Immortality: Uploading Human Mind to Computers?

[Wuwei]

Dude you have not been programming computers to behave like the human brain for 15 years as this is in it's infancy. You also said that the location of data meaning memories is unknown, and I corrected you by reminding you that memories are stored in the cerebellum or neo cortex. 0/1's are probably not the format of data storage in the human brain, though since the true mechanism remains elusive who knows. I believe that simulating the human brain in programming is merely a step to creating artificial life and that at some juncture silicon will become primitive as self replicating and self evolving computers will be the norm. At such time creating one for another planetary environment will also prove God and that we were actually created not only in his image but with his ability

You obviously don't know anything about associative memories. Here is a simple analogy you should be able to understand. Suppose you want to know a site where you can get information about Hopfield Nets. You simply don't know a URL or domain name to get you that information. That is what I meant when I said "The location of the data is unknown." However your web browser is the mechanism to associate the phrase "Hopfield Net" with the locations that have that do have that data.

You obviously don't know anything about artificial neural networks (ANN). Look up Artificial neural network in wikipedia. Look at the history. The first sentence is,
"Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts[3] (1943) opened the subject by creating a computational model for neural networks."
So yes, I have been working in the area for 15 years which really shouldn't surprise you since the field has existed and advanced for over 7 decades.
.

 

[esalla]

Dude you have not been programming computers to behave like the human brain for 15 years as this is in it's infancy. You also said that the location of data meaning memories is unknown, and I corrected you by reminding you that memories are stored in the cerebellum or neo cortex. 0/1's are probably not the format of data storage in the human brain, though since the true mechanism remains elusive who knows. I believe that simulating the human brain in programming is merely a step to creating artificial life and that at some juncture silicon will become primitive as self replicating and self evolving computers will be the norm. At such time creating one for another planetary environment will also prove God and that we were actually created not only in his image but with his ability

You obviously don't know anything about associative memories. Here is a simple analogy you should be able to understand. Suppose you want to know a site where you can get information about Hopfield Nets. You simply don't know a URL or domain name to get you that information. That is what I meant when I said "The location of the data is unknown." However your web browser is the mechanism to associate the phrase "Hopfield Net" with the locations that have that do have that data.

You obviously don't know anything about artificial neural networks (ANN). Look up Artificial neural network in wikipedia. Look at the history. The first sentence is,
"Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts[3] (1943) opened the subject by creating a computational model for neural networks."
So yes, I have been working in the area for 15 years which really shouldn't surprise you since the field has existed and advanced for over 7 decades.
.

I am not discussing associative memories, I am discussing replicating human like neural pathways in silicon based computing as a precursor step to true AI. Way over the head of a typical analyst in need of an analyst. Babbling about 1943 just shows how far behind the 8 ball that you are.

Are you a lazy history major which is why you consistently choose to dwell in the past instead of forging into the future? You seem to feel safe where you know the outcome which is what the past offers, the future on the other hand requires vision which you clearly lack

You still want to babble that quantum communication is impossible

Quantum Communication Could Make U.S. Subs Even More Deadly

More secure communication means a more effective nuclear deterrent.

www.popularmechanics.com

 

[Indeependent]

The ambitious mission of replicating the human brain onto a computer and achieving immortality.

Immortality: Uploading Human Mind to Computers?! - Scientific European SCIEU

Multiple research shows that we could well imagine a future where infinite number of humans can upload their minds to the computer thus......

www.scientificeuropean.co.uk

We can upset a personality to a computer?

 

[esalla]

The ambitious mission of replicating the human brain onto a computer and achieving immortality.

Immortality: Uploading Human Mind to Computers?! - Scientific European SCIEU

Multiple research shows that we could well imagine a future where infinite number of humans can upload their minds to the computer thus......

www.scientificeuropean.co.uk

We can upset a personality to a computer?

To some star trek fans

Sure no big deal

 

[Wuwei]

Dude you have not been programming computers to behave like the human brain for 15 years as this is in it's infancy. You also said that the location of data meaning memories is unknown, and I corrected you by reminding you that memories are stored in the cerebellum or neo cortex. 0/1's are probably not the format of data storage in the human brain, though since the true mechanism remains elusive who knows. I believe that simulating the human brain in programming is merely a step to creating artificial life and that at some juncture silicon will become primitive as self replicating and self evolving computers will be the norm. At such time creating one for another planetary environment will also prove God and that we were actually created not only in his image but with his ability

You obviously don't know anything about associative memories. Here is a simple analogy you should be able to understand. Suppose you want to know a site where you can get information about Hopfield Nets. You simply don't know a URL or domain name to get you that information. That is what I meant when I said "The location of the data is unknown." However your web browser is the mechanism to associate the phrase "Hopfield Net" with the locations that have that do have that data.

You obviously don't know anything about artificial neural networks (ANN). Look up Artificial neural network in wikipedia. Look at the history. The first sentence is,
"Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts[3] (1943) opened the subject by creating a computational model for neural networks."
So yes, I have been working in the area for 15 years which really shouldn't surprise you since the field has existed and advanced for over 7 decades.
.

I am not discussing associative memories, I am discussing replicating human like neural pathways in silicon based computing as a precursor step to true AI. Way over the head of a typical analyst in need of an analyst. Babbling about 1943 just shows how far behind the 8 ball that you are.

Are you a lazy history major which is why you consistently choose to dwell in the past instead of forging into the future? You seem to feel safe where you know the outcome which is what the past offers, the future on the other hand requires vision which you clearly lack

You still want to babble that quantum communication is impossible

Quantum Communication Could Make U.S. Subs Even More Deadly

More secure communication means a more effective nuclear deterrent.

www.popularmechanics.com

You seem to try hard to be an asshole. I see you are just being a troll and pretending not to understand anything. You said that computational NNs were new. I just showed you just how old a science it is. Yes there have been new developments and there will always be. As I said before your dreams are cheap. It is the manifestations of dreams that have any worth. I have been on the latter track for 15 years and on the forefront of advanced NNs for high speed industrial assembly line applications that sold many thousands of units. You have nothing but cheap dreams.

RE. Quantum communication, QC. You are lying and you know it.
You said QC is faster than light speed.
I said QC is at light speed and is useful for unhackable communication.
.

 

[JoeMoma]

In a Star Trek TNG episode, a scientist with a terminal illness uploaded his mind into Data's positronic brain. That was almost the end of Data, but the scientist was later convinced to transfer his mind back to his dying body before Data's consciousness was completely overwhelmed.

The character Data from the next generation is a literary creation not based in fact. The writers disguise this by using the terminology from seemingly relevant theoretical/scientific principals

Its called science fiction for a reason. Thank you Captain Obvious.

 

[Unkotare]

The ambitious mission of replicating the human brain onto a computer and achieving immortality.

Immortality: Uploading Human Mind to Computers?! - Scientific European SCIEU

Multiple research shows that we could well imagine a future where infinite number of humans can upload their minds to the computer thus......

www.scientificeuropean.co.uk

You could achieve that with jitler without even plugging in the computer.

 

[esalla]

Dude you have not been programming computers to behave like the human brain for 15 years as this is in it's infancy. You also said that the location of data meaning memories is unknown, and I corrected you by reminding you that memories are stored in the cerebellum or neo cortex. 0/1's are probably not the format of data storage in the human brain, though since the true mechanism remains elusive who knows. I believe that simulating the human brain in programming is merely a step to creating artificial life and that at some juncture silicon will become primitive as self replicating and self evolving computers will be the norm. At such time creating one for another planetary environment will also prove God and that we were actually created not only in his image but with his ability

You obviously don't know anything about associative memories. Here is a simple analogy you should be able to understand. Suppose you want to know a site where you can get information about Hopfield Nets. You simply don't know a URL or domain name to get you that information. That is what I meant when I said "The location of the data is unknown." However your web browser is the mechanism to associate the phrase "Hopfield Net" with the locations that have that do have that data.

You obviously don't know anything about artificial neural networks (ANN). Look up Artificial neural network in wikipedia. Look at the history. The first sentence is,
"Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts[3] (1943) opened the subject by creating a computational model for neural networks."
So yes, I have been working in the area for 15 years which really shouldn't surprise you since the field has existed and advanced for over 7 decades.
.

I am not discussing associative memories, I am discussing replicating human like neural pathways in silicon based computing as a precursor step to true AI. Way over the head of a typical analyst in need of an analyst. Babbling about 1943 just shows how far behind the 8 ball that you are.

Are you a lazy history major which is why you consistently choose to dwell in the past instead of forging into the future? You seem to feel safe where you know the outcome which is what the past offers, the future on the other hand requires vision which you clearly lack

You still want to babble that quantum communication is impossible

Quantum Communication Could Make U.S. Subs Even More Deadly

More secure communication means a more effective nuclear deterrent.

www.popularmechanics.com

You seem to try hard to be an asshole. I see you are just being a troll and pretending not to understand anything. You said that computational NNs were new. I just showed you just how old a science it is. Yes there have been new developments and there will always be. As I said before your dreams are cheap. It is the manifestations of dreams that have any worth. I have been on the latter track for 15 years and on the forefront of advanced NNs for high speed industrial assembly line applications that sold many thousands of units. You have nothing but cheap dreams.

RE. Quantum communication, QC. You are lying and you know it.
You said QC is faster than light speed.
I said QC is at light speed and is useful for unhackable communication.
.

I said that neural networks attempting to replicate human neural pathways are relatively new and are currently one avenue into true AI research.

However you are babbling that researchers were doing computer programming in 1943 replicating the human mind on mechanical computers that were only several vacuum tubes in complexity if that which only confirms that you are totally and I do mean completely out of your area of comfort.

You said that quantum entanglement could never be used for communication, and referenced links saying just this, well these links are still there but they are just wrong. So in short the US Navy is now experimenting with quantum communications that you said were impossible.

Look sarge, nobody wins here, except for me, just accept your defeat and move on, I have beaten the 40 FBI agents with 80 or 90 degrees between them that came before you..............

Now as for entanglement being either instant, which is faster than light as light has a measurable speed and instant does not, I can only attest to what the researchers in the field are saying which details instant to 10,000 times light speed. I can not verify this because both these speeds are faster than I can be which clearly defies physics as it is currently known.

Until I get an entanglement rig that is

 

[Wuwei]

Dude you have not been programming computers to behave like the human brain for 15 years as this is in it's infancy. You also said that the location of data meaning memories is unknown, and I corrected you by reminding you that memories are stored in the cerebellum or neo cortex. 0/1's are probably not the format of data storage in the human brain, though since the true mechanism remains elusive who knows. I believe that simulating the human brain in programming is merely a step to creating artificial life and that at some juncture silicon will become primitive as self replicating and self evolving computers will be the norm. At such time creating one for another planetary environment will also prove God and that we were actually created not only in his image but with his ability

You obviously don't know anything about associative memories. Here is a simple analogy you should be able to understand. Suppose you want to know a site where you can get information about Hopfield Nets. You simply don't know a URL or domain name to get you that information. That is what I meant when I said "The location of the data is unknown." However your web browser is the mechanism to associate the phrase "Hopfield Net" with the locations that have that do have that data.

You obviously don't know anything about artificial neural networks (ANN). Look up Artificial neural network in wikipedia. Look at the history. The first sentence is,
"Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts[3] (1943) opened the subject by creating a computational model for neural networks."
So yes, I have been working in the area for 15 years which really shouldn't surprise you since the field has existed and advanced for over 7 decades.
.

I am not discussing associative memories, I am discussing replicating human like neural pathways in silicon based computing as a precursor step to true AI. Way over the head of a typical analyst in need of an analyst. Babbling about 1943 just shows how far behind the 8 ball that you are.

Are you a lazy history major which is why you consistently choose to dwell in the past instead of forging into the future? You seem to feel safe where you know the outcome which is what the past offers, the future on the other hand requires vision which you clearly lack

You still want to babble that quantum communication is impossible

Quantum Communication Could Make U.S. Subs Even More Deadly

More secure communication means a more effective nuclear deterrent.

www.popularmechanics.com

You seem to try hard to be an asshole. I see you are just being a troll and pretending not to understand anything. You said that computational NNs were new. I just showed you just how old a science it is. Yes there have been new developments and there will always be. As I said before your dreams are cheap. It is the manifestations of dreams that have any worth. I have been on the latter track for 15 years and on the forefront of advanced NNs for high speed industrial assembly line applications that sold many thousands of units. You have nothing but cheap dreams.

RE. Quantum communication, QC. You are lying and you know it.
You said QC is faster than light speed.
I said QC is at light speed and is useful for unhackable communication.
.

I said that neural networks attempting to replicate human neural pathways are relatively new and are currently one avenue into true AI research.

However you are babbling that researchers were doing computer programming in 1943 replicating the human mind on mechanical computers that were only several vacuum tubes in complexity if that which only confirms that you are totally and I do mean completely out of your area of comfort.

You said that quantum entanglement could never be used for communication, and referenced links saying just this, well these links are still there but they are just wrong. So in short the US Navy is now experimenting with quantum communications that you said were impossible.

Look sarge, nobody wins here, except for me, just accept your defeat and move on, I have beaten the 40 FBI agents with 80 or 90 degrees between them that came before you..............

Now as for entanglement being either instant, which is faster than light as light has a measurable speed and instant does not, I can only attest to what the researchers in the field are saying which details instant to 10,000 times light speed. I can not verify this because both these speeds are faster than I can be which clearly defies physics as it is currently known.

Until I get an entanglement rig that is

"I said that neural networks attempting to replicate human neural pathways are relatively new and are currently one avenue into true AI research."
Not relatively new. Computer representations of a large array of interconnected neurons (ANN) has been around for decades and operate on the factory floor in fractions of a second.

Some relatively new research involves simulating the entire wet chemistry of Na and K ions and action potentials in a single neural cell. Of course this is physiologically valuable but using that mechanism for a full network of thousands of neurons is awkward and unnecessary.

You are confusing those two areas of research.

Since you think communication by entanglement is instant, outline a method for using entanglement to instantly send a simple message across the galaxy where particle spin up means "yes" and particle spin down means "no". Suppose you want to send the message "yes". What would the apparatus at each end look like?
.

 

[luchitociencia]

In the future cemeteries will be places filled with hills of computers and not a single electric outlet in miles around.

That is how far "immortality" will reach.

 

[Wuwei]

In the future cemeteries will be places filled with hills of computers and not a single electric outlet in miles around.

That is how far "immortality" will reach.

LOL That will happen to Windows 299 users when their system is upgraded to Windows 300.

 

[Mindful]

In the future cemeteries will be places filled with hills of computers and not a single electric outlet in miles around.

That is how far "immortality" will reach.

LOL That will happen to Windows 299 users when their system is upgraded to Windows 300.

So when we are robots, we’ll have to go around plugging ourselves in?

The upgrades should prove interesting.

And when the power goes off?

 

[Wuwei]

In the future cemeteries will be places filled with hills of computers and not a single electric outlet in miles around.

That is how far "immortality" will reach.

LOL That will happen to Windows 299 users when their system is upgraded to Windows 300.

So when we are robots, we’ll have to go around plugging ourselves in?

The upgrades should prove interesting.

And when the power goes off?

Actually evolution of robots would happen at a rapid pace. There would be new models that replace old models. There would be two races of robots: Appleoids, and Windowoids. There may even be wars between the two for world dominance. Viruses will be a threat to both species.

Pretty much what carbon-based life is now.
.

 

[Mindful]

In the future cemeteries will be places filled with hills of computers and not a single electric outlet in miles around.

That is how far "immortality" will reach.

LOL That will happen to Windows 299 users when their system is upgraded to Windows 300.

So when we are robots, we’ll have to go around plugging ourselves in?

The upgrades should prove interesting.

And when the power goes off?

Actually evolution of robots would happen at a rapid pace. There would be new models that replace old models. There would be two races of robots: Appleoids, and Windowoids. There may even be wars between the two for world dominance. Viruses will be a threat to both species.

Pretty much what carbon-based life is now.
.

As long as my mind is intact. I don’t want to lose it.

 

[esalla]

Dude you have not been programming computers to behave like the human brain for 15 years as this is in it's infancy. You also said that the location of data meaning memories is unknown, and I corrected you by reminding you that memories are stored in the cerebellum or neo cortex. 0/1's are probably not the format of data storage in the human brain, though since the true mechanism remains elusive who knows. I believe that simulating the human brain in programming is merely a step to creating artificial life and that at some juncture silicon will become primitive as self replicating and self evolving computers will be the norm. At such time creating one for another planetary environment will also prove God and that we were actually created not only in his image but with his ability

You obviously don't know anything about associative memories. Here is a simple analogy you should be able to understand. Suppose you want to know a site where you can get information about Hopfield Nets. You simply don't know a URL or domain name to get you that information. That is what I meant when I said "The location of the data is unknown." However your web browser is the mechanism to associate the phrase "Hopfield Net" with the locations that have that do have that data.

You obviously don't know anything about artificial neural networks (ANN). Look up Artificial neural network in wikipedia. Look at the history. The first sentence is,
"Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts[3] (1943) opened the subject by creating a computational model for neural networks."
So yes, I have been working in the area for 15 years which really shouldn't surprise you since the field has existed and advanced for over 7 decades.
.

I am not discussing associative memories, I am discussing replicating human like neural pathways in silicon based computing as a precursor step to true AI. Way over the head of a typical analyst in need of an analyst. Babbling about 1943 just shows how far behind the 8 ball that you are.

Are you a lazy history major which is why you consistently choose to dwell in the past instead of forging into the future? You seem to feel safe where you know the outcome which is what the past offers, the future on the other hand requires vision which you clearly lack

You still want to babble that quantum communication is impossible

Quantum Communication Could Make U.S. Subs Even More Deadly

More secure communication means a more effective nuclear deterrent.

www.popularmechanics.com

You seem to try hard to be an asshole. I see you are just being a troll and pretending not to understand anything. You said that computational NNs were new. I just showed you just how old a science it is. Yes there have been new developments and there will always be. As I said before your dreams are cheap. It is the manifestations of dreams that have any worth. I have been on the latter track for 15 years and on the forefront of advanced NNs for high speed industrial assembly line applications that sold many thousands of units. You have nothing but cheap dreams.

RE. Quantum communication, QC. You are lying and you know it.
You said QC is faster than light speed.
I said QC is at light speed and is useful for unhackable communication.
.

I said that neural networks attempting to replicate human neural pathways are relatively new and are currently one avenue into true AI research.

However you are babbling that researchers were doing computer programming in 1943 replicating the human mind on mechanical computers that were only several vacuum tubes in complexity if that which only confirms that you are totally and I do mean completely out of your area of comfort.

You said that quantum entanglement could never be used for communication, and referenced links saying just this, well these links are still there but they are just wrong. So in short the US Navy is now experimenting with quantum communications that you said were impossible.

Look sarge, nobody wins here, except for me, just accept your defeat and move on, I have beaten the 40 FBI agents with 80 or 90 degrees between them that came before you..............

Now as for entanglement being either instant, which is faster than light as light has a measurable speed and instant does not, I can only attest to what the researchers in the field are saying which details instant to 10,000 times light speed. I can not verify this because both these speeds are faster than I can be which clearly defies physics as it is currently known.

Until I get an entanglement rig that is

"I said that neural networks attempting to replicate human neural pathways are relatively new and are currently one avenue into true AI research."
Not relatively new. Computer representations of a large array of interconnected neurons (ANN) has been around for decades and operate on the factory floor in fractions of a second.

Some relatively new research involves simulating the entire wet chemistry of Na and K ions and action potentials in a single neural cell. Of course this is physiologically valuable but using that mechanism for a full network of thousands of neurons is awkward and unnecessary.

You are confusing those two areas of research.

Since you think communication by entanglement is instant, outline a method for using entanglement to instantly send a simple message across the galaxy where particle spin up means "yes" and particle spin down means "no". Suppose you want to send the message "yes". What would the apparatus at each end look like?
.

I am not confusing any area of research, you are actually babbling that computers have been running neural networks for decades which means that you are

1. Not aware that neurons are biological not manmade computer parts or software
2. Unaware that researchers are currently trying to reproduce human neural pathways with software for a variety of reasons including AI

However I suppose there is a need for small thinkers like you

Continue being small, I will handle the big issues

 

[Wuwei]

I am not confusing any area of research, you are actually babbling that computers have been running neural networks for decades which means that you are

1. Not aware that neurons are biological not manmade computer parts or software
2. Unaware that researchers are currently trying to reproduce human neural pathways with software for a variety of reasons including AI

However I suppose there is a need for small thinkers like you

Continue being small, I will handle the big issues

You are indeed confused. You apparently have no idea of what is happening in high tech companies with ANN applications in medicine, visual feedback for robots, and games like Go and Chess. Many niche applications of ANN outpace humans.

Yes, you go handle your "big issues" of armchair small cheap obvious dreams while others are making it happen unbeknownst to you.
.

 

[22lcidw]

The ambitious mission of replicating the human brain onto a computer and achieving immortality.

Immortality: Uploading Human Mind to Computers?! - Scientific European SCIEU

Multiple research shows that we could well imagine a future where infinite number of humans can upload their minds to the computer thus......

www.scientificeuropean.co.uk

You or your mind wouldn't be immortal. A copy of your mind would be.

Think of it as cloning. If I got a clone and die the next day, I would still be dead but my clone would be alive. I think that's an important distinction.

Excellent point. Our clones would be as children to us and therefore we'd achieve immortality. Their children will also be machines and humanity will have become immortals.

Would that mean in a true sense that our posterity will be to ourselves?

 

[alang1216]

The ambitious mission of replicating the human brain onto a computer and achieving immortality.

Immortality: Uploading Human Mind to Computers?! - Scientific European SCIEU

Multiple research shows that we could well imagine a future where infinite number of humans can upload their minds to the computer thus......

www.scientificeuropean.co.uk

You or your mind wouldn't be immortal. A copy of your mind would be.

Think of it as cloning. If I got a clone and die the next day, I would still be dead but my clone would be alive. I think that's an important distinction.

Excellent point. Our clones would be as children to us and therefore we'd achieve immortality. Their children will also be machines and humanity will have become immortals.

Would that mean in a true sense that our posterity will be to ourselves?

Not sure what you're asking. Our children would likely not be organic (no need to worry about any virus) and may 'grow' up at a very accelerated rate. Like everything humans do, it will be both good and bad. I'm optimistic.

 

[esalla]

I am not confusing any area of research, you are actually babbling that computers have been running neural networks for decades which means that you are

1. Not aware that neurons are biological not manmade computer parts or software
2. Unaware that researchers are currently trying to reproduce human neural pathways with software for a variety of reasons including AI

However I suppose there is a need for small thinkers like you

Continue being small, I will handle the big issues

You are indeed confused. You apparently have no idea of what is happening in high tech companies with ANN applications in medicine, visual feedback for robots, and games like Go and Chess. Many niche applications of ANN outpace humans.

Yes, you go handle your "big issues" of armchair small cheap obvious dreams while others are making it happen unbeknownst to you.
.

LOL, you say that I do not know, but forget to actually mention anything that I do not know that you do and oddly enough you can't even search the internet better than I can.....................while sleeping

I understand your problem however which is that you believe that AI already exist and that it has for a long time because for one software designers tell you that AI is here now to strip you of your cash, and that it is easy for the simple minded to not truly comprehend that all computers do is run pre-executed programs written in binary. At some point it will be advantageous to combine binary and molecular quad code allowing one to direct a silicon system by neural thought processes. So the neural network that I am referencing is the advanced one between my ears where you store wontons.

PS. Please do not eat the bats, or the monkeys and stop cooking living dogs.

 

[Wuwei]

LOL, you say that I do not know, but forget to actually mention anything that I do not know that you do and oddly enough you can't even search the internet better than I can.....................while sleeping

I understand your problem however which is that you believe that AI already exist and that it has for a long time because for one software designers tell you that AI is here now to strip you of your cash, and that it is easy for the simple minded to not truly comprehend that all computers do is run pre-executed programs written in binary. At some point it will be advantageous to combine binary and molecular quad code allowing one to direct a silicon system by neural thought processes. So the neural network that I am referencing is the advanced one between my ears where you store wontons.

PS. Please do not eat the bats, or the monkeys and stop cooking living dogs.

So that is that all you have left: armchair blather, callow insults, a total ignorance of what AI is, and how successful it has been. Pardon me but your id is showing.

Your insults are becoming a bit stale. You have even lost your ability for creative insults. C'mon ramp it up it will be good to get it off your chest so you don't come down with stress related diseases.

You are dumbfounded and ignored my previous question. Here it is again.
Since you think communication by entanglement is instant, outline a method for using entanglement to instantly send a simple message across the galaxy where particle spin up means "yes" and particle spin down means "no". Suppose you want to send the message "yes". What would the apparatus at each end look like?