A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
vcg.seas.harvard.edu
A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
1–10 of 43 posts
Re: A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
#2The dataset the paper uses: 1.4 petabyte browsable reconstruction of the human cortex - https://h01-release.storage.googleapis.com/landing.html
Re: A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
#3This is incredible work!
Re: A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
#4Amusing how they (minimally) protected the identity of the individual standing on a roller chair in the main illustration.
Re: A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
#5There was a story I read once where general AI was unobtainable but computing power continued so simulations of brains was done via processing brain slices. So every AI was just a person who had died with an intact brain that could be preserved. Self driving cars were a thing but it was someone’s grandma.
Re: A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
#6There was a story I read once where general AI was unobtainable but computing power continued so simulations of brains was done via processing brain slices. So every AI was just a person who had died with an intact brain that could be preserved. Self driving cars were a thing but it was someone’s grandma.
How is that different from general AI though?
Re: A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
#7Perhaps someone has been reading Anders Sandberg[1]?
1. https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/brain-emulation-roadmap-report.pdf
Re: A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
#8No post body was provided.
Re: A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
#9There was a story I read once where general AI was unobtainable but computing power continued so simulations of brains was done via processing brain slices. So every AI was just a person who had died with an intact brain that could be preserved. Self driving cars were a thing but it was someone’s grandma.
How is that different from general AI though?
General ai would be a unique mind. Simulation doesn't require engineers to understand the process, just that the process works. I can copy a mechanism without scientifically understanding what that mechanism is doing. I can follow a recipe or instructable or copy grandma's brain and have little to no understanding of what's really happening.
Then again, if you can copy a genius researcher and put a million of the minds to work on solving agi methodically, you don't need precision and understanding to start with. You just hope the million mind genius collective doesn't lie or mislead.
Re: A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex
#10There was a story I read once where general AI was unobtainable but computing power continued so simulations of brains was done via processing brain slices. So every AI was just a person who had died with an intact brain that could be preserved. Self driving cars were a thing but it was someone’s grandma.
How is that different from general AI though?
It would be General Intelligence but it's probably not Artificial General Intelligence in so much as the intelligence aspect wasn't designed and created. It also wouldn't be able to get smarter at the rate of singularity since its intelligence comes from using humans as raw material.