SynthNet is at an early stage, but right now, it can emulate a classic fear-conditioning experiment.
You will rue the day you first heard the name SynthNet
I don't get how working at the electrochemical level buys you anything but obfuscation and extra runtime compared to a normal neural net. The fear response demo certainly isn't anything an NN couldn't do.
# Can you grow better NNs using genetic algorithms?
Yeah, I'm really wary of giving full credence what he is claiming here. Not only is he not affiliated with any academic institution, he doesn't appear to have any background in neurology or biochemistry. I'd really appreciate someone with some expertise in the field to critique it. In AI, there's a history of clever amateurs thinking they've discovered or created something super impressive.
I think the bigger question that is routinely overstepped by AI talk is that the real question is not what the brain looks like in operation, or how it operates right now, but how does it get there? Back before we could build an airplane, we could build a glider. The problem of flight was never the issue, the problem of take off was, and lo and behold, the solution to that puzzle was also the solution to maintaining altitude. Unfortunately, and this will be tricky, the answer to the question of how to build a True AI will be how to make it make itself. I suggest more study of baby brains. And, ideally, less crypto-creationists.
Who knows? Maybe it will work, maybe it won't, though I'm skeptical that you can successfully simulate a brain without giving it a decently high-resolution stream of sensory and proprioceptive input.
Giving it simulated input seems intractable, though, even given our monumentally powerful brain simulator.
« Older We've seen musical video mashups before, but what ... | On Sunday, Vice President Joe ... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt