Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Slarg232 wrote:

Testify wrote:

Albatross wrote:And our animal brains are capable of storing information. It should theoretically be possible to explore alternative methods of importing information into the brain.

I can hold your brain in my hand. I cannot hold code. The two are separate.

But what is a brain? There are people with brains but no memories, just as there are people with brains but no motor functions.

A Brain is nothimg more than an organic hard drive, when you think about it; useless on it's own, but it holds so much.

Emphasis mine. The idea of the brain being "useless" is amusing. Intelligence is not a static thing. It's the ability to see the patterns behind events and information. A computer cannot do that.

A Brain is useless by itself. It holds memories and hard data (Breath in, Breath Out, the first time you rode a bicycle, how to ride a bicycle, and that one time you nearly drowned to death), but people who are vegetables, er rather can't breath, eat, or poop by themselves, are almost always suffering from brain damage.

Slarg232 wrote:A Brain is useless by itself. It holds memories and hard data (Breath in, Breath Out, the first time you rode a bicycle, how to ride a bicycle, and that one time you nearly drowned to death), but people who are vegetables, er rather can't breath, eat, or poop by themselves, are almost always suffering from brain damage.

Yes because they're brain-damaged. When you utilise knowledge, for example in programming, you use your abstract intelligence to model the elements involved, creating links and seeing potential solutions to problems in a split second. A computer can't do that. It's a machine. Just because it's complicated, doesn't mean it's any more than a few trillion tiny switches.

Testify wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:A Brain is useless by itself. It holds memories and hard data (Breath in, Breath Out, the first time you rode a bicycle, how to ride a bicycle, and that one time you nearly drowned to death), but people who are vegetables, er rather can't breath, eat, or poop by themselves, are almost always suffering from brain damage.

Yes because they're brain-damaged. When you utilise knowledge, for example in programming, you use your abstract intelligence to model the elements involved, creating links and seeing potential solutions to problems in a split second. A computer can't do that. It's a machine. Just because it's complicated, doesn't mean it's any more than a few trillion tiny switches.

Yes, yes I did just link a movie scene.


How can you know what every combination of those tiny switches can acheive? Swap one Switch, how does that affect the entire tapestry?

Because it's a machine? It is no more capable of thought than a hammer or a coffee maker.
The machine in the clip you posted is operating within strict variables. If a human wanted to win, he'd cheat. A computer cannot, unless it is programmed to, at which point the "cheat" has become a variable.
Basically a human can find infinite ways to break a system when a computer cannot.

I always hated how they "killed" the computer in that movie. Soooo the super computer cant figure out how to win at Tic Tac Toe......yet me, a simpleton, can win everytime if I go first, period, end of story. Go figure

Oh yeah. Programming in lieu of education would be awesome, especially if it was like the programming in the Matrix.

Frazzled wrote:

LordofHats wrote:But that would take all the fun out of learning!

Wait, you guys don't have fun learning?

even philosophy and morals.

You see no moral/ethical quagmire in some random administrator programming children to believe what is right/wrong?

I don't have any problem with that as long as I am the random administrator

"In 2016 Frazzled was elected President of the United States, garnering a record 100% of the youth vote."

I would vote for you frazz, Aslong as two things.
Weiner Dog identification program(must have a weiner dog to vote)
Wargaming is the national past time.

Testify wrote:Because it's a machine? It is no more capable of thought than a hammer or a coffee maker.
The machine in the clip you posted is operating within strict variables. If a human wanted to win, he'd cheat. A computer cannot, unless it is programmed to, at which point the "cheat" has become a variable.
Basically a human can find infinite ways to break a system when a computer cannot.

Oh? How can you be so sure? In I, Robot, they had a robot with three laws programmed into it, and then they gave the main one the ability to ignore them if it so chose; It was COMPELLED to obey, but it wasn't FORCED to, giving him a sort of concious.

We already have several forms of primitive AI, so an actual computer that is willing to Cheat isn't too far fetched.

The brain is nothing more than a complex biological computer. You can stimulate different bits of it to induce different emotions, make you see and hear things, move about etc. Conversely you can (to a currently limited extent) 'read' the activity in the brain to deduce what is going on in there.

To say that you can hold a brain but cannot hold 'code' ignores that all you are doing is holding a biological computer which has a set of basic codes hard wired in, and the ability to 'learn' new ways of behaving. Much like some of the more limited electrical brothers that are being developed now. Computers already learn, in a limited way; a way limited by our inexperience in this field, not by the inability of any machine to ever learn.

'Downloading' information into biological systems is just a different programming and hardware challange.

LordofHats wrote:
You see no moral/ethical quagmire in some random administrator programming children to believe what is right/wrong?

We can simply program that out of you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SilverMK2 wrote:
'Downloading' information into biological systems is just a different programming and hardware challange.

Philosophically there are certain issues regarding sentience vis a vis the nature of free will, and things like qualia. Its all pretty well covered in AI theory, though no one really has any definitive answers.

Personally, I think that downloading anything to the brain, at least safely, will probably need to be preceded by the construction of a computer that can pass the Turing test.

Memory/information implants are, I would argue, a different (if only marginally) kettle of fish to developing a 'thinking' computer, or one which can pass for a human being. Kind of like the difference between hot air and lighter than air balloons - both doing similar things, using similar theories, but with different tech, materials, etc.

From a purely practical point of view, it is almost certain that computer advances will outstrip 'brain' advances for quite some time to come. It is a lot easier and cheaper to mess about with computers than with people's brains... At least unless the Nazi's or someone like that get into power and start slicing into people again...

SilverMK2 wrote:Memory/information implants are, I would argue, a different (if only marginally) kettle of fish to developing a 'thinking' computer, or one which can pass for a human being. Kind of like the difference between hot air and lighter than air balloons - both doing similar things, using similar theories, but with different tech, materials, etc.

Well, I'm thinking that there may be a problem in the interaction between the biological and non-biological components in that one is seemingly adaptive and the other is not. How do we interface hard memory with memory that, essentially, does not degrade in the same way without fundamentally changing at least the adaptive memory? Speaking only to the physical pathways, of course.

I'm not really up on the way the brain stores memory (not sure that this field is in anything more than its very infancy really) so I can't really comment specifically - however, memory downloads could certainly (initially) take the form more of hypnotic suggestion - putting the recipient into some highly receptive state and force feeding them information through more traditional inputs (such as sound and vision), letting the brain take care of the storage and processing.

That's how I would envisage it, Silver. The old 'chip in the brain' thing that makes you super-intelligent seems a little far-fetched at this point, but it IS possible to 'programme' human brains biologically, as you've just demonstrated. In very basic terms, the brain takes in sensory stimulus and converts it into information, then stores it. I think it would definitely be possible to program brains by stimulating areas of the brain into creating false memories of information learned.

and if it all goes wrong and gets virused or something simliar?

Nom

What are you even talking about?

No thanks. I like my brain the way it is.

Really?

In a word: No.

I would rather have a society composed of people with average intellects and varied personalities and identities than a society of highly-intelligent automatons with no personality.

_Tim?

Albatross wrote:That's how I would envisage it, Silver. The old 'chip in the brain' thing that makes you super-intelligent seems a little far-fetched at this point, but it IS possible to 'programme' human brains biologically, as you've just demonstrated. In very basic terms, the brain takes in sensory stimulus and converts it into information, then stores it. I think it would definitely be possible to program brains by stimulating areas of the brain into creating false memories of information learned.

Really? I wasn't aware this was possible. Is there even any evidence that it is feasible?
Pointing at a scan of a brain and seeing which parts buzz with electric activity during certain experiences is one thing, but in terms of actually knowing how the brain stores information we're still in the dark ages.

Testify wrote:

Albatross wrote:That's how I would envisage it, Silver. The old 'chip in the brain' thing that makes you super-intelligent seems a little far-fetched at this point, but it IS possible to 'programme' human brains biologically, as you've just demonstrated. In very basic terms, the brain takes in sensory stimulus and converts it into information, then stores it. I think it would definitely be possible to program brains by stimulating areas of the brain into creating false memories of information learned.

Really? I wasn't aware this was possible. Is there even any evidence that it is feasible?

There are plenty of ways to implant false experiences into the brain. Silver mentioned hypnotic suggestion, for one. There are drugs that change your brain's patterns, create emotions, or can provide you with false sensory information, such as visual hallucinations. Hell, Ayahuasca can give you an out-of-body visionquest type of experience that reportedly feels completely real, except it isn't actually happening.

Now obviously that's just basic stuff, but it leads me to believe that one could program brains with specific information. I'm not saying it's probable, just that it is possible. To engineer a process that replicates the experience of learning a specific body of information, condenses it then inputs into a human brain - sure, why not? As I've said, I'm not talking chip-in-the-brain - I'm talking about a process that tricks the brain into biologically recreating the same specific conditions as are found in the brain of say, an expert in the German language, just as an example. There are people who have woken up after head trauma speaking foreign languages, so it's definitely possible.

Albatross wrote:Really?

Yep. Really. Do you not like yours?

rubiksnoob wrote:

Albatross wrote:Really?

Yep. Really. Do you not like yours?

Oh yeah, I'm just surprised that you do...

Albatross wrote:

Testify wrote:

Albatross wrote:That's how I would envisage it, Silver. The old 'chip in the brain' thing that makes you super-intelligent seems a little far-fetched at this point, but it IS possible to 'programme' human brains biologically, as you've just demonstrated. In very basic terms, the brain takes in sensory stimulus and converts it into information, then stores it. I think it would definitely be possible to program brains by stimulating areas of the brain into creating false memories of information learned.

Really? I wasn't aware this was possible. Is there even any evidence that it is feasible?

There are plenty of ways to implant false experiences into the brain. Silver mentioned hypnotic suggestion, for one. There are drugs that change your brain's patterns, create emotions, or can provide you with false sensory information, such as visual hallucinations. Hell, Ayahuasca can give you an out-of-body visionquest type of experience that reportedly feels completely real, except it isn't actually happening.

Now obviously that's just basic stuff, but it leads me to believe that one could program brains with specific information. I'm not saying it's probable, just that it is possible. To engineer a process that replicates the experience of learning a specific body of information, condenses it then inputs into a human brain - sure, why not? As I've said, I'm not talking chip-in-the-brain - I'm talking about a process that tricks the brain into biologically recreating the same specific conditions as are found in the brain of say, an expert in the German language, just as an example. There are people who have woken up after head trauma speaking foreign languages, so it's definitely possible.

You can't hypnotise information into someone's brain. Actual skills and knowledge require time and effort to achieve. Mind-altering drugs (of which I have some experience) affect perception, not intellect. You don't actually "learn" anything that couldn't be learned from abstract thought anyway.
How the hell are you going to program a human mind to recognise, say, the patterns of sound that are nessesary to learn a language? I hear "guten tag" and I know it means good day, because my brain recognises the pattern of those sounds. Programming a mind to recognise those patterns is almost definitely impossible.

nomsheep wrote:and if it all goes wrong and gets virused or something simliar?

Nom

PROFIT!

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:In a word: No.

I would rather have a society composed of people with average intellects and varied personalities and identities than a society of highly-intelligent automatons with no personality.

_Tim?

Again, if it were JUST factual knowledge, 2+2 = 4, we have a Moon, Im a friggin badass, things like that, people will still be able to have their own personalities and opinions. It gets muddy and turns to us being automatons, when you have EITHER the God made everything crowd running things, or the God doesnt exsist its all science crowd, or Republican is the wave of the future, running things. That kind of stuff should be left out for that very reason.

Albatross wrote:

rubiksnoob wrote:

Albatross wrote:Really?

Yep. Really. Do you not like yours?

Oh yeah, I'm just surprised that you do...

Oh no no, my good chap. I don't I really have enough experience with your brain to decide whether I truly like it or not.

Interesting.

I think some fields like science and math SHOULD be programmed if possible. A lot of school time is spent memorizing formulas and terms and if we can get rid of that and have everyone at the same level then we can actually spend more time on the "learning by doing" part.

Languages would also be nice. Program an entire dictionary in your head and then just work on the skill of speaking it

History im iffy about. One the one hand it would mean a lot less memorization of dates and names...on the other hand history is too easily colored by political beliefs and can be manipulated by simple omission of facts

I can see History being one of those subjects as well. Sure many things in history are pretty cut and dry, as far as how/did it happen. But then again, there is also A LOT of History that is rather political as well, as far as debating it goes. Welp, spend the time we used to on learning how to do Math and Science, and use that trying to find your stance on History?


Speaking of reading, would these upgrades allow the "average" person to read and absorb much faster?