What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
31 Comments
- quasipalm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8If it's really modeling the entire human brain, then yes.
Not that I can prove it... but I can't prove that anyone other than myself is sentient. - Hypersapien, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8We WILL eventually have the computing power available to model the human brain with complexity approaching the real thing. When that happens, will the model itself become sentient and aware?
- smartpatrol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8They're simulating a column in the neocortex. I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the cortex is made up of many "cortical maps" about 1mm squared. These maps are laid out across a 2 dimensional surface, but they are connected heirarchically. Each cortical map is made up of many columns. Basically, which columns are "lit up" in a map determines what message it sends up to the next map in the heirarchy. In other words, some type of "recognition" has been achieved.
That's the best I can explain in such a short space. Check out On Intelligence by Jeff Hawkins if you want to learn more :) - brandonking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7As one of the resident Digg neuroscientists (no, really), the cortex has been studied in very fine detail for decades. The idea of columns (proposed by Mountcastle, forgot when but something like the 50's) is a somewhat antiquated model, but is a general way of examining a piece of the complicated neocortex. Diagrams drawn by Cajal dating back to the beginning of last century have mapped out a simplified model of how the various layers are connected. Depending on which part of cortex you look at, the columnar organization is more or less apparent.
What they are simulating is a 'classic' column, which is actually integrated into the rest of cortex via lateral connections and relays through the thalamus. So, sure it will perform 'differently' than in an intact animal, but it helps us understand how accurate our models are. We can grab a monkey, throw a few electrodes in a column, stimulate here and record there, and see if that model holds up. If it does, we know that our ideas of how cortex works are largely correct. This is INFINITELY important. If we know how the cortex computes locally, we can alter inputs and outputs. I work in brain computer interface. If we had a more precise model of the activation patterns, we could place recording electrodes there, send the signals out to a prosthetic, and decode in the device, translating into movement. If someone has retinopathy and we know how visual cortex works, we could use a camera with a simulating array in visual cortex.
Hope that clears up the significance. - AeonTorpor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Just because chemicals exist while your consciousness does, doesn't mean that your consciousness is what creates it. The only way chemicals are a product of consciousness is if you are referring to the idea of a chemical. And just because you have no idea of something, doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't exist.
- monolith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@smartpatrol,
Awesome, thanks. Just read his wikipedia bio. Cool dude.
The 'Singularity is Near' is a good read about this stuff too. - quasipalm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Hey -- there's nothing wrong with a little masturbatory use of computer power.
- CadMasterAdam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm glad there isn't an overwhelming amount of "YOU CAN'T DO THAT!" Posts.
i think lamen's can't understand exactly what they're testing.
I'm not surprised though about the amount of data though. it seams logical to me that even a simple system would generate that. [just thinking about if they were to analyze the movement and interactions of 10,000 subatomic particles in an accelerator]
however this also brings up the question: If 10,000 neuron produce 1,000,000,000,000 Bytes of data, what kind of storage requirements would 1,000,000,000 neuron require?
and would be be-able to understand it in terms of algorithms (in any type of realistitc time frame, like oh lets say 100 years?) - brandonking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah, most people are hung up on the binary properties of the action potential, but you have to remember that the neuron itself is highly analog, as are the rules governing spiking. THAT is what takes computing power.
- jdavid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I wonder how dense the simulation is, they mention cellular simulations and 10,000 neurons seems low for a blue gene supercomputer. I have seen 10k nodes done on an opteron, be it simple ones, but still. I would be curious to know what they are really simulating.
- brandonking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You're right. We have no microscopes, multimeters, computer models, experiments, etc. We have no idea if the brain is made up of gerbils and gumdrops. Oh wait. Stupid comments like that only get a sarcastic response and a reminder that textbooks do not bite.
- monolith, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@quasipalm, good point. However, try proving your sentient, to me.
- vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Actually, yes we know a lot about the brain... Maybe not enough for a true simulation yet, but we could come close. Since 1950's (when neuroscience really picked up with more than just labatomies) neuroscientists have been mapping the brain and trying to find out exactly how it has worked. We have sliced corpses (volunteers of organ donars mind you) milimeter by militer to get an exact mapping and even done live experients on epsilepsy pations in order to aliviate their conditions. However, this isn't living brain yet, but our cat scans and other technology is getting better every day.
We certainly don't know how exactly an atom works at sub particle levels (quarks etc), but we can sure make nuclear energy or a bomb out of it. - fquednau, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I must second jdavid. What is simulated? Do we already know that much about when exactly a neuron fires in the brain and how this behaviour changes over time, type of neuron and other influences?
And if we know that much, would this simulation actually work like a human brain, if in theory all neurons of a brain would be simulated? I.e. would we have a conscious being in the sense of considering humans as conscious beings? - Hypersapien, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, but then you'll just get back together again because neither of you will remember the first relationship.
- brandonking, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3No, consciousness is the product of chemicals. That is the point of neurosceince, and I dare say we are doing a hell of a job at proving it. Read some early Damasio and Kandel. If chemicals were made by consciousness, anesthetics wouldn't work.
- BadgerOU, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I've helped write some neural simulation software -- this is most probably simulating the electrical and chemical responses of the neurons. One reason they need some much computing power is because these computations involve some fairly hefty integrations at each neuron (and synapse).
- vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"That is not chemicals my friend, chemicals are a product of consciousness."
Take a hit of LSD or do some exstacy and get back to us...
Okay? Done. Allright... Those emotions and things you saw were a part of your conciousness in a sense... However, you as a person and your emotions were directly affected by said chemicals.
Did you really love that girl you met in the bar? Or was that the alcohol?
Did carpet start growing magic grass or did the LSD make your mind think that you saw it growing into plants?
Like it or not... We are chemicals and depending on what we put into our body (drugs, alcohol, candy bars, moutain dew, healthy vegan meals or what have you) and depending on how our mind's composition is at the moment is how we perceive and do things.
If I am hungry and lake of nutrients is firing off in my brain, I'm going to be rather cranky and weak for a while... If I eat a big steak and have a foster's beer. I am rather pleased.
It is as simple as that... Even playing WoW causes that seretonin to fire off causing players bits of joy when they level up. We are chemicals. Nothing more nothing less.
However, conciouness is a bit different I will admit... However our concioussness is not our ego (our chemicals and our person). I suggest reading up on Buddhism if want an answer for that. - krehbester, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Processing power is a small part of replicate the brain. We could of all the processing power in the universe and we still wouldn't know what to do with it. We don't know enough on how the brain works to replicate it.
- technonoob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I hope they develop a TV remote that works off brain waves SOON!
Even a mouse or keyboard would be nice too. - TopherT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ Monolith did you come up with the thought that quasipalm had? Maybe it doesn't prove that it was quasipalm that had the thought but it certainly seems to prove that there is consciousness outside of yourself.
- Eronysis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Everythings blue...
- monolith, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Except when there is something better...
- moeq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1/zombie
Mmmm.... braiinsssss... maped brainssss..
/shotgun
/end zombie
/jibblys - floejoe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3We should have the processing power of a human brain available by around 2015. Now, this would be a supercomputer most likely. However, with the extremely fast advances and implementation of technology, at most by 2025 we should be able to run full brain simulation in real time.
We don't know if the simulation will be of any use but if you just plot the technological development trends, this amount of computing power should be available by 2020's. - chosenone-, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Ever wonder that there's a frequency for human experience? It's not all chemicals, you know...
... and if it is, show me the chemical reactions that allow you to comprehend what you're reading right now, think wtf, and brush it off.
That is not chemicals my friend, chemicals are a product of consciousness. - TuffGhost, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Finally. Now they can erase the memories of my ex, like in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.
- drseth, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2That's incredible. We have a Wonderful Creator.
- brandonking, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Go flame elsewhere jesus freak. Why not post that crap on the Wii articles?
- rolypolyman, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2And this is modelled after a real human brain how? This sounds more like a masturbatory use of computer power done in the name of science.
- fapfiles, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0blueprint the human body at www.fapfiles.com
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is