Scientists will build 'human brain'...

Scientists will build 'human brain'...

www.dailymail.co.uk

But Prof Markram said: ‘This will, when successful, help two billion people annually who suffer from some type of brain impairment.

‘This is one of the three grand challenges for humanity. We need to understand earth, space and the brain. We need to understand what makes us human.’

Over the past 15 years his team have painstakingly studied and managed to produce a computer simulation of a cortical column – one of the small building blocks of a mammal’s brain.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Mission to Build the World's First Simulated Brain is Underway (moved from ATSNN)

Amazing what the human mind is capable of. And how complicated it truly is.

This is kinda scary, as the article states, to give machines such intelligence. I have seen many movies with bad turn-outs due to situations such as this. But scientists are smart, and they know what they are doing, sorta, right?

I did not find this story on ATS, but a similar story posted in 2005, which I have included.

Gnight

www.dailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

What you see in movies and comparing it to real life is obvously dumb and I think you get that, there is a risk, but small risk if they scientists know what there REALLY doing. Small margin for error, but also small margin to even come a scientist if you get what I mean. There not stupid.

Eventually...

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
Eventually...

Well no ****, thats all you got? Something like this is not as small as a simple new robot, something that would easily change the world.

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
Eventually...

I agree...

High energy consumption: The computer will require the output of a nuclear power station like Sellafield, pictured here Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... #ixzz1sGm328x0

...and Skynet was born.

reply to post by sting130u


no .. we need food for the hungry, clean water, clean air, safe food, housing for the homeless, education, heating, cooling, aged care, help for the ill, we need everything BUT to build a human brain.. that once 'misunderstood' by science and twisted by illogical military will be technology used to subvert the conscousness of humanity and be abused by mega corps to control people and kill off those they fear - is: people who already know what it means to be human.


Rosha

and then they will hook it up to a visual system that can project it's image as a hologram.
possibly feed it information about everything they can so it can watch over all of us normie brains with due dilligence?
or it will just work security

How can they build something that they do not fully understand? Ive taken neuroscience classes and it is exceedingly complex and we are just beginning to understand some of its features

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
How can they build something that they do not fully understand? Ive taken neuroscience classes and it is exceedingly complex and we are just beginning to understand some of its features

Read the article, it states they are building it to further their understanding.

They need to understand it inside and outside, and to simulate it would help further this understanding.

Originally posted by boncho

High energy consumption: The computer will require the output of a nuclear power station like Sellafield, pictured here Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... #ixzz1sGm328x0

...and Skynet was born.

Dont you know? Skynet is software.(according to the redacted classical explanation and the new one) I personally would like to welcome our new robot masters and give these duracell batteries as tribute. Anyway what will happen if the brain is abnormal? What if they create a retarded robot? Oh wait...Megan fox was their first attempt. Sorry.

They are on pace to have the computing andstorage ability in about 15 years. It poses some interesting questions. If they could simulate the human brain and you could download the content from an existing brain would the person with the simulated brain experience emotion or just mimic neurotypical behavior like an existing AI program does?

Why start with a human brain? Why not a reptillian brain? It is less complex and the tech is already available. Multiple trials and corrections could be done before we even have the capacity to simulate a human brain.

reply to post by DrJay1975


Dear DrJay1975,

A great question. My answer is that they are not trying to duplicate consciousness, they are attempting to mimic it sufficiently for us to believe we are dealing with a separate being. All the software in the world and all the computers in the world can never become self aware, the programming can only make us think that it is. Peace.

Nothing to fear here.

They will always stumble at the intricacy of an individual cell let alone the brain.

It's an impossibly huge call to say you will replicate something you cannot understand - and no one is close to understanding how the brain works... unless you are listening to New Age people who have some great ideas that they like to put a scientific stamp on, like holographic memories or quantum entanglement and about the way the whole body is full memory cells etc etc

Have fun kids

Don't get too excited. We'll probably never see it materialize in our lifetime.

reply to post by squandered


Dear squandered,

unless you are listening to New Age people who have some great ideas that they like to put a scientific stamp on, like holographic memories or quantum entanglement and about the way the whole body is full memory cells etc etc

While I agree that they cannot duplicate consciousness, I must disagree with your claim that quantum entanglement is a new age belief. Quantum entanglement is a scientific observation that is repeatable and observable using standard scientific methods. I find it difficult to label Stephan Hawking or Michio Kaku as new age believers. Mr. Hawking is an atheist.

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by squandered

 

Dear squandered,

unless you are listening to New Age people who have some great ideas that they like to put a scientific stamp on, like holographic memories or quantum entanglement and about the way the whole body is full memory cells etc etc

While I agree that they cannot duplicate consciousness, I must disagree with your claim that quantum entanglement is a new age belief. Quantum entanglement is a scientific observation that is repeatable and observable using standard scientific methods. I find it difficult to label Stephan Hawking or Michio Kaku as new age believers. Mr. Hawking is an atheist.

I was referring to the way that entanglement is often hijacked by less rigorous standards. It suits a lot of New Age theories.

As you made that conclusion I'd like to point out that I'm not against New Age thinkers. My take is that we are in the position to put all the information from all the great spiritual thinkers from any age, together.

Science can take it's inspiration from what little info' is available through 'scientific research' if they like, but on the other hand are great brains that are free from subjective thinking - light years ahead.

NB: The premise of Buddhism is that "everything is impermanent" and that includes science fact.

reply to post by squandered


Dear squandered,

As you made that conclusion I'd like to point out that I'm not against New Age thinkers. My take is that we are in the position to put all the information from all the great spiritual thinkers from any age, together.

I did not conclude that you disliked New Age thinkers. I mentioned people who could not be accused of such a thing. I made no judgement on New Age thinkers nor on you.

reply to post by AQuestion


That's clear - no problem

If anything I find it insulting to suggest that the brain can be equaled. I've listened to many lectures from scientists who cite the exponentially increasing speed of computational development which by current standards suggests computing powers will soon be many 10,000's of times faster than now and thus in line to match the computing power of the brain.

Consciousness is another thing. Science doesn't really touch that and the New Age lecturer's (for want of a better term) had more to say about what it is. I left with the view that the detail / the spark of life is beyond detection and exists on all planes: macro and micro.

I never reach any conclusions when I think about what life is. Perhaps it's like being a cell in my little finger trying to answer the same question.