tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-948384407338209758.post6785065268804063919..comments2022-03-17T14:07:12.473-07:00Comments on BrainWorks: Parallel EvolutionTed Vesseneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17711708636792771116noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-948384407338209758.post-71396238207347491442008-04-26T14:56:00.000-07:002008-04-26T14:56:00.000-07:00Glad to see your answer.I've been thinking about t...Glad to see your answer.<BR/><I>I've been thinking about this for the past few days.</I><BR/>You flatter me!<BR/><BR/>Indeed, I agree. Much probably the AI efforts are developed upon a flawed hardware platform, since it is by design, more oriented to the bruteforce work, to that precision you were talking about, than it is to the use of any criterion.<BR/><BR/>Hence, any later programming efforts will go necesarily against the very nature of this plataforms.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I think this is based on the idea of a limited analytic capacity. What would happen with an entity able to receive, process and store <B>all</B> the information, and still <I>function</I>, its something that would be maybe more appropriate to H. P. Lovecraft to answer ;)Novackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10227341845269493845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-948384407338209758.post-54931057705324857392008-04-26T14:53:00.000-07:002008-04-26T14:53:00.000-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Novackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10227341845269493845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-948384407338209758.post-37648676378447250472008-04-25T12:16:00.000-07:002008-04-25T12:16:00.000-07:00I've been thinking about this for the past few day...I've been thinking about this for the past few days. You are correct that the human mind stores data in what can be though of as a priority queue. But really the mind has an extremely aggressive filter. Well over 70% of incoming sensory data is ignored by the brain. The brain doesn't store data so much as the key aspects of thoughts, and then it fabricates most of the missing details based on the few key aspects.<BR/><BR/>This isn't a typical priority queue because in most such queues, data gets seldomly overwritten. For the human mind, most of the data doesn't even make it past the first filter.<BR/><BR/>So I agree with you. But I still contend that a hardware platform designed to take in lots of data and discard most of it might be a better starting point for AI research.Ted Vesseneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17711708636792771116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-948384407338209758.post-8845872544870214392008-04-21T11:15:00.000-07:002008-04-21T11:15:00.000-07:00If you allow me, I think you are over simplifying ...If you allow me, I think you are over simplifying one point.<BR/><BR/>Human brain dont just <I>"trades precision for increased data capacity and faster access time"</I>.<BR/><BR/>What the human brain actually does is prioritize that HUGE amount of information that reach us every nano-second, with the only motive of let itself concentrate on more important things.<BR/><BR/>So what I want to say is: that precision capacity is not traded but discarded, deprecated. I fact, all that info is actually beeing processed, and clasified, "Relevant" or "Not relevant".<BR/><BR/>So maybe, that excellent precision of a computer is <B>not efficient at all.</B> If we were able to give our senses to a current machine, it would freeze instantly, saturated by the huge bombardment of info, consecuence of its inability to discard information.<BR/><BR/>What we usually forgive in the quest for an ultimate AI, is that our human brain is the result of millenia of life evolution. That evolution is the ultimate programmer, the one who designed our brain on How, When, and Which, [information] can be <B>safely</B> discarded.Novackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10227341845269493845noreply@blogger.com