|
Post by MaybeNever on Sept 26, 2009 19:19:52 GMT -5
According to this 2005 CNN article, we will probably have the technology to download our brains into computers by 2050. Now, I am not a technology-knowing-about guy, but I am to some extent a brain-knowing-about guy and this seems to me to be a highly questionable idea despite being extremely awesome. The questionable part, I think, is not so much a question of ethics but of feasibility: there's more to the brain than data storage and processing power, and while I imagine that the processing power might be there by 2050 we still don't have anything like a complete understanding of how the brain works as a whole, nor how consciousness maps onto it. Advancing technology is shedding some light on this, as things like fMRI machines and temporarily induced regional lesions make it possible to get glimpses of the brain's more complex functions, our ignorance is still so towering.
|
|
|
Post by Mira on Sept 26, 2009 19:25:44 GMT -5
Yay, now I can live forever in eternal boredom! I just have to make it to fifty-seven years old.
|
|
|
Post by Distind on Sept 26, 2009 19:25:50 GMT -5
They're talking about the PS3 as if it's ground breaking hardware...
If that thing is 1% the human brain, we have computers entirely capable of such things arleady. The problem being effectively recording the human mind and figuring out how to emulate it's hardware(wetware?) so the mind could continue to function.
That said, years ago I saw someone claim that if we could get a terabyte of storage we could store a lifetime of human memmories. I have a friend with at least two of those full of human mammaries, so take what you hear with a grain of salt.
I'm more hoping for the whole functional immortality in the next 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by Random Guy on Sept 26, 2009 19:51:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Hades on Sept 26, 2009 21:26:21 GMT -5
Yay, now I can live forever in eternal boredom! I just have to make it to fifty-seven years old. Eternal boredom? I would think if we had the technology to download your brain, we'd have the technology to create a "matrix" for that brain to "live" in. Or something like that. I doubt it would just be the virtual equivalent of Futurama's jar heads on shelves. And also, even if all of that comes to pass in our lifetimes, it probably won't be available to everyday people. I would guess it would be rather expensive so early.
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Sept 26, 2009 21:55:25 GMT -5
Yay, now I can live forever in eternal boredom! I just have to make it to fifty-seven years old. Eternal boredom? I would think if we had the technology to download your brain, we'd have the technology to create a "matrix" for that brain to "live" in. Or something like that. I doubt it would just be the virtual equivalent of Futurama's jar heads on shelves. And also, even if all of that comes to pass in our lifetimes, it probably won't be available to everyday people. I would guess it would be rather expensive so early. The Matrix deal would be a necessity, assuming the brain couldn't interact somehow with the outside world. Brains that do not receive external stimuli of some form tend to melt down pretty quickly. For humans, this includes social interaction. Without that, madness is virtually certain.
|
|
|
Post by Mira on Sept 27, 2009 2:51:46 GMT -5
download our brains into computers by 2050. I'm pretty sure it should be 'uploading.' Sorry, it has been bothering me.
|
|
syndrome
Full Member
The meaning of life is Sausage.
Posts: 137
|
Post by syndrome on Sept 27, 2009 7:02:25 GMT -5
It may be just me, but this and a few other things in the article seem like just a bad idea to me.
|
|
|
Post by The Lazy One on Sept 27, 2009 8:04:49 GMT -5
Eternal boredom? I would think if we had the technology to download your brain, we'd have the technology to create a "matrix" for that brain to "live" in. Or something like that. I doubt it would just be the virtual equivalent of Futurama's jar heads on shelves. And also, even if all of that comes to pass in our lifetimes, it probably won't be available to everyday people. I would guess it would be rather expensive so early. The Matrix deal would be a necessity, assuming the brain couldn't interact somehow with the outside world. Brains that do not receive external stimuli of some form tend to melt down pretty quickly. For humans, this includes social interaction. Without that, madness is virtually certain. Maybe they'd set it up like email, so brains could talk to each other? I don't know, I'd think they would need to make it so the brains could get some entertainment.
|
|
|
Post by cagnazzo on Sept 27, 2009 12:06:08 GMT -5
I find this article.... questionable. I'm sure most neurologists would love to know how they discovered that consciousness is just another "sense", and how they're planning on replicating it.
Since, you know, I'm pretty sure we don't even know if it's just an emergent property or not.
More relevantly, he talks about uploading a brain onto a computer. Then discusses about how we can make computers strong enough to rival a human brain. That ignores a whole host of other issues (brains are 100 hertz, at maximum, so at best we'd be simulating the brains, not copying them.) More importantly though, we don't know exactly how things like memory and stuff works. Our current best guess is that memory involves stuff that involves ion channels. So to copy a brain, we'd need to be able to scan the entire thing, at the small molecule level, precisely, without destroying it.
We can't even do that when we're allowed to destroy it. And we have nothing that can look at that level more than a tiny distance inside. So I'm a bit skeptical.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger on Sept 27, 2009 13:17:46 GMT -5
The Matrix deal would be a necessity, assuming the brain couldn't interact somehow with the outside world. Brains that do not receive external stimuli of some form tend to melt down pretty quickly. For humans, this includes social interaction. Without that, madness is virtually certain. Maybe they'd set it up like email, so brains could talk to each other? I don't know, I'd think they would need to make it so the brains could get some entertainment. Stick the hard drive in a robot. Problem solved.
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Sept 27, 2009 13:54:55 GMT -5
Maybe they'd set it up like email, so brains could talk to each other? I don't know, I'd think they would need to make it so the brains could get some entertainment. Stick the hard drive in a robot. Problem solved. They had better be sex robots. Also, at that point we're at that episode of Futurama wherein Fry downloads Lucy Liu. Also also, yes it should be "uploads" based on how I used it. However I, being the rebel lone wolf counter-culture motorcycle pilot, refuse to change it.
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Sept 27, 2009 23:48:49 GMT -5
They're talking about the PS3 as if it's ground breaking hardware... If that thing is 1% the human brain, we have computers entirely capable of such things arleady. The problem being effectively recording the human mind and figuring out how to emulate it's hardware(wetware?) so the mind could continue to function. That said, years ago I saw someone claim that if we could get a terabyte of storage we could store a lifetime of human memmories. I have a friend with at least two of those full of human mammaries, so take what you hear with a grain of salt. I'm more hoping for the whole functional immortality in the next 20 years. That pun made me love you forever.
|
|
|
Post by Death on Sept 28, 2009 12:55:43 GMT -5
The reverse adage should apply.
If people have shit for brains then it won't be improved by uploading all thst crap they know. Rubbish in, rubbish out.
I would be much more interested if I could just upload all those books I have to read into my brain.That would be more useful.
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Sept 28, 2009 15:20:48 GMT -5
Engram chips have long been a fantasy of mine too. "I need to read War And Peace by tomorrow? No problem. And now I've got it memorized!"
Unfortunately that might actually be more complex than transferring a mind wholesale, which is itself quite a doozy.
The other thing is, should someone claim they have developed this technology - who's going to test it? And without a human participant, how can you be sure it's effective? Animal testing, sure, but our brains are apparently more complex than any other animal's.
|
|