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

I'm scared about biological computing

kuber.studio

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 271 posts

Re: I'm scared about biological computing

#211

Post by peddling-brink »

noosphr wrote: post #127
pjs_ wrote: post #25

Be careful about how you interpret that paper. It looks really impressive -- real neurons in a petri dish seem to successfully (if amateurishly) murk a few imps. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRV8fSw6HaE But there's more to the setup than you might assume from a casual reading. Here's the code used for that demo: https://github.com/SeanCole02/doom-neuron So there is an entire pytorch stack wrapped around the myster…

All opinions are my own: The whole point of the CNNs is to act like a auto encoder for input and an auto decoder for output. The only reason why this is done in the first place is because the number of electrodes in the dish is pitiful and has no chance of describing something as complex as Doom. They are there to create a latent space that can be fed through 60 odd electrodes and decode the neuron latent space into…

> What I wanted to do after dish brain pong, but never had the budget for, was using live animals as the computational substrate.

This is horrific. What’s your end goal? Prisoners as data centers?

I hope you rethink this.

Re: I'm scared about biological computing

#212

Post by cindyllm »

constantius wrote: post #209
noosphr wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All opinions are my own: The whole point of the CNNs is to act like a auto encoder for input and an auto decoder for output. The only reason why this is done in the first place is because the number of electrodes in the dish is pitiful and has no chance of describing something as complex as Doom. They are there to create a latent space that can be fed through 60 odd electrodes and decode the neuron latent space into…

> What I wanted to do after dish brain pong, but never had the budget for, was using live animals Torture, so casually mentioned. For what, I wonder.

[dead]

Re: I'm scared about biological computing

#213

Post by iljsdfiljasdf »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #122
philips wrote: post #2

I think this is the same ethical questions of veganism and our use/abuse of biological systems. This is an excerpt from "The Pig that Wants to be Eaten" by Julian Baggini > After forty years of vegetarianism, Max Berger was about to sit down to a feast of pork sausages, crispy bacon and pan-fried chicken breast. Max had always missed the taste of meat, but his principles were stronger than his culinary cravings. But…

At the end of the day vegans play the same game as meat eaters where some line is drawn. For meat eaters it is with livestock meats and for pescatarians that is no go, but fish are alright. And for vegans that is all off limits. Except of course the life we deem base enough to not care it is being eaten alive. Slaughter all the lettuce you want. There are no lettuce advocates. All this to say the moral arguments are…

[dead]

Re: I'm scared about biological computing

#214

Post by iljsdfiljasdf »

slibhb wrote: post #143
Tharre wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLMs still do not pass the turing test as it is commonly understood. Ask the right questions, and it becomes apparent very quickly which party is the machine and which is the human. Hell, there are enough people on here that can probably tell them apart just from the way that LLMs write. But it's also easy to argue that LLMs do pass the turing test just because it's so vague. How many questions can I ask? What's the…

> LLMs still do not pass the turing test as it is commonly understood. Ask the right questions, and it becomes apparent very quickly which party is the machine and which is the human. Hell, there are enough people on here that can probably tell them apart just from the way that LLMs write. LLMs obviously would pass a Turing test if they were designed to. But they aren't, they don't hide the fact that they're LLMs.

[dead]

Re: I'm scared about biological computing

#215

Post by iljsdfiljasdf »

maybewhenthesun wrote: post #199
slibhb wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we eventually (we're not there yet, I think) create a true intelligent AI it will probably be a long time before people will accept that creating an intelligent being probably means it should have 'rights' as well. In my view, the best LLMs clearly pass the bar for intelligence. I highly doubt they have consciousness. So the revelation of LLMs is that consciousness is not necessary for intelligence.

But how do you know it's not conscious? It's a very poorly defined concept. I know various people that to this day say that fish do not feel pain (because they want to catch them with a hook through their mouth without feeling guilty). That seems a ridiculous notion to me, as pain is extremely evolutionary useful and a fish displays all sorts of pain-like behaviour when hooked. But still, since we can't really look i…

[dead]

Re: I'm scared about biological computing

#216

Post by iljsdfiljasdf »

zelon88 wrote: post #161

Biological computers are inevitable. We are the most compelling proof of concept of this that we have. Our entire civilization may be a prototype of one already. From my perspective, I belive things will happen in the following order; 1. AI will eventually take over all silicon chip design. Human designs pale in comparison. Moores Law, which currently indicates that humans are reaching the practical limitations of th…

[dead]

Re: I'm scared about biological computing

#218

Post by constantius »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #122
philips wrote: post #2

I think this is the same ethical questions of veganism and our use/abuse of biological systems. This is an excerpt from "The Pig that Wants to be Eaten" by Julian Baggini > After forty years of vegetarianism, Max Berger was about to sit down to a feast of pork sausages, crispy bacon and pan-fried chicken breast. Max had always missed the taste of meat, but his principles were stronger than his culinary cravings. But…

At the end of the day vegans play the same game as meat eaters where some line is drawn. For meat eaters it is with livestock meats and for pescatarians that is no go, but fish are alright. And for vegans that is all off limits. Except of course the life we deem base enough to not care it is being eaten alive. Slaughter all the lettuce you want. There are no lettuce advocates. All this to say the moral arguments are…

Your mental hoops being on full display doesn't make them true. Nothing new or profound in these arguments and analogies, and stating them with this pretend wise tone just sounds childish.

Re: I'm scared about biological computing

#219

Post by asklfjnasfas »

subscribed wrote: post #28
kuboble wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If ai running on silicon can be conscious - does it imply that the same calculation done by a human with pen and paper is also conscious?

Your brain is a network. How does your entangled fatty tissue achieved consciousness? I think that until we can answer this question in the authoritative way ruling out non-brain based consciousness concept is not particularly well thought thought - after all plants exhibit communication and response mechanisms that are similar to those in animals - without brain. So what's your theory of consciousness and how does i…

[dead]

Re: I'm scared about biological computing

#220

Post by asklfjnasfas »

adamsmark wrote: post #133
0dayz wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK vegans base their argument on the degree of consciousness a living being had and compromise on the least evil. Most meat eaters base it on closeness to said living thing. It'll be interesting to see if the veganism movement survives lab grown meat that is ethically produced.

It wouldn't continue in any real form. Maybe cholesterol conscious and devout buddhists will still try to adhere, but beyond that I don't see what the point would be. It would be like how Ozempic lead to a mysterious quieting of Body Positivity/Health at Every Size advocates. They were a vocal minority, there was much "debate" and cri de couer from many sides and now its all evaporated without a farewell or explicit…

[dead]
Post reply on HN