Elon Musk recently presented the latest efforts from Neuralink, a company he founded in 2016 that has wonderful aspirations to expand an implantable brain-machine interface or BMI (for my previous policy on Neuralink, see the link here, for my long-term future research Despite some attractive demonstrations, adding pigs involved in ongoing experiments, much of the discussion was speculative and led some to ask more where the meat is comparing the occasion with little more than a theater of neurosciences and pointing out some internal anxiety about how engineering and science are carried out.
In any case, the questions and answers have led to desirable assumptions about the likelihood that one day we will be able to copy the human brain.Let’s use this as a way of reading about how copying the human brain can be similar to AI, then to genuine AI.-Autonomous carts based on as an example to explore the facets of copying the brain.
First of all, if you do something with something, is it the same as the original?
Suppose you move to a local photocopier and make a copy of your birth certificate, needing a copy at your fingertips.
It is possible that the copy sometimes appears to be the same as the original, on closer inspection, the colors are slightly crooked from the original and the lines are not so absolutely formed. In addition, many stains or noises have been controlled to reach the copy, perhaps because the photocopier glass is not absolutely blank or due to the printing procedure as a whole.
Therefore, it turns out that the copy is somewhat smaller than the original and is not literally a complete and purely not easy correspondence.
On the other hand, it turns out that the birth certificate was faded and that the freshly made copy looks much sharper.The clarity of the document has been greatly improved.
Therefore, you can argue that the copy is slightly larger than the original.
However, you didn’t end up with exactly the same thing as the original, adding some aspects that weren’t as desirable and other aspects that were an extra bonus.
Change the subject and communicate about the human spirit.
Can you make a human spirit?
If so, would it be exactly the same as the original, or would it be bigger or worse?
This is an incredibly intriguing factor and remains a wild and debatable topic among philosophers, neuroscientists, cognitive scientists and synthetic intelligence (AI) experts, as well as many other theorists and professionals.
First, it is vital to identify that there is no known way to make a copy of a spirit.
Presumably, that would require evaluating or collecting the Byzantine biochemical and electrical states of the brain, recording them or copying them miraculously, and then placing the states in some other brain.
It’s a challenge.
Current strategies such as MRI, CT, and other experimental approaches are up to the task.
Even if we can also do such a feat, some wonder if I would copy the whole spirit from this original source.In other words, there might be other elements in the brain that do not occur through the undeniable mechanical facets of the brain.This can pass to the sand of whether we have a “soul” that is beyond physically collective brain states and reaches too many assumptions about whether the brain is inseparable from our frame beyond the only elements of the brain.
If there is more in the brain than the brain declares, its copy will probably be “inferior” to the original and will not be a compliant copy.Of course, the counterargument is that the copy could be superior, to the Argument raised above on the copy of the birth certificate that resulted in some advanced facets.
In short, we don’t know if this mechanistic technique for physical copying of a brain would result in an equivalent brain when carried to another person’s brain.
This raises a similar point that creates more problems.
What brain would I copy?
It would seem problematic to try to copy a copy of the entire brain into the brain.
The design of the target brain might not be the same as that of the source brain, probably containing another number of neurons and their myriad of interconnections (plus a number of other demonstrative differences).As such, it would not be easy to imagine simply mapping a one-to-one base from the source brain to the target brain.
So what about the content that is already the target brain?
Possibly everything in it or would cause overlap.It can be very important to start with a blank slate, however, it raises the question of how a brain can also be scraped in such a way that there is no brain consistent with itself in the brain.
Wonderful.
And if it turns out that the brain is more than the collective set of source brain states, it can also simply copy and have a brain that doesn’t paint on the target brain.The user who receives the intellectual copy may be so intellectually that it can no longer function.A sacred misfortune after having gone through all this mess to make the brain copy.
These are some of the disorders faced by those looking to figure out how to make a copy of the total brain (WBC), also known as brain discharge, brain copy, brain transfer and also called total brain emulation (WBE).However, WBE is not exactly like other names, as it tends to mimic the brain, rather than focusing only on the perception of the copy of the brain.
This, however, proposes a transition to an affiliated issue, AI’s role in this matter.
AI and copycat
The number one goal of AI is to realize human intelligence or its equivalent, doing so on a machine.
Currently, AI researchers and AI developers are looking to create the equivalent of a human brain using all kinds of computer approaches and algorithmic deceptions.Don’t be fooled by the popular press suggesting that we’re about to crack the code of the human brain.and that we are preparing to have an AI that has completely achieved human intelligence (for the Turing test, a way to assess whether AI has achieved its touted goal, see my discussion here).
In fact, they talk about the advent of sensitivity, regarded as the still-defined spark that makes humans think of humans, and the supposed moment known as singularity will occur when this transition from a daily PC to a man-made AI will occur, those speak Abuses and Forecasts are relentlessly premature.I am not saying that we do not talk about these vital issues, we do, but I insist that the achievement of these noble objectives remains, at best, a remote vision.
Anyway, create how exciting it would be if we could potentially copy a human spirit.Until now, past problems have been the copy of a human spirit and the position of that copy in some other human being.Suppose we can copy a human spirit, and place that copied spirit on a computer.
In addition to this assumption, think that the PC is able to emulate a brain enough for the now copied brain to function properly.
One of the reasons it would be exciting is that it could mean that we don’t want to build a brain or AI from scratch.
Today, the harsh deconstruction technique of the brain will not necessarily run smoothly, nor will programming and coding necessarily produce the desired effects through AI, assimilated to human intelligence. for them This is the photocopier technique.
In other words, we focus on creating a synthetic brain that can harbor a human mind.
Don’t worry about how to create the component of the human spirit.Instead, look to create a repository, then let the copied brain do everything else for us.We replaced our focus on how to mimic one brain instead of another., emphasizing how to expand a brain or its equivalent.
Does this mean that we are going in the wrong direction lately and that we want to take some other fork, to build a shell to engage the human spirit rather than seek to create a human spirit from scratch?
Well, that’s a wild bet as to which direction you’re going.
Perhaps the mind of nothing is the most productive technique, or the brain-computer receptacle is the most productive technique or anything that combines the two, or neither of them.
No one can say for sure.
The twists and turns of the debate on the replicas of the human spirit
I’ll raise some provocative twists about it.
Suppose we can copy a human brain into a PC brain shell and produce a PC brain that works fully and correctly.
You can simply claim that the AI was nevertheless realized.
Some would cheat him.
Chances are it’s a trap in the sense that we wouldn’t necessarily know why the brain works and just makes a somewhat bly, completely copy of the brain from the source human brain.Purists who, as a component of the general purpose of AI, want to perceive how human intelligence develops.A massive copy of a spirit supposedly wouldn’t take us there.Of course, you can say without problems that if we discovered how to make the copy, we could also have analyzed the functioning of the brain, so it can be a double.
Another twist considers the abundant nature of the copy.
When you make a copy of your birth certificate at the photocopier store, you can make as many copies as you want without problems.If we can copy a human spirit, think that we ask Joe or Jane to let us copy their minds, and then raise it.to our convenient computer brain receptacle, then we made a copy and supposedly now an equivalent of Joe or Jane (in relation to his mind).
Maybe it would be great to make more copies.
Maybe we can just build a hundred of those brain receptacles and put Joe or Jane’s brain in them.
Why would we do that?
Imagine that Einstein is alive today and that we were able to copy his mind.If we made a hundred copies, some might claim that we would have a massive amount of brains to paint, which perhaps leads to new theories about physics and how the world works, far beyond what a singular Einstein might have discovered.
That’s the side.
The problem would be to make copies of a potentially evil or evil spirit, which helps me stay awake at night, imagining as a nightmare a hundred copies of a cowardly spirit that can be fed by waves of strength to locate tactics to absolutely rule or ruin humanity..
I do not need that.
Going back to the perception of copying through the brain, we can simply create an AI formula that is equivalent to human intelligence, a synthetic brain so to speak, and use it as a copy source.
Jesus, you say.
Yes, the implication is that we can do one of those things:
· Copying a human spirit into a human spirit
Copy a human brain into a PC brain receptacle and make the brain paints there
· Copying a “spiritual” AI into a human mind
· Copies a ‘spiritual’ AI into ‘spiritual’ AI
As long as I have those possibilities, there’s something else to consider.
In theory, each and every human being is unique in relation to their mind.
More than even the uniqueness of your fingerprint, your brain is a consistently tangled conglomerate of all your reports and brain.No other user on earth has had exactly the same reports and brain as you.Therefore, your brain is completely unique, at any given time.time, and entirely your living existence.
Now, I’m saying that this uniqueness necessarily makes a difference.
Scale how a user behaves; We can say that two other people are more or less equal.However, as far as we know, the detailed internal states of their brains and minds are really different.
Okay, we decided to copy Jane’s brain on Tuesday at nine o’clock in the morning; a moment later, his brain is now another than it was at the time of copying.And, for every moment, minute, hour, or day that passes, your brain continues to move further and further away from the copy that has been made.
By the way, we also assume that the copying act does not disturb or adjust the original.In the analogous case of the birth certificate, presumably, the birth certificate does not change the copying process.We don’t know that copying a human spirit can also simply think of the same thing, and possibly very well whether the action of copying into certain tactics adjusts or adjusts the mind, whether for smart or evil.
Since we are already in a country of theory, let us assume for now that the spirit you copy does not change.When we put Jane’s brain on some other human, the moment we do it, probably after that, the brain is not the same as Jane’s evolving brain, and the new Jane will necessarily be another spirit.The point here is that we don’t know that having a running copy will necessarily produce the same effects as the original brain that immediately deviates in other ways.
These hundred Einstein brains are becoming and possibly or possibly not converge in Einstein’s original, which is also becoming.
If we did this kind of human cloning, doing it in the mind and not in the bodies (although it would possibly also be on the to-do list), what rights would one’s minds have?
Would you say that these hundred Einsteins both gain human rights advantages and, therefore, can do the things that both one and the other are properly believed to be capable of doing?An undeniable example, can one and both vote in an election?
I also assume that your response may differ depending on the purpose of the mind.
When the target is human, it turns out you’d be willing to settle for this newly beaten brain human (although a copy), to retain his human rights., announcing human rights can be more difficult.
The moral implications are staggering, as are the legal ramifications.
There is no loose lunch in copying the mind.
AI spirits and self-driving cars
We can use authentic AI-powered self-driving cars as an example to think of those questions.
Real autonomous cars are the ones that the AI drives completely alone and there is no human assistance for the driving task.
These cars without driving force are considered grades four and 5, while a car that requires a human driving force for percentage driving effort is considered a point 2 or 3; cars that represent the percentage of the driving task are described as semi-autonomous and typically involve a variety of automated add-ons called Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS).
One still resolved question is whether the AI that can drive a car will necessarily want the same functions as complete human intelligence.Some argue that it is not obligatory to fully reproduce human intelligence in the “narrow” act of driving a car.In theory, AI does not want to live up to the aspirations of AI, now called Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), which is a reformulation of choice of AI nickname that brings us back to the AI’s number one goals.
If we don’t want the entire set of human intelligence to drive a car, it actually makes it easier to create an AI driving system, you sense that this doesn’t mean it’s easy, and just suggests it will require less than one.att that if we had to achieve all aspects of human intelligence.
Anyway, it’s very well classified as a shot at the moon (see my discussion in this link here).
Suppose that after the many billions of dollars that have been spent on autonomous driving, we are not in a position to achieve what would be deemed appropriate and conduct through AI.
So what?
Well, in theory, we can just check the technique of making an automatic brain receptacle and getting a human brain that we’d pour into that container.
Similar to how today there is a user who expressed the words he hears from an Alexa or Siri herbal language processing formula (NLP), believe it if we choose Joe or Jane as the key source of our autonomous AI car formulas.their minds, adding all their utilities and peculiarities, and unloaded them in an artificial intelligence driving formula that could probably now drive a car.
It would seem wise to make sure that Joe or Jane does not have an arrest warrant for unlawful conduct or a fine.In fact, we may need to locate a race car driving force as a human brain to copy, this possibly bites us as well, as the AI driving formula can also suddenly put the vehicle at the most sensitive speed and step on the accelerator (for my discussion on the functionality of the race car for AI driving formulas , see the link here).
Okay, this general concept of copying the brain for AI driving purposes is a bit of an exaggeration (for more details, see my previous policy of Elon Musk’s Neuralink company, at this link here).
Let’s go down a little bit.
A practical attention is that the AI driving formulas that are designed today are oriented towards a specific logo and style of a given car logo.”spirit” in the pejorative sense) in other cars.
I hope you can see that it’s the same kind of challenge about copying, much easier, to the end, and we’re not talking about the human brain in this case.
From the point of view of auto brands and developers of autonomous technologies, they will be happy, indeed ecstatic, when they can have an AI driving formula that is and works properly, while the portability factor in other cars is anything they say..is quite secondary and does not deserve exaggerated attention at this time.
Get the basics, discuss and about expansions later.
Conclusion
Throughout mankind’s lifestyles, there have been dreams and even genuine attempts at immortality.
For those who have already chosen to freeze their bodies and introduce a cryogenic state, some hope that when they wake up one day, diseases that plague their bodies will have new remedies and that they will have a healthy life again.it will be an elixir that will give them a long life and allow them in a awake state to live for many years.
Maybe one day we’ll have a mind.
Would anyone decide to be copied through the brain into some other human, or would it be placed in an automatic brain receptacle (perhaps accompanied through a robot body)?
But would this copy really be immortality, or just a copy and would not be offering the source spirit to live in itself?You can simply say that this is “trap” and not the true edition of immortality.
I guess we’ll deal with that riddle when that day comes.
Dr. Lance B.Eliot is a world-renowned expert in synthetic intelligence (AI) with over 3 million perspectives accumulated in his AI columns.As an experienced high-tech executive
Dr. Lance B.Eliot is a world-renowned synthetic intelligence (AI) expert with over 3 million perspectives accumulated in his AI columns.As an experienced executive and high-tech entrepreneur, it combines industry hands-on experience with in-depth educational studies to provide cutting-edge data on the long-term supply and long-term supply of AI and ML technologies and applications.Former USC and UCLA professor, and director of a pioneering AI lab, speaks at primary events in the AI industry.more than 40 books, 500 articles and two hundred podcasts, has appeared in media such as CNN and co-host of the popular radio show Technotrends, has served as an advisor to Congress and other legislative bodies and has won quite a few awards/accolades.He sits on several director forums, has worked as a venture capitalist, angel investor and mentor of marketing founders and startups.