Uploading yourself can be fun, aka....

[RAMA]

Why you should want to upload yourself to a supercomputer!

http://www.sentientdevelopments.com/2014/02/why-you-should-upload-yourself-to.html

 

[sojourner]

It won't be me. Only a copy.

 

[bbjeg]

I'm torn on the idea. Mental immortality would be interesting but what happens after a glitch or memory dump? I don't trust man enough to handle my thoughts.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

We're still decades — if not centuries — away from being able to transfer a mind to a supercomputer. [...] Here's why you should seriously consider uploading.

lulz.

 

[Melakon]

In the future, internet trolls will insult people by telling them to upload themselves.

 

[rhubarbodendron]

I'd rather stay an unique phenomenon.

 

[Metryq]

And everyone will scramble for the aliases "Neo", "Trinity", "Morpheus" and "Agent Smith."

"Me, two!"

As Sojourner pointed out, it won't be you, it will be a copy—assuming a copy is even possible. Consciousness will not move. It will be like that (rather silly) Arnold movie SIXTH DAY. Each individual will still suffer death. Eventually.

I think James P. Hogan said it best in the intro to his novel THE TWO FACES OF TOMORROW:

However, I am less persuaded by the paradigm of achieving AI through digital symbol manipulation that has dominated for the past half century. Throughout history, the current explanation of mind has always reflected the latest technology. Descartes envisaged it in terms of reflexes and the cuckoo clock. Freud's terminology of obstructed channels, diverted flows, and buildups of pressures was inspired by the complexity of the sewer system of Vienna. By the thirties the brain had become a telephone exchange, and with World War II an interacting network of servo loops and feedback circuits. These days, naturally, it has to be a computer ... but I'm not convinced that we've reached the end of the line yet.

In other words, our brains and computers are incompatible. Our minds are more than just the data we believe to be stored in the brain in computer fashion. Once you have all the data, you also need an emulator. If that emulator is anything less than perfect, you will no longer be "you," even if the construct appears to be such to everyone on the outside.

Even worse, the hackers really will have all your personal data!

 

[bbjeg]

When applied to something like a video game or interactive movie, it could work. Imagine a game where you upload your consciousness into a virtual realm which sends visual and audio information back to the brain. (this theoretical device would probably be a hundred terabyte system.)

Spoiler: You probably saw this movie by now.

I wasn't a fan but kinda like that new Total Recall movie

 

[RAMA]

We're still decades — if not centuries — away from being able to transfer a mind to a supercomputer. [...] Here's why you should seriously consider uploading.

lulz.

He's being conservate, there have been some recent breakthroughs on this, and also a lot of the brain mapping being done as well as the accelerated change of information technology should make such qualms moot because part of the goal is to make computer and human intelligence interchangeable. Decades is more realistic based on the math.

In other words, our brains and computers are incompatible. Our minds are more than just the data we believe to be stored in the brain in computer fashion. Once you have all the data, you also need an emulator. If that emulator is anything less than perfect, you will no longer be "you," even if the construct appears to be such to everyone on the outside.

This is what the general consensus has been for years, with really no evidence to back it up, it's all speculation that we have some "specialness" something more than the sum of our parts. We're finding out this isn't really true. Quantifying the brain seems well within the reach of computer power, and software (which was considered a weak point) has been proven to be up to the task as well.

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/excerpt-the-future-the-mind

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

It won't be me. Only a copy.

It could be both or neither. Up to you.

RAMA

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Quantifying the brain seems well within the reach of computer power, and software (which was considered a weak point) has been proven to be up to the task as well.

Those are pretty bold statements. Got anything solid to back them up?

 

[RAMA]

Quantifying the brain seems well within the reach of computer power, and software (which was considered a weak point) has been proven to be up to the task as well.

Those are pretty bold statements. Got anything solid to back them up?

Yes, I've already posted links on these particular claims before. The factual numbers on brain power can be found in numerous places but you could cut to the chase by reading The Singularity is Near. The very reason there are multpile highly funded projects on researching the brain for AI is because experts now believe it can be done.

The software argument is one I made several years ago after it was put forth as a major problem in developing AI, but it works here as well as a software "emulator". I posted a link on a governmet study that refuted the claim software was not keeping pace with computer power. It is also accelerated infotech.

Of course there have been two major books written about the brain in this context in the last year:

The latest: http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/excerpt-the-future-the-mind

http://www.amazon.com/How-Create-Mind-Thought-Revealed/dp/0143124048

How Kurzweil will help Google make AI:

http://www.wired.com/business/2013/04/kurzweil-google-ai/

http://rt.com/usa/google-kurzweil-singularity-brain-011/

More:

The money and the researchers:

http://www.popsci.com/science/artic...an-mogul-wants-upload-your-brains-immortality

False memory in a Mouse, NYT:

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/...e-panacea-to-hurt/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Hawking predicts brain uploading:

http://www.kurzweilai.net/hawking-predicts-uploading-the-brain-into-a-computer

The Blue Brain project: One of many now. Headed by a neuroscientist:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Brain_Project

Ironically some neuroscientists criticized Kurzweil's last book.

RAMA

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Okay, then you basically have some speculation and blue-sky research that has yet to produce anything remotely applicable to humans. It's cool that this research is happening but it's hard to take your statements seriously when you make it sound like we're right on the precipice of it being a reality. That is clearly not the case, and you do everyone a disservice by exaggerating just how far along things are.

 

[sojourner]

It won't be me. Only a copy.

It could be both or neither. Up to you.

RAMA

No. A copy is a copy. It may "think" it's me in a box, but that won't make it true.

 

[scotpens]

. . . Throughout history, the current explanation of mind has always reflected the latest technology . . . Freud's terminology of obstructed channels, diverted flows, and buildups of pressures was inspired by the complexity of the sewer system of Vienna.

Some people's minds are like a sewer.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

We're still decades — if not centuries — away from being able to transfer a mind to a supercomputer. [...] Here's why you should seriously consider uploading.

lulz.

He's being conservate, there have been some recent breakthroughs on this, and also a lot of the brain mapping being done as well as the accelerated change of information technology should make such qualms moot because part of the goal is to make computer and human intelligence interchangeable. Decades is more realistic based on the math.

1) The passage I quoted said that decades is a possibility, but no sooner, and you're saying, no, it's decades. More lulz.

2) Something that won't exist at least for decades can't be recommended to the reader as something that he or she should "seriously consider" doing, without bringing on the lulz. As I said, lulz.

3) Since you've told us that decades instead of centuries is "more realistic based on the math" without citing a source (the msnbc.com article you linked to in that post didn't cover that; all it said was "but he admits that a true telepathy helmet is still several decades away because both MEG and EEG scans lack accuracy", which says nothing of "uploading minds"), I'd love to read an explanation in your own words of what the math says.

 

[publiusr]

My aging body isn't in much better shape than the walkers on AMC, so I'm ready for a move.

 

[RAMA]

http://www.exponentialtimes.net/vid...-pearce?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

AI expert Ben Goetz El on mind uploading.

 

[Haggis and tatties]

I wonder how would they will get round all the problem the chemical and organic part of out brain that is also part of all the electical stuff that goes on in there to make us conscious and sentient.

Ok i will give it a whirl, a 500gig HDD should do my intelligence with plenty of room to add movies, music and games to keep me happy. lol

 

[Kemaiku]

I wonder how would they will get round all the problem the chemical and organic part of out brain that is also part of all the electical stuff that goes on in there to make us conscious and sentient.

Ok i will give it a whirl, a 500gig HDD should do my intelligence with plenty of room to add movies, music and games to keep me happy. lol

Considering even the "simplest" chemical inbalances in the brain are the cause of many chronic mental illnesses, I'd imagine a complete disruption to the entire chemical system of the brain would be catastrophic.

We can barely stabilise defective neuro-transmitter levels and cannot repair various forms of synaptic damage, never mind generate nano/femto level mechanisms based on them that could perfectly take over their function without any interruption to either.

Tell you what, have rat brain perfectly uploaded to an iPod and we'll see.