GostHacked Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 I watched an interesting epp of Star Trek - Voyager last night. One I had not seen yet. Storyline set around 7 of 9 and the crew she was with when their borg ship crashed on the planet. While at the this docking station, vistors came aboard and wanted to see 7. They were part of the same 9 group. 2, 3, 4, of 9. Somehow they found doctors to remove the implants, but not very well, and one part of the nano probes where still in their brains, linking all the other 3 together. They wanted to be individuals, but could not untill 7 did some experiments n stuff. Remil Ghost in the Shell was really an eye opener for me. The Complex series also was very damn good. But being linked to everything does not sit well with me at all. As a young lad, I would have jumped on the chance to have cyborg implants, now... I am not so sure. To those who think robots and AI can't 'evolve' on their own. Watch these. Modular robots are the future here. The smaller the more complex things they can make. Stage 1 Stage 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyzVtTiax80...feature=related Stage 3 And if you want to know what the future holds, read the comments in any of the vids... oh noes we is gonna die by the robots! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 If the means to neurally connect a human to a machine ever exists it'll be a burry line between whether its a machine augmented human or a human augmented machine.I wonder if the day will come when you can download or upload as the case may be, a mind into a machine. Downloading of the contents of one's brain (memories, personality, knowledge, experience, etc) to an artificial medium will be possible within two decades, at the most. It seems difficult to imagine given how much it appears our minds and bodies are dependant on each other for their mutual survival. Perhaps nano-technology coupled with quantum computing would make this possible. Neither of these are necessary. Recent research shows that the brain almost certainly does not make use of quantum computing, thus quantum computing is not required to make an artificial analog of the brain. All that is needed are scanners of the needed resolution to map out every neuron and inter-neuron connection in one's brain reliably and accurately, and computers that have the necessary storage, memory, and processing power to replicate it. On the computation front, we are only a few years away from the top supercomputers matching the computational ability of the human brain. On the scanner front, we are a bit further away, but progress is fast and accelerating. "Residing" within a self-aware swarm of nano-sized particles might be as interesting as assembling yourself into whatever form you wished. I'd probably turn myself into a spaceship and go "walkabout" the galaxy. That would indeed be quite the experience, though that is quite a bit further away than simple mind downloading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remiel Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 One of the things most worth contemplating in Stand Alone Complex, I think, is the phenomenon of the two beggars that are the only ones able to see the Laughing Man, because they are the only ones whos eyes/brains are not augmented or cyberized. It is perhaps related to how de-gene-erates are treated in Gattaca. Will poverty be the price of remaining human? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 I for one bow down and welcome our new machine overlords. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyOnDetails Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 What yardstick gets used? For example, if the number of genes in the genome is used as a measure of complexity, rice is far more advanced than us. We have evolved in a symbiotic relationship with the world around us. It is foolish and short-sighted to think we are master. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 What yardstick gets used? For example, if the number of genes in the genome is used as a measure of complexity, rice is far more advanced than us.We have evolved in a symbiotic relationship with the world around us. It is foolish and short-sighted to think we are master. The answer is very simple. complexity is not a question of the number of genes but the complexity of the individual genes themselves. Humans have fewer genes than rice it's true, but with fewer but more comples genes we can make eyes..... http://www.imperial.ac.uk/college.asp?P=3509 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) The complexity and capability of the brain can be gauged by determining how many neurons it has, how interconnected they are, and how quickly individual interconnections can activate. The human brain has on the order of 10^11 neurons, each with about 10^3 interconnections, each connection capable of firing ~200 times/second. That's a total computational capacity of 2*10^16 calculations / second, or 20 petaflops. The fastest supercomputers running right now are in the 1-2 petaflops range, just 10 times slower, and IBM is planning to have a 20 petaflop supercomputer operating by 2011. So once we have the computational capacity of the human brain, what else will be missing? One thing is the parallelism. In the brain, each neuron is an individual "processor", and it is effectively 10^11 of them running in parallel, whereas our supercomputers have at most a few tens of thousands of processors, but each one can perform billions of calculations per second. But parallelism can be emulated in software, rather than being implemented in hardware. Of course, having the raw computational capacity that equals the brain is not the same as creating an artificial intelligence that equals a human. It makes sense to assume there are many other elements needed. But we are well on our way and the pace of progress is only increasing. Edited August 19, 2009 by Bonam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyOnDetails Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 The answer is very simple. complexity is not a question of the number of genes but the complexity of the individual genes themselves. Humans have fewer genes than rice it's true, but with fewer but more comples genes we can make eyes.....http://www.imperial.ac.uk/college.asp?P=3509 They are not more complex genes, though PERHAPS the way they are inter-related makes it more complex overall. Is having eyes more advanced than the ability to feed from sunlight? It depends on what you value, and who draws up the yardstick for "advanced" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 They are not more complex genes, though PERHAPS the way they are inter-related makes it more complex overall. Is having eyes more advanced than the ability to feed from sunlight? It depends on what you value, and who draws up the yardstick for "advanced" Do you know where you get vitamin D from. Who gets the draw up the yard stick? Well, when rice can decipher the genome, rice in is the running... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyOnDetails Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 Who gets the draw up the yard stick? Well, when rice can decipher the genome, rice in is the running... Again, your yardstick, your opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.