A.I.s, singularity, brain transfer... your thoughts?

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

GeeGee
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 7:00 pm

Postby GeeGee » Fri Aug 31, 2012 4:50 am

kurt9 wrote:
I meant that it does not violate any laws of physics and that it could be possible in say, a 1000 or 10,000 years.


I agree that whole brain emulation seems pretty far off, but 1000 years? 10,000 years?

Respectfully, that is pure insanity. 1,000 years ago we knew close to nothing about the physical universe. And 10,000 years ago, civilization as we know it did not even exist!

The technology necessary for whole brain emulation already exists today in very primtiive forms. We've already partially simulated c. elegans, and David Dalrymple is currently working on getting a complete functional simulation of c. elegans, which he expects to be finished in 2-3 years (but no later than 2020). The next step will probably be the simulation of a small mammalian brain, e.g. a mouse. That could probably be done in the next 20-30 years. My guess is that a human brain will probably take longer, on the order of 50-100 years.

kurt9
Posts: 561
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Postby kurt9 » Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:39 pm

GeeGee wrote:
kurt9 wrote:
I meant that it does not violate any laws of physics and that it could be possible in say, a 1000 or 10,000 years.


I agree that whole brain emulation seems pretty far off, but 1000 years? 10,000 years?

Respectfully, that is pure insanity. 1,000 years ago we knew close to nothing about the physical universe. And 10,000 years ago, civilization as we know it did not even exist!

The technology necessary for whole brain emulation already exists today in very primtiive forms. We've already partially simulated c. elegans, and David Dalrymple is currently working on getting a complete functional simulation of c. elegans, which he expects to be finished in 2-3 years (but no later than 2020). The next step will probably be the simulation of a small mammalian brain, e.g. a mouse. That could probably be done in the next 20-30 years. My guess is that a human brain will probably take longer, on the order of 50-100 years.


Maybe, but I don't expect whole brain emulation anytime this century or even the 22nd century.

Skipjack
Posts: 6014
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Postby Skipjack » Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:51 am

I couldnt care less about some emulated computer version of my brain (not my personality). I (me) will be dead then and I wont know one way or the other. So why bother?

paperburn1
Posts: 2446
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Postby paperburn1 » Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:43 pm

Skipjack wrote:I couldnt care less about some emulated computer version of my brain (not my personality). I (me) will be dead then and I wont know one way or the other. So why bother?

I would like to have a copy so I could debate myself and see if I really do sound like an idiot. :lol:

vernes
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 10:22 am
Location: The Netherlands

Postby vernes » Thu Sep 06, 2012 6:48 pm

Skipjack wrote:I couldnt care less about some emulated computer version of my brain (not my personality). I (me) will be dead then and I wont know one way or the other. So why bother?

*Jams electrodes into your brain to keep your simulated brain synchronized during your death*
There, dying now is just a very uncomfortable sensation while 50% of your brain stops working.


But seriously, I think there is something we're overlooking here.
Something we simply cannot comprehend like some kind of Agnosia.

I submit the following thoughts:
Is the difference between the person of age 5 and the same person of age 50 greater or smaller then two different persons of the same age but brought up in the same neighbourhood?

Imagine we found a way to freeze tissue without causing tissue data.
All chemistry is locked in place.
So we stop a brain, and it stops being a personality, it is a monolithic block with a lot of different chemicals.
During this frozen period, where is the person?

In this frozen state, we rebuild the person in two copies.
One is rebuild with actual atoms, recreating tissues in their different states (build up in a frozen state).

And another is rebuild inside a powerful simulation system (also simulated to be frozen).

We keep the original frozen and defrost the two copies.

Which one is real according to his own perspective?
Which one is real according to your perspective?

After a while, we de-freeze the original, can we consider a personality that completely stopped for a while, and started again still the same personality?
What if we used that period to simply take that person perfectly apart in cubes of 1cm^3 and reassemble without losing a single atom?
Is it still the same person?

Would you ever find out if we switched the original with the flesh clone?

Would it matter?


Your clone would always consider itself to be you. You would be your clone.
There will be an instance of your person who would be proven wrong about it's view about being dead even if an copy existed.

The thing is, I think we are not some magical entity which cannot be copied and even if copied, would be something lesser.
It's just we are incapable to consider this a valid thought since it is one about the way we look at ourselves in a very primary way.

But I do think we NEED to have a transfer period, something that offers us the sensation of continuity to be able to accept the concept of still being yourself if this technology would be possible.

Betruger
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Postby Betruger » Thu Sep 06, 2012 8:10 pm

IIRC we discussed some of these fundamental points back then..
http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?t=702
You can do anything you want with laws except make Americans obey them. | What I want to do is to look up S. . . . I call him the Schadenfreudean Man.

AcesHigh
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:59 am

Postby AcesHigh » Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:02 am

Skipjack wrote:I couldnt care less about some emulated computer version of my brain (not my personality). I (me) will be dead then and I wont know one way or the other. So why bother?


well, what are "you"

if you get teletransported, are you still you? Ceased to exist in one place and was reconstructed in another? If multiverse theories are right, it becomes even more complicated. Each nanosecond, there are infinite copies of you being created...

are the protons and electrons that constitute our bodies the same when you die as when you were born.

in some ways, if your memory and brain can be completely emulated/recreated, its the same thing as not dying.

Betruger
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Postby Betruger » Tue Sep 18, 2012 8:08 am

http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/09/genome ... -than.html

Going straight for one of the biggest concise statements in the article:
Question: And what about long-term technologies. If you had to bet on a technology that would change the world within the next 30 years, what would you pick?

The engineering of human bodies will bring about the biggest changes that humanity has ever seen. It isn't one technology, but rather the synergy of many interacting technologies. We will start to see one or several new species of humans emerge. Within the next thirty years sentient, intelligent lifeforms that are noticeably different than homo sapiens will emerge, and this will utterly transform every aspect of society.
But the article in full (it's short) is worth reading.

In one of the more recent debates with Diogenese (over, among other things, whether "natural" is Most Good and whether any presently living Homo Sapiens Sapiens' philosophy, e.g. politics, would not be outdated once we really hit our stride in synthetic biology) I pointed out what I see as the inevitability of genetic divergence, at first recreationaly but sooner than later out of necessity (quick & dirty e.g.: surviving extraterrestrial radiation, or (a much stronger positive feedback instance) to stay competitive with everyone else who's doing it). It did not seem to impress Diogenes much, and indeed I expect most people on the planet whom you'd ask this would concur.

But that IMO is the same unawareness of accelerating progress as Kurzweil has documented with "his" Singularity. Technology is not improving linearly.. 25 years in the future is not 25 years in the past. The Singularity doesn't need to be nigh if we live long enough -- hopefully the kind of social upheaval that Enriquez envisions in the next 30 years will be enough to leverage public perception of synthetic biology (and science in general) so that life extension will get major increases in funding.

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Syi9bqfFIdY
You can do anything you want with laws except make Americans obey them. | What I want to do is to look up S. . . . I call him the Schadenfreudean Man.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest