.
In the end, humans choose evil. Most people don't want to be a robot. So there is free will, free to choose. But when they could use free-will to do good they choose and do evil.
There are hospitals trying their best to help with that, and you have people bombing hospitals for babies with cancer.
Animals eat animals. Isn't that evil? By that entire life is cruel, and I don't get why a god should have to take blame for it. It just seems to push away responsibility of doing good vs evil.
I think you underestimate how much time and energy it took to get us to this point. Like, billions of years of evolution to arrive at a brain as efficient as ours.
depends what age your brain is, a 1 year old brain wouldn’t have a clue… and number of mental defects or how intoxicated the person is or whether you have vocalisation issues, health issues, if your brain is shut down/asleep for however many hours overnight it won’t be able to tell you anything, ai ofc doesn’t have these issues
training them uses the lifetime energy equivalent of hundreds of humans
it’s very likely actual electricity use will soon not be an issue, we are already flooded with too much solar power during the day, in maybe as little as 10 or so years we may have so much solar and battery we have essentially unlimited renewable power
on top of all of this ai is in its infancy, who knows where it will be at in 100 years, maybe jobs are a thing of the past and we just spend all day socialising and spending time on our hobbies
Human energy needs are incredibly variable so the estimates for normal consumption are wrong for most people, but when you get into essential systems (basically cardiovascular and nervous, not even including digestive or any muscle movement) you actually need even less - the average (by weight, height & age) man needs 1950kcal or so and the average woman (by height, weight & age) needs 1450kcal or so
When we replace AI with brains in jars I'm sure we can cut it down even more though
I've tried some of the free mods, but I can't really recommend them. Definitely steer clear of frying-pan to the dome, and you won't get any real lasting effect from hold your breath till you're blue.
I remember listening to a podcast with indy devs and they agreed that engaging player's imagination is the best way to make sure your game succeeds. And most indy games don't have the budget for super good graphics.
What would happen if you did the equivalent of feeding your A.I. a healthy diet, then run a parallel system and fed it only burgers and pizza and Doritos?
If you ever study biochemistry, it leaves you absolutely in awe. The best engineering we can do is pretty amazing, we have computers and airplanes and all this magic stuff, but the stuff in you is a hundred, a thousand times better made. It's stunning. Comparatively speaking, it is perfect. And that's only the stuff we understand. The stuff in your brain, we do not.
In the relatively short amount of time we've had with computers we've made pretty astounding progress though. If we had had a few million years to improve those silicon brains I think we'd give evolution a run for its money!
Yea, our engineered stuff might be simplistic compared to the brain and biology, but evolution is just a combination of luck, randomness and "unguided" trial and error. There's no "thought" to evolution and that's why we end up with all these....weird quirks and flaws LMAO
those quirks are all features, i swear
Antivirus protection could be better, though. Oh, and the built in self destruct is kind of a bummer, too.
Figernails are so annoying
If you ever need to claw your way out of a heap of rubble, you'll be thankful for them.
Rip them off.
It is a planned obsolescence.
I remember a quote from Civ along the lines of "if the brain was simple enough for us to understand, our minds would be to simple to understand it."
It's a pretty trivial informational paradox for a mind to comprehend itself -- comprehension of its comprehension of itself then needs further comprehension... So yeah. Only a much more complex mind can understand a given mind
We don't need a single mind to understand the entirety of how the brain works. One of the powers of human knowledge is its distributed nature arising from our ability to write things down and create abstractions. What matters in the end is that we as a collective understand the brain.
But then you just have the same paradox writ large. Maybe we, as a collective, can entertain understanding of a single mind - but the generalisation of us as 'the mind' rather than 'a mind' includes all of us, and must therefore be left wanting
Actually wait this is glib as fuck and probably wrong, I retract it. You could have the capability to understand, given specific allocation of resources but only do it rarely, without violating any information theory fundamentals
Give it a few more billion and we'll finally have an intelligence, that's not hell bent on destroying itself.
That was one of the better QoS settings on my router back in the day.
I think this might be a case of expecting a fish to climb a tree. Brains are terrible in fp32 performance, and computers are so far not great at reasoning. But that's mostly because they are made for different things. I'm not sure of this, but i would expect a single neuron firing costing a similar amount of energy as a single transistor firing. The difference is in part that they work differently, but I think the most important part is that they are put together differently. Computers were made for arithmetic while brains evolved for socialising and survival. For most other things you are 100% correct though, we could not recreate a bee or an ant even if we wanted to.
I can create real time visual imagery with no apparent resolution limit or perceptible frame rate including audio and a soundtrack.
Apparent and perceptible are the key words here. Your brain makes up pretty much everything and pretends it's the real deal. Detail and consistency really aren't all that great actually, much like ai video generation
A lotta people have a resolution limit and use glasses to compensate
Not in their minds.
Oh, your brain is amazing, sure. Buuuut get Neuralink and let me plug my game in while you try to render the raytracing from foliage collision and I'm pretty sure you would crash like a Windows RT.
The fact that we only recently mapped out the brain really tells you a lot about its complexity.
And that was only a fruit fly brain! Human brain still hasn't been mapped.
Watch this whenever you think humans have rivalled nature in building stuff that works.
Nature's crafts in unrivaled
Hold my nanostructured beer.
But there was no switcharoo
Where’s the switcharoo? There’s supposed to be a Lemmy shattering switcharoo‽
It makes me wish I believed in God.
You're allowed to have a type of awe and reverence for the natural world, very much akin to religion, without needing to buy into any bullshit along with it.
It used to be pretty standard, and then the Christians (among others) fucked that up for everyone, and now you can't be anything other than an aggressive humanist atheist without people starting to make assumptions about you.
careful what you wish for. year's not over...
If Christ returned, I'd be an instant convert
Sounds like agnosticism to me 🤝🤝
But would you mind if it turned out to be a immensely powerful alien disguised as a guy from our own past ?
At least, that seems more likely to me...
Most atheists fall under the agnostic atheist banner
I've met a few gnostic atheists. They can be weird. Their non-believing can look very much like theism.
I once met an actual gnostic atheist missionary. He was standing on a Tesco parking lot with a self-made mobile display handing out hand-drawn leaflets about atheism. He was literally preaching on the street corner. Looked like one of them jehovas whitnesses until you got up close.
I really really do not want to be an atheist. But where is God?
Why?
what do you mean?
As long as he's capable of saving my soul.....
As long as I have a soul.....
After all, science distinguishable from magic is merely insufficiently advanced
If Batman appeared I would also immediately start believing in him.
That doesn't make me Batman-agnostic though.
In the end, humans choose evil. Most people don't want to be a robot. So there is free will, free to choose. But when they could use free-will to do good they choose and do evil.
Babies get cancer. That's not humans choosing evil. If there is a god that created a baby just to get cancer and die before age 3, that god is evil.
There are hospitals trying their best to help with that, and you have people bombing hospitals for babies with cancer.
Animals eat animals. Isn't that evil? By that entire life is cruel, and I don't get why a god should have to take blame for it. It just seems to push away responsibility of doing good vs evil.
That’s free will after Adam and Eve.
If you’re into that.
I think you underestimate how much time and energy it took to get us to this point. Like, billions of years of evolution to arrive at a brain as efficient as ours.
Did you just externalise all the other inputs?
It's usually a lot faster in producing outputs though.
How many R in strawberry ?
how many R not in strawberry?
depends what age your brain is, a 1 year old brain wouldn’t have a clue… and number of mental defects or how intoxicated the person is or whether you have vocalisation issues, health issues, if your brain is shut down/asleep for however many hours overnight it won’t be able to tell you anything, ai ofc doesn’t have these issues
it’s very likely actual electricity use will soon not be an issue, we are already flooded with too much solar power during the day, in maybe as little as 10 or so years we may have so much solar and battery we have essentially unlimited renewable power
on top of all of this ai is in its infancy, who knows where it will be at in 100 years, maybe jobs are a thing of the past and we just spend all day socialising and spending time on our hobbies
Human energy needs are incredibly variable so the estimates for normal consumption are wrong for most people, but when you get into essential systems (basically cardiovascular and nervous, not even including digestive or any muscle movement) you actually need even less - the average (by weight, height & age) man needs 1950kcal or so and the average woman (by height, weight & age) needs 1450kcal or so
When we replace AI with brains in jars I'm sure we can cut it down even more though
My brain has the same power draw as a Switch 2? This explains a lot...
Just connect your brain up to a monitor and imagine your game with the best graphics you can possibly think of.
Capitalism has us by absolute fools.
Paying $69.99 for something someone else dreamed up.
We have a solution for this, its called going to sleep.
I've tried some of the free mods, but I can't really recommend them. Definitely steer clear of frying-pan to the dome, and you won't get any real lasting effect from hold your breath till you're blue.
I remember listening to a podcast with indy devs and they agreed that engaging player's imagination is the best way to make sure your game succeeds. And most indy games don't have the budget for super good graphics.
Ever heard of daydreaming? A monitor is not even needed
My shit ass wetware needs to lock in and catch up. It can't even run Doom or play back Bad Apple properly.
Visualise playing Doom in your head. It's free, and the cops can't stop you.
"You wouldn't imagine downloading a car, would you?"
Well? Would you?!
.....?
ANSWER ME!!
Just sitting...
20% of our body's energy use is our brain, it's a major energy expenditure.
That's 50% of your households energy
What would happen if you did the equivalent of feeding your A.I. a healthy diet, then run a parallel system and fed it only burgers and pizza and Doritos?
Nothing, cos energy is energy
you could probably get more energy burning a burger in a generator, than eating it. BM
My GPU can compute stuff faster than your brain though.
Your GPU might tell you to glue cheese to your pizza, but at least it's fast!
It also has a lot of FLOPS. Do you have a lot of FLOPS?
Well if you want to turn this into a dick measuring contest...
ok but like, my brain would totally do that too
I can generate an image in my head faster than your GPU
But you can't generate it faster in an output format that is visible to others than my GPU.
Except very simple sketches possibly.