Live data from Hacker News

A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

fortune.com

81–90 of 111 posts

Re: A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

#81
If you assume that your conscious experience is somehow arising from your neurons, then generating a set of those neurons that are genetically identical and cannot be distinguished in any way (except location in physical space, which is an ephemeral quality that doesn't appear to change neuron function), then we can assume we are creating, or will create, beings who are having conscious experience on some level.

On an ethical level, I think we need to understand whether we are creating thinking feeling creatures who will be doomed to suffer as data slaves before we normalize this. If I removed your brain from body, removing all sense pleasures, drowning you in darkness and isolation, and the only input and output you had were binary signals for some abstract data problem, you would experience profound silent suffering in an eternal private hell.

This truly would be the invention of the matrix, but not for an army of tyrannical robots / AI, but for the use of humans themselves -- a modern day slavery of the mental kind.

Re: A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

#83

> Currently, the company is working to get its mini-brains—which so far are approaching the processing power of a dragonfly brain—to play the old Atari arcade game Pong I'm surprised that no-one has discussed whether these systems could develop emergent qualia, and experience pain. No joke. Are there any ethical frameworks around this kind of research?

We are all machines. The idea that one type of machine or another cannot feel "pain" is simply a rationalization for human behavior that causes harm to other organisms, like hunting and fishing and killing wasps. Pain is a sensation that drives an animal to quickly react to injurious situations. Consider a robot made with Brooks's subsumption architecture [1]. The basal level of behavior drive of the robot is its sel…

Are you a robot?

If you are at all in doubt of your qualia, to quote Sam Harris (who has many entertaining podcasts on this topic with people far more qualified to speak on it than I am):

> Unfortunately, many experiences suck. And they don’t just suck as a matter of cultural convention or personal bias—they really and truly suck. (If you doubt this, place your hand on a hot stove and report back.)

https://twitter.com/SamHarrisOrg/status/951276362387591169

The twitter thread was about moral realism, but the topics are very much intertwined. If there is no imperative for anyone to do less harm to other creatures, why should anyone care if you are in pain?

And of course this argument extends to our treatment of animals too. Countless number of living, feeling animals, suffer for scientific progress (and cosmetics), let alone factory farming and wet markets. But at least there's light at the end of the tunnel for some of these concerns (lab meat, improved in-vivo testing)

Re: A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

#84

If you assume that your conscious experience is somehow arising from your neurons, then generating a set of those neurons that are genetically identical and cannot be distinguished in any way (except location in physical space, which is an ephemeral quality that doesn't appear to change neuron function), then we can assume we are creating, or will create, beings who are having conscious experience on some level. On a…

An artificial brain being fed a stream of bits will not necessarily feel like it's in an empty room processing an abstract data problem.

If we can create an AI with different goals and reward mechanisms, there is a potential that we could create agents that are experiencing bliss doing data processing tasks.

Of course how we tell the difference between a miserable agent and a joyous agent is still an open question ..

Re: A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

#85
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if that logic goes the other way. If we succeed in creating a being with intelligence equivalent to 100 humans, would experimenting on it be 100x as unethical as experimenting on humans?

As far as I am aware, intelligence is not the variable we care about with respect to ethical experimentation. Rather, consciousness. All humans are assumed equally conscious, while clearly not equally intelligent. Similarly, we understand (at least mammalian) brain structure well enough to identify animals like cows to probably have relatively minimal conscious lived experience, even if they have ample processing pow…

> Similarly, we understand (at least mammalian) brain structure well enough to identify animals like cows to probably have relatively minimal conscious lived experience, even if they have ample processing power, i.e. "intelligence".

Do you have any sources to back that up? As far as I'm aware, the 'hard problem of consciousness' is still 'hard'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness

Re: A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

#86
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are all machines. The idea that one type of machine or another cannot feel "pain" is simply a rationalization for human behavior that causes harm to other organisms, like hunting and fishing and killing wasps. Pain is a sensation that drives an animal to quickly react to injurious situations. Consider a robot made with Brooks's subsumption architecture [1]. The basal level of behavior drive of the robot is its sel…

Careful, or you might use a definition of pain too broad to be useful. Plants, single-celled organisms, thermostats, and anti-lock braking systems meet your use of the word. Almost all of us know what it means to be in pain. It’s the hard to put into words subjective experience of suffering that is worth making ethical decisions about, not the autonomous reflex that doesn’t come with conciousness-is-a-poor-word-but-I…

I disagree with the presented interpretation of pain as a concept. That's not the same as lacking an alternative word. Be careful not to make this discussion a semantic one.

I have no reason to believe that what a Roomba feels when it approaches a descending flight of stairs is any different in practice from what I feel when I approach a precipice. Our pathways are totally different, but ultimately there is a communication from our sensory organs to our processing architecture, where an ingrained drive toward self-preservation momentarily overrides other needs. In my case, I could call it "fear," or "anxiety," or "angst" if I'm feeling philosophical. In the Roomba's case, I have no knowledge of its subjective experience, but that doesn't mean that I should draw up a new word to construct a delineation between the Roomba and myself. We are both machines, and our response to the same situation is largely the same.

How useful is it to describe pain as a "subjective experience of suffering" when neither subjective experience, nor the feeling of suffering, is directly observable? (Also, I don't agree that pain and suffering are interchangeable concepts.)

A truly useful definition of "pain" would hold water without reliance on an anthropocentric tautology. I know what it feels like to slice my hand open while cutting tomatoes. That doesn't give me any power to understand what it feels like for an octopus to lose one of its arms, or for a tree to have its branches trimmed.

What's funny is that my way of considering "pain" is not even the most divergent from yours. Many Andean cultures believed that stones, rivers, and mountains have energy, thoughts, feelings, and souls. These ideas remain in the culture to this day.

What spurs an ABS to pulse the brake line pressure when the wheels begin to slip as the driver mashes on the brakes to avoid a collision? What spurs an ant to run away when it steps onto a hot radiator? What spurs a human to stop walking on a broken ankle? All of this is programmed in one way or another, all of it is self-preservation.

Re: A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

#87

If you assume that your conscious experience is somehow arising from your neurons, then generating a set of those neurons that are genetically identical and cannot be distinguished in any way (except location in physical space, which is an ephemeral quality that doesn't appear to change neuron function), then we can assume we are creating, or will create, beings who are having conscious experience on some level. On a…

An artificial brain being fed a stream of bits will not necessarily feel like it's in an empty room processing an abstract data problem. If we can create an AI with different goals and reward mechanisms, there is a potential that we could create agents that are experiencing bliss doing data processing tasks. Of course how we tell the difference between a miserable agent and a joyous agent is still an open question ..

“I leave Sisyphus at the foot of the mountain. One always finds one's burden again. But Sisyphus teaches the higher fidelity that negates the gods and raises rocks. He too concludes that all is well. This universe henceforth without a master seems to him neither sterile nor futile. Each atom of that stone, each mineral flake of that night-filled mountain, in itself, forms a world. The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

Albert Camus

Re: A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are all machines. The idea that one type of machine or another cannot feel "pain" is simply a rationalization for human behavior that causes harm to other organisms, like hunting and fishing and killing wasps. Pain is a sensation that drives an animal to quickly react to injurious situations. Consider a robot made with Brooks's subsumption architecture [1]. The basal level of behavior drive of the robot is its sel…

Are you a robot? If you are at all in doubt of your qualia, to quote Sam Harris (who has many entertaining podcasts on this topic with people far more qualified to speak on it than I am): > Unfortunately, many experiences suck. And they don’t just suck as a matter of cultural convention or personal bias—they really and truly suck. (If you doubt this, place your hand on a hot stove and report back.) https://twitter.co…

Do you believe that a robot cannot have qualia?

I am a collection of interconnected units, each of which is itself a combination of different organelles and other purpose-serving features. My intelligence is itself a product of the interaction of simple, unintelligent parts. So I would say that I am a machine. I would describe a robot as a man-made machine where the interaction of various silicon parts and processors gives rise to intelligence. By that definition, I am not a robot.

I believe that we don't feel pain when we are truly in trauma. It is only when we can do something about the damaging stimulus that we feel pain. I once had a major accident where I experienced lung collapse and multiple fractures. I never lost consciousness but I don't remember feeling any pain until well after others came to my aid. Even when I tried and failed to pick myself up off the ground, I did not feel pain, only disability and relief that my fingers and toes still moved.

I believe that the question of "what is pain" and the question of "is pain a good criterion for deciding whether it is acceptable to do harm to something" are two totally different philosophical problems. They are connected only insofar as we have chosen pain as a proxy for harm. But that very relationship between pain and harm indicates that pain is not just some kind of soulful feeling, but rather a signal to help us evade harm now or in the future.

Re: A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

#89

If you assume that your conscious experience is somehow arising from your neurons, then generating a set of those neurons that are genetically identical and cannot be distinguished in any way (except location in physical space, which is an ephemeral quality that doesn't appear to change neuron function), then we can assume we are creating, or will create, beings who are having conscious experience on some level. On a…

Agree, but I don't think biological neurons are the crux of the issue. I can't find the quote, but I believe from the book Echopraxia, the author discusses consciousness as a form of conflict resolution in regards to predictions about the self, an example of holding a hot pan despite the pain, knowing the consequence of letting go results in hunger. Or similar, the classic Jabberwocky example from Dune as a test of Paul's "humanity". But we can easily imitate these processes with machine learning even today, several projects involving the OpenAI gym have approached this. At what point do we believe these agents are conscious, and at what point do we shut them down?

Re: A startup is building computer chips using real neurons

#90
post #50

> Currently, the company is working to get its mini-brains—which so far are approaching the processing power of a dragonfly brain—to play the old Atari arcade game Pong I'm surprised that no-one has discussed whether these systems could develop emergent qualia, and experience pain. No joke. Are there any ethical frameworks around this kind of research?

> could develop emergent qualia If we were to admit there really is such thing as "qualia", there's not reason you wouldn't ask the same question about non-biological software or hardware systems... electronic hardware or biological hardware can have same computational qualities. But since OBJECTIVELY there's no such things as qualia (the concept only exist SUBJECTIVELY), it could only exist by definition for "a pers…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN