Growing Rat Neurons to Play Video Games [video]
youtube.com
youtube.com
Really, does no one see the connection to AI, and how humans are nothing but feedback loops. It's all just scale.
The real danger comes from farmers. Ammonium Nitrate (fertilizer) and diesel (tractors). They must be up to something [/s]
Nile Red is also really good at chemistry and seems to have no qualms doing questionable stuff. Think 'Things I Won't Work With', and then he works with it, a lot. Thank God he's not too into amines ... yet. The algorithm is going to push him ever more towards the boom-boom side of chemistry and he can only resist so long.
Speaking in prosecutor-terms, these guys more than have the means and opportunity, they need only the motive and the case is a slam dunk. The lines they walk are quite fine.
All that said, I love these guys and have for years. I'll continue to watch and support them as long as they can continue to upload, which is never a sure thing in their cases
What case are you talking about specifically? You're implying there's been a crime, can you expand on this?
Some outstanding videos IMHO:
The channel owner applies himself a gene therapy to fix his lactose intolerance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3FcbFqSoQY
How exactly the Covid Tests work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_usIkrVQwE
Growing Human Neurons Connected to a Computer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2YDApNRK3g
Especially the Covid test video was eye opening against the conspiracy theorist propaganda during the pandemic because knowing how tests actually work on practical level makes you see through the claims effort free.
Is he an infant? Otherwise, lactose intolerance isn't something to fix as it is the norm.
At first: how horrifying to subject brain cells to the world of Doom!
After more info: oh, they don’t perceive the horrific setting nor possess the context to know they are in a simulation. They just have inputs and outputs, comfort and discomfort. That’s not so bad.
Upon deep reflection: oh God! We are just a scaled up version of this! Our perception of the world is just a tiny slice of reality filtered through limited senses. For all we know we could be trapped in a simulated hellscape with no chance of ever breaking free!
FWIW, even if we are all in “prime” and this is not a simulation. There is always the possibility of inventing a way to elevate ourselves out into a higher dimension.
Either way, same goal really.
Well, ok, I suppose maybe we could construct some kind of vessels in this larger space which could like, well, if mind-uploading is achievable (or, even if just mind-transfer-to-a-new-medium is possible) then conceivably we could do that to be able to live in such higher-dimensional space?
But, unless it granted us more control over our environment in a useful way, I don't see why that would be particularly desirable? Well, I guess it probably would grant some more control, but like,
our minds, I think, are suited for the kinds of experiences that humans have generally had, not so much for, whatever constructed bodies we might somehow build for such a higher-dimensional space.
I don't mean like, "our minds aren't well-suited to navigating in higher-dimensional spaces, with higher-dimensional sensory-input". That might be true, but maybe we could adapt to that part without too much of an issue, idk.
Rather, I mean stuff like, it is important that we have things like, the feelings of sharing a meal with one's loved-ones, hugs, and other physical expressions of affection. (I am not making the claim that hugs are a human cultural universal. I don't know. But I'm fairly confident in my assumption that all successful human cultures have some form of physical expression of affection.)
Now, I'm not saying that such things would be inherently impossible with more dimensions of space. Why would they be? But, I'd imagine that even if our minds can adapt relatively easily to piloting a body in a higher-dimensional space, that, probably the combination of our minds and whatever bodies we constructed for navigating such a higher-dimensional space, and the kind of larger-environment that there might be in such higher-dimensional space (I imagine it being fairly desolate, as if there were things living there we would probably be toast already) would not be conducive to having those experiences in those bodies.
If you mean more generally, "some true-er view of reality" and not necessarily "higher-dimensional space" (but still in a way that differs substantially from reality-as-we-currently-perceive/experience-it)...
Well, sometimes I imagine that heaven might not operate like (3+1)-dimensional space (perhaps not corresponding to any kind of smooth manifold). In this case, I would imagine that this would be fine (by assumption of it being "heaven"), because either we would always have been designed so as to be compatible with it, or it would have been designed to be compatible with us, or both.
(side note: If I had to guess, I think my current guess is that heaven does actually, at least sorta-kinda-in-some-sense(not that I have an idea of "in what sense") be spatially 3D, or resemble that in some way. But, I'm not confident either way.)
But, if we are working under the assumption that reality doesn't hold those-we-would-regard-as-people as "special" in any way, such that we would have particular reason to expect it to be good to us outside the scope we find ourselves in currently, then, I would generally not expect this this "higher reality" or whatever, to be well-suited for us.
Maybe it could be exploited in some way, to make things better in this portion/view of reality, and maybe more parts could be made to be like this one, but, under the assumption of an uncaring universe, I would expect that any "higher/true-er reality" would not be really nice for living in.
Similarly,
I don't anticipate Mars will be nice for living in, until we Terraform it.
Why couldn't we both 1. find a way to "reach it", and 2. find a way to improve it in our favor?
I feel like it'll be the best puzzle yet! Asked differently: What keeps you motivated for society's success, and what will keep you motivated after that is accomplished (asked recursively)?
In addition: no, the planck length is not at all likely to be a consequence of discretization for the purpose of simulation. It is a length scale implied by various other constants. Like, if you considered the "laws of physics except gravity is stronger", you would end up with a different value for the Planck length. And, why would increasing the strength of gravity in your simulation, imply necessarily changing your discritization scale? It doesn't make sense.
Quantum mechanics does not fit with the idea of "well, it was hard to simulate the full thing, so we made some simplifications" with those simplifications being the reason for the parts of quantum mechanics that seem "weird". I know it is a popular idea, but it doesn't make sense.
Making things quantum-mechanical makes them harder to simulate, not easier.
The universe apparently doesn’t think so. In fact there’s an argument that, in some sense, what the universe does should be one of the easiest ways to do it, otherwise the existence of the universe would be much more unlikely.
Changing acceleration values in physics simulations often requires you to modify the rate at which you check for overlap collisions. Could be related to the minimum distance an object can move i.e. the largest step it can take
but, it shouldn't be that changing the strength of gravity, 100% of the time force you to change the discretization scale regardless of what it currently is.
Once upon a time, meaning and wisdom were considered paramount.
...what? Are they experiencing pleasure? It sounds a lot like they're experiencing pleasure.
Sisyphus teaches the higher fidelity that negates the gods (or simulation) and raises rocks.
Meaning: is it sufficient to grow an organoid and then connect it to the electrodes and go through the training process, or is there an advantage to growing the organoids _while_ connected to stimuli?
Naively, it seems like our brains are growing while receiving input and that could guide the growth process.
Are we sure military hasn't gone further than a video game?
boss: you might try doing X as your next project
me: ok
boss: actually, we can't do X, we don't have access
me: ok
boss: you might want to watch this video on X, though, it's interesting
me: no yt-dlp --skip-download --write-auto-sub
> inside your head is one of the greatest computers in the universe which is surprising because I've seen your b-
I.e. one can also quickly verify if it is for the wrong target.
I believe people keep producing videos, since it can be monetised nicely
Probably something already exists? LLMs could be good for heuristically obtaining punctuated text - but since real understanding is required, other systems should be employed - such as a transformers based ANN (speech + raw_transcript → punctuated_text).
The issue of "real understanding" is that which should discourage «LLM [generated] summar[ies]» - I have not yet seen any that show actual understanding of the original. "No work" is often better than "bad work".
Also, when asked to summarize, even Vicuna removed all portions of irrelevant talking (like to the crowd on a meeting) and jokes.
Might be worthwile to finish that
Hard to find intellectual material that does not require full concentration. Even those few pieces that seem to be highly digestible - they typically do not speak to the intellect and/or do not get fully processed anyway, under condition of shared attention.
If you also can peek to videos in your multitasking: there are many related YT channels around, but if you are into leisure time spending on divulgational channels, there is probably little better around than
Curiosity Show, the Australian (Adelaide?) TV channel featuring Rob Morrison and Deane Hutton in the '70s and '80 - for the young;
Steve Mould, ongoing YT productions, picking stimulating topics of non immediate evidence.
One way address that is to grow the as organoids. You can think of organoids like 'cells growing in a non-flat surface'. This mean the cells would have all 3 dimensions to grow and form connections.
The problem with that is that you need a LOT o cells, and they are expensive. The way around it is to create neurons from skin cells. But that has its own set of challenges.
Opinion that's years out of date:
* The biosafety level is lower (all human tissue is automatically BSL2 or BSL2+ because it might have HIV and stuff)
* The best neural cultures (neurons + supporting cells) come from actual tissue, there aren't good stable immortal cell lines for neural cells. So this generally means fetal cells which for human tissue involves a boatload of process and bureaucracy. Fetal rats, *comparatively* have little bureaucracy.
* iPSC cells (Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells / "stem cells harvested from adults") can generate neural cells but it's several stages removed, and still more process overhead if it's human tissue
* It's better to harvest actual brain tissue than grow them from progenitor lines. You can grab partially or fully differentiated cells by dissecting them out of specific locations (i.e. hippocampal neurons, dopaminergic neurons, ...). Forcing a population of progenitor cells to develop into what you want is a massive pain / still an "unsolved problem" in the sense that you can't buy a grow-a-brain kit. (NOT facetious, most labs that aren't dirt poor use kits as much as possible and it is TOTALLY worth it)