xpuente

This "experiment" might be somehow related with https://tsunamidemocratic.github.io ?

Chinese silicon isn't everywhere?

Surprise. The bits can be in two or more places at the same time. You known... the magic of "cp"

>The analogy of comparing the brain to a stadium of people cheering made it really easy to understand Neuralink's aims.

The problem we have is that we have no idea about the language they are speaking.

I think WRC helicopter teams are way more impressive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7h0OxsCCwA

Perhaps we need data from "real" benchmarks, such as SPECCPU2017. Geekbench is merely a toy compared with SpeCPU.

"wrong"

metabotropic channels/synapses? ... sadly the most frequent are missing there.

The fear of being forced by the EU to allow app sideloads.

The big question here is: How brains think?

Seems like computer architecture is not computer science. Nice.

> ... as a vector of real numbers...

Using IEEE754?

>I do imagine it, every day. But I'm a professional, so maybe that doesn't count?

Can englight us?

uhmmm ...

https://www.quantamagazine.org/gil-kalais-argument-against-q...

This is a PITA for coherence controllers.

Low hanging fruits are scarce now. With 3 orders of magnitude difference in power (MW over few watts), clearly this is not the right way for reaching the tree top.

“All the impressive achievements of deep learning amount to just curve fitting,”

You don't need to trust others. For example, build the password using some simple algorithm that uses the TLD name. This way you only need to remember the algorithm.

I think is that the question is really close to how we design a modern Processor. Certainly is important to look at the data (i.e. how behaves a real machine under actual workloads). That data might suggest design improvements (through some form of experience, art and intuition). You use simulation the test those "potentially" good ideas. Most of them are discarded...

Perhaps neuroscience should move in the same direction: how I think cortex work? Test in under (simple) working conditions. See if it makes sense. Move to more complex working conditions. Rinse an repeat.

In actual processors math is rather useless too... beyond some niches. Even in susceptible issues such as formal verification of coherence protocol design, mathematical tools are rather limited (due to state explosion).

The real issue is not to have a few devices, but having tens of billions of them in the same substrate.

Spain is mainly the responsible for that: ~30kg per capita/year (vs. <10kg in other European countries).