Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 208 posts

Re: A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

#61

Post by fluoridation »

idiotsecant wrote: post #60
fluoridation wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If life is physics and physics is an algorithm, it doesn't follow that an algorithm reproducing the physics of life contains life, even if we grant that it actually reproduces it completely and perfectly. That's just confusing the symbol for the thing.

If it reproduces it perfectly it's not a symbolic representation of the thing, it is the thing, by any definition that makes sense.

It's not the thing, because the thing is made of substance, not electronic impulses. No matter how hard you compute, you will never compute the simulation into a real, tangible object. The simulation and the real object are extremely, obviously distinguishable, even though they're structurally analogous.

If you could simulate a human perfectly, the simulated human would not be a human, it would be a simulated human. It's not a given that it would be subject to the same rules of ethics as real humans.

Re: A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

#62

Post by loa_in_ »

idiotsecant wrote: post #59
solid_fuel wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More than that, real neurons don’t behave anything like the ones we model in neural networks - real ones signal with pulses, in a manner where the timing seems as significant as the magnitude of the impulse. Typically simulated neural networks use continuous analog values instead of pulses and a sigmoid function to shape the output. Basically, the “wiring” might be the same but nothing beyond that is. - - - Actually,…

I feel like probably a graph of sigmoid or whatever weights of sufficient size can probably model a network of biological neurons signaling frequency and phase and magnitude.

It won't be confirmed until we record all the stimuli and outputs of a fruit fly's nervous system in normal environment.

Re: A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

#63

Post by randomImmigrant »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #15

I have no exposure to connectomes - or really anything quite like this (as opposed to good ol’ fashioned perceptrons) - so forgive my following uninformed question: Can someone explain if this software is ethical?

Yes. Because it’s a simulation of a living thing. It’s still electrons moving around silicon. It deserves the respect your MacBook does. Which is not nothing. But certainly not what’s due to a life.

Re: A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

#64

Post by mapontosevenths »

logicallee wrote: post #54
mapontosevenths wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty amazing stuff! I was very excited the first time I saw a connectome as well. Years ago I managed to get most of openworm running and connected to some Lego Mindstorms to let the worm roll around my house. I'm not even sure the connectome was finished at that time. Honestly, I barely had any idea what I was doing and we didn't have AI tools so I was never really sure what I wired to what. I did manage to h…

I can't imagine why people hate my comment so much (4 downvotes), when I linked an existing fruitfly project I already did, and Claude is working on what I wrote now, just as I wrote. Maybe people thought I was being sarcastic when I wrote "A connectome is like a full brain scan!" but I wrote that since maybe not everyone knows what a connectome means.

I'm only guessing, but I think it was because you seem optimistic about technology. Especially AI.

An increasing percentage of people view optimism, hope, or excitement as childish or worse. Anytime you focus on anything positive they leap from the shadows to dance on your joy. It must feel nice squishing between their miserable toes or something.

Still, I appreciate your enthusiasm and hope to see you build something really cool. The future will be made by the enthusiastic, and if they don't want to come along they can wait in the car. I bet they wear blue jeans to the beach.

Re: A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

#65

Post by peddling-brink »

fluoridation wrote: post #61
idiotsecant wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it reproduces it perfectly it's not a symbolic representation of the thing, it is the thing, by any definition that makes sense.

It's not the thing, because the thing is made of substance, not electronic impulses. No matter how hard you compute, you will never compute the simulation into a real, tangible object. The simulation and the real object are extremely, obviously distinguishable, even though they're structurally analogous. If you could simulate a human perfectly , the simulated human would not be a human, it would be a simulated human.…

Yikes. So because it can’t hit you back, you’re ok with it suffering?

Also relevant short story: https://qntm.org/mmacevedo

Re: A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

#66

Post by etienne89 »

dag11 wrote: post #49
a1o wrote: post #11

> What's modeled vs. measured > Honesty section: I wouldn’t mind an human written README

> runs as a 1 kHz leaky-integrate-and-fire (LIF) simulation That hyphenated thing is always such a give. Clearly a thing discussed in the Claude conversation, made its way into the plan, then the readme. It always creates hyphenated phrases out of things it feels are core requirements. I'm actually over caring about Claude's obsession with the concepts of "real", "honest", and "rather than". What annoys me the most n…

To be fair, as a term it has always been written as "Integrate-and-Fire" neuron model. In this case correct would be "Leaky Integrate-and-Fire" but that is nitpicking.

Resources that outdate ChatGPT: - W. Gerstner "Neuronal Dynamics" (2014): https://neuronaldynamics.epfl.ch/online/Ch1.S3.html - E. Izhikevich "Which model to use for cortical spiking neurons?" (2004): https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/1333071

Re: A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

#67

Post by fluoridation »

peddling-brink wrote: post #65
fluoridation wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the thing, because the thing is made of substance, not electronic impulses. No matter how hard you compute, you will never compute the simulation into a real, tangible object. The simulation and the real object are extremely, obviously distinguishable, even though they're structurally analogous. If you could simulate a human perfectly , the simulated human would not be a human, it would be a simulated human.…

Yikes. So because it can’t hit you back, you’re ok with it suffering? Also relevant short story: https://qntm.org/mmacevedo

I just said it's not a given. It's not immediately obvious.

EDIT: I prefer SOMA's take on it.

Re: A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

#68

Post by vincnetas »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #15

I have no exposure to connectomes - or really anything quite like this (as opposed to good ol’ fashioned perceptrons) - so forgive my following uninformed question: Can someone explain if this software is ethical?

Is ethics another tool in a power play game (religion being another) that people use to exert dominance over other people? No one expects of cat or pigeon to be ethical. But somehow humans sometimes get overloaded by external demand to think of gazillion things that might offend someone (sometimes unreasonable demands, or how it might get interpreted (sometimes incorrectly)) before acting.

Im not saying ethics is bad, but sometimes people bend to to extremes (same like spirituality or religion)

Re: A 3D fruit fly on macOS desktop powered by the real FlyWire connectome

#70

Post by reverius42 »

randomImmigrant wrote: post #63
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #15

I have no exposure to connectomes - or really anything quite like this (as opposed to good ol’ fashioned perceptrons) - so forgive my following uninformed question: Can someone explain if this software is ethical?

Yes. Because it’s a simulation of a living thing. It’s still electrons moving around silicon. It deserves the respect your MacBook does. Which is not nothing. But certainly not what’s due to a life.

A lot of people believe that this reality, in which we're conversing on HN, is also a simulation (thus making the fruit fly a simulation within a simulation).
Post reply on HN