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

101–110 of 208 posts

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

#101

Post by mock-possum »

SamBam wrote: post #48
jasonjayr wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to drop any spoilers (hide this comment before reading further ....) But "The Amazing Digital Circus" explores this concept relating to human brain scans, and how the 'simulated' brains would react under simulation.

Similarly, the story Lena by qntm.[1] It describes in part how some volunteer brain scans are actually quite agreeable to work with until they work for too many hours, and then they get fussy, but it's cool, you can always reboot them. But you need to hide from them the fact that it's been decades since they were scanned and uploaded, or they'll realize how long they've been slaves for. 1. https://qntm.org/mmacevedo

and both Black Mirror and Westworld explore these same ‘what-if’s’ in turn.

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

#102

Post by shaky-carrousel »

invalidusernam3 wrote: post #100
sgt wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you seriously suggesting that we should have empathy for ... fruit flies? Speechless

Why would you choose not to have empathy for a living creature?

Because lice are also living creatures. And I have no empathy for them, and hopefully never will.

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

#103

Post by fluoridation »

darkwater wrote: post #98
fluoridation wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're answering a different question, which is "why do humans empathize with non-humans?" Humans can empathize with inanimate objects and with fictional people. The question of the origin of empathy really has nothing to do with what I asked.

I think I do answered your question but maybe it was too implicit, so let me be more explicit. A human should have moral responsibility towards non-humans because of empathy and recognizing the fact that other animals are alive as well.

Bacteria are alive too, and I'm going to guess you don't claim we have a moral responsibility to them. And as I said, humans can feel empathy for things that are not alive. The capacity to feel empathy rests entirely on the empathizer, and has nothing to do with any intrinsic properties of the empathizee. Is a psychopathic murderer morally in the right because he doesn't feel any empathy for his victims?

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

#104

Post by egorfine »

a1o wrote: post #11

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

Honestly? I don't even know how to write anymore. Generative text is unequivocally nice, polished and correct. And it so happens that I do write in the same style as well. I never use LLMs to write human content, but here we are: I cannot use "honestly" anymore. And the emdash. Thank God we got "delve" back, though.

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

#105

Post by DonHopkins »

dekhn wrote: post #29

It's weird to write MacOS specific software in this era.

You've curiously left out which platform it's not weird to write software for.

Is there only one platform that's not weird, or is MacOS the only weird platform?

Some of the best platforms and software are weird. Get over it.

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

#106

Post by spuz »

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 didn't downvote it but I imagine it's because your comment comes across as manic rambling. You managed to say "it will run in the browser" three times - once is enough. I'd recommend writing out your entire comment then deleting it an rewriting it to be more concise. No we don't expect literature in HN comments but good writing is a courtesy to your readers.

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

#109

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

logicallee wrote: post #57
twothreeone wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, one obvious question is if the simulated brain experiences pain, or more generally can it suffer? And if so, how would we tell.

I've ported it to the browser and connected a squash functionality behind an ethical guardrail (you have to lift a cover to engage this functionality). need to iterate on the ui but will share it soon. you can squash the bug and cause it real pain. it also sees you if you turn your camera on and reacts to your movements. this is all wired up and I'll post it shortly.

I can’t tell if you’re a talented comedian - or if you should be assessed for sociopathy.

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

#110

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

hellohello2 wrote: post #43
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 I can, no problem. First figure out how consciousness works and tell me, then I'll be able to explain if the software is ethical or not. Its simple really.

As we don’t know yet, it has to be determined by the balance of probabilities; but even if the weight of evidence leads us to conclude that-there’s-no-consciousness going on when you run this, there’s still going to be a chance of us being wrong, let’s say 10%… Is the utility (…or entertainment value) of this program worth a 10% chance that we confidently, yet unwittingly, create perhaps the most cruellest machine it’s ever possible to make, and then have to live with ourselves?
Post reply on HN