If you'd like an unsolicited recommendation, 'A Brief History of Intelligence' by Max Bennett is a good, accessible book on this topic. It explicitly draws parallels between the brain's evolution and modern AI.
If you'd like an unsolicited recommendation, 'A Brief History of Intelligence' by Max Bennett is a good, accessible book on this topic. It explicitly draws parallels between the brain's evolution and modern AI.
The genome determines how your brain learns, so yeah we do. We don't solve short easy tasks via learning, no, but longer tasks that involves learning involves our DNA.
Learning is a physical process in which neurons form new connections to one another. It has nothing to do with DNA.
This is like measuring LLM performance based on CPU microcode size. Completely nonsense.
Longer tasks that involve learning also involve caloric consumption and respiration, that doesn't mean we think with the sun and the air.
The apples-to-apples comparison is comparing the human genome to the code behind a particular LLM. The genome defines the structure that learns and thinks, just like the code for the LLM.
What I'm saying is you can't judge the data in the genome by purely counting the bytes of data.