zlacker

>Imagine thinking that regression based function approximators are capable of anything other than fitting the data you give it.

Are you aware that you are an 80 billion neuron biological neural network?

>>logica+(OP)
And this is why I always hate how computer parts are named with biological terms.... a neural network's neuron doesn't share much with a human brain's neuron

Just like a CPU isn't "like your brain" and HDD "like your memories"

Absolutely nothing says our current approach is the right one to mimic a human brain

>>lm2846+N9
>a neural network's neuron doesn't share much with a human brain's neuron

What are the key differences?

>>lm2846+N9
The human brain works around a lot of limiting biological functions. The necessary architecture to fully mimic a human brain on a computer might not look anything like the actual human brain.

That said, there are 8B+ of us and counting so unless there is magic involved, I don't see why we couldn't do a "1:1" replica of it (maybe far) in the future.

>>lm2846+N9
> a neural network's neuron doesn't share much with a human brain's neuron

True, it's just binary logic gates, but it's a lot of them and if they can simulate pretty much anything why should intelligence be magically exempt?

> Absolutely nothing says our current approach is the right one to mimic a human brain

Just like nothing says it's the wrong one. I don't think those regulation suggestions are a good idea at all (and say a lot about a company called OpenAI), but that doesn't mean we should treat it like the NFT hype.

>>lm2846+N9
Internal differences do not necessary translate to conceptual differences. Combustion engine and electric engine do the same job despite operating on completely different internal principles. (Yes, it might not be a perfect an analogy, but it illustrates the point.)

>>logica+Jd
Nobody knows tbh.