That raises a lot of ethical concerns. It is not possible to prove or disprove that these synthetic homunculi controllers are sentient and intelligent beings.
I’d wager the main reason we can’t prove or disprove that, is because we have no strict definition of intelligence or sentience to begin with.
For that matter, computers have many more transistors and are already capable of mimicking human emotions - how ethical is that, and why does it differ from bio-based controllers?
There is no soul in there. God did not create it. Here you go, religion serving power again.
Good point. There is a theory somewhere that loosely states one cannot understand the nature of one’s own intelligence. Iirc it’s a philosophical extension of group/set theory, but it’s been a long time since I looked into any of that so the details are a bit fuzzy. I should look into that again.
At least with computers we can mathematically prove their limits and state with high confidence that any intelligence they have is mimicry at best. Look into turing completeness and it’s implications for more detailed answers. Computational limits are still limits.
we absolutely should not do this until we understand it
How would we ever understand it, then?
I think we should still do it, we probably will never understand unless we do it, but we have to accept the possibility that if these synths are indeed sentient then they also deserve the basic rights of intelligent living beings.
Can’t say we as a species have a great history of granting rights to others.
But if we do that, how will we maximize how much money we make off of it? /s
Nah it’s okay. I was called all sorts of names and told I was against progress when I raised such concerns, so obviously I was wrong…
There are about 90 billion neurons on a human brain. From the article:
…researchers grew about 800,000 brain cells onto a chip, put it into a simulated environment
that is far less than I believe would be necessary for anything intelligent emerge from the experiment
Some amphibians have less than two million.
The amount isn’t necessarily an indicator of intelligence, the nunber of connections is very important too
And they are ceos!
In a couple years, they’ll be able to make Trump voters.
Is there any actual evidence of any of this? Why not show some of the “brains-in-a-jar” walking around?
It’s just a bunch of huckster promotion, “infographics”, and phony pictures of Krang. The only actual photos are a few tiny petri dishes. There are no “brains” controlling robots.
The grift is strong and travels far beyond any national border.
Bio-neural gel packs here we come.
Tatooine monks when?
Murderbot.
Murrrderbooooot.
800,000 brain cells played pong.
Creepy.
That’s murderbot’s ancestor.
Has it asked for any soap operas yet?
A scant couple hundred thousand more brain cells and we’ll be there.
Cheap shot, I’ve never dared a soap opera myself.
Which means we may see full organic to digital conversion within he next half century
Ethical horrors aside, been wondering if that would happen in the forseeable future or not
Don’t worry, they’ll be kept docile with a generous amount of Nuke
No way this is real. The brain looks like a gyro rotisserie.
Ah, the Torment Nexus is coming along nicely I see.
Now?
I recall a project that had rat brain cells controlling a turtlebot years ago.
This video is a year old, they’ve made a lot of progress since then.
This came up in my Discover feed and I initially assumed it was a fake news site. Unfortunately all the things in the article are indeed real (aside from the robo-brains which they note are mock ups). The brain cells learning to play Pong made the news last year. Combine this with the creepy as hell skin grafted onto a robot and you have nightmare fuel for life.
Even in death, I serve the Emperor
