The Brain as a Computer

[Saiwania]

8.we don't have to build computers with hard drives, if anything we are moving away from it.

I hope not, because I know I want the greatest capacity hard drive/SSD I can get, to store everything I want permanently and have immediate access to it even when internet access is disrupted. 60 TB hard drives from Seagate are allegedly around the corner.

[Republic of Coldwater]

I believe that the brain can be used as a computer, if we find a way to harness its true potential. The problem is that the brain can't operate as perfectly as a CPU, it will fail and sometimes, it would operate better than other times (also, how will you power the brain?), and it is more prone to losing memory, whereas Hard Drives and SSDs won't so easily lose the data stored in there. The brain is also not designed to do ultra-complex math in cryptocoin mining or read algorithms, meaning that we might need to alter it a bit to allow it to better function as a computer. All in all, I like the idea, but I believe that the brain needs some level of improvement to fit the need of being a computer.

[Risottia]

Personally I found Sartre to be pretentious and shallow as philosopher, and boring as writer (not to mention individualist and petty-bourgeoise ). So I forgot all of his works.

petty-boureoise mon ami, those would be fighting words to jp

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7NEslas ... T6uc7nu6El

[Risottia]

Care to show one? I'm not an expert about field topology, but this is getting interesting.

I'm not sure how to get the appropriate text on this forum interface.

How about posting a link?

...I'm not sure about the mathematics behind a cultural paradigm.

It's not a mathematical statement as much as it is the philosophical statement that all mathematical operations take place in an inescapable temporal, historical, cultural, social, and conceptual context.

True, but the purpose of mathematics transcends the historical, cultural and social contexts - and once you remove those, you don't have culture anymore: just psychology and biochemistry as boundary conditions.

[Ethel mermania]

petty-boureoise mon ami, those would be fighting words to jp

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7NEslas ... T6uc7nu6El

i dont remember what they were saying, but i can tell you my mother would have left my father in a heartbeat for omar sharrif.

[Arkolon]

Here is a computer. I'm going to keep adding human-like/brain-like qualities to it. At which point does the computer become a human brain-- and why?

well a human brain is defined by species which means it needs to be biological and made of neurons containing homosapien genes.

Which a computer cannot be. You would have to define what a computer is in the first place.

a brain can be interpreted to mean "a biological organ composed of centralized neurons" or "a mind", in which case the answers are when it is one and already is.

If we define being "functionally" alive as being conscious or self-aware, would you say a computer is alive?

to counter, here is a book If I keep adding movie like qualities when does it become a the movie King Kong.

and what bearing does that have on weather books are like movies.

It's a sorites, which makes it an effective rhetorical question. It's an argument from vagueness; a fallacious one at that.

[Sociobiology]

well a human brain is defined by species which means it needs to be biological and made of neurons containing homosapien genes.

Which a computer cannot be. You would have to define what a computer is in the first place.

we build biological computers from isolated neurons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w41gH6x_30

a brain can be interpreted to mean "a biological organ composed of centralized neurons" or "a mind", in which case the answers are when it is one and already is.

If we define being "functionally" alive as being conscious or self-aware, would you say a computer is alive?

what does alive have to do with being conscious or self-aware?
but sure if we define Bleen as the color yellow then most bananas are Bleen.
you already defined conscious as self aware.
so to answer your question yes we already build computers that are self-aware. Self aware is easy, lots of animals are self aware.

to counter, here is a book If I keep adding movie like qualities when does it become a the movie King Kong.

and what bearing does that have on weather books are like movies.

It's a sorites, which makes it an effective rhetorical question. It's an argument from vagueness; a fallacious one at that.

it is a mirror image of your argument, so you just debunked your own argument.

[Vladislavija]

Time is inextricably linked with the conceptual notion of physical configuration. Indeed, as Sartre made note of in his seminal works, time is merely the subjective quantification of changes in the physical configuration of an arbitrarily selected object. Therefore, it is necessary given the fifth axiom of model-epistemic logic that time is physical. As a physical entity, we can conclude from a backwards-definitional analysis that it must also be corporeal. According to Einstein's field equations, which follow topologically from a Riemann analysis of Cauchy surfaces, where surface S is the efficient cause of S2, and both surfaces are homemorphic to the Euclidean field metric, the only physically coherent epistemology for the utilization of so-called "time units" is through informational processing in computational science. Therefore, the existence of sufficiently sophisticated computers, each with its own internal syntax processing and self-defined reflexive axiomatic propositions, is physically necessary for the utilization of time units

The existential analytic of time units leads one to a path that requires a working understanding of sophisticated tensor calculus and computational neuroscience. To summarize the work that has been done in this area, empirical observations have concluded that time units are the a priori structure of reality itself, and we interpret reality through a set of physical structures which is responsible for the syntaxical and meta-syntaxical coherency of the informational transmission. Since our mind is the physical structure identified with the syntaxical and meta-syntaxical coherency of the informational transmission (defined as the decrease in Channon uncertainty as the time limits approaches zero), our mind is necessarily a sophisticated computer with own internal syntax processing and self-defined reflexive axiomatic propositions that are physically necessary for the utilization of time units given a Riemann analysis of Cauchy surfaces, the truth of which follow topologically from Einstein's field equations.

Please elaborate some more.

[Gothmogs]

In my forthright assessment, it appears as though you are wielding pointlessly ornate diction in order to embroider a rather impuissant asseveration. Overly sumptuous terminology does little to enhance one's thesis, but rather portrays an egotistical intention in endeavoring to flaunt one's own acuity.

[Cyrisnia]

Porn?