<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Eugen Leitl wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:20110629210654.GC26837@leitl.org" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 02:52:43PM -0400, Richard Loosemore wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Eugen Leitl wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">It currently takes a Blue Gene to (poorly) model a very crude model
of a cortical column. Not exactly in realtime.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Ack! :-) You continue to flatly misunderstand. Blue Gene does not
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I hear that pretty often.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">simulate the functionality of a cortical column, because that
functionality is not known at the present time. It tries to simulate
the functionality at around the neuron/synapse level.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Of course; because if you plug in digitized neuroanatomy into
a sufficiently low level of theory the resulting behaviour will
contain all the upper layers by way of emergence. So you can inspect
the simulation to obtain the unknown unknowns.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">an AGI could very well be built using something within an order of
magnitude of a current PC.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Can I see a realtime model of your cortical column on a PC?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">No! But only because it is proprietary. And I think this request was
based on the same misunderstanding I just explained, so if you saw the
model you would not know it for what it was. You seem to think that
you would get from me a model at the neural level. That is not the
case, because I am modeling (what I believe to be) the functionality.
Big difference.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
So you say that you choose to simulate the functionality you don't
know at a level of theory you don't know to be sufficient. And you
can't tell us anything about that, orelse you'd have to kill us.
Sorry, that's enough of known unknowns out there already.
</pre>
</blockquote>
I'm really tired of the sarcasm and silliness.<br>
<br>
This has become a waste of my time.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Richard Loosemore<br>
<br>
P.S. In case you take that as an implicit acceptance of your
provocative distortions, be aware that you can read about my program of
research in my papers and in many post on the AGI list and elsewhere.<br>
</body>
</html>