[lm28469]

Until it's there it's 100% sci-fi. We've been through a few AI hype cycles already and the most advanced AI is still dumb as fuck compared to a 3yo kid.

We might be on a completely wrong path with our current approach too, difference of degree vs difference of kind, we don't know much about the brain and so far our binary way of computing isn't really promising, especially not in term of mimicking or surpassing the human brain, it might just not be the right tool.

[baja_blast]

> most advanced AI is still dumb as fuck compared to a 3yo kid

Or even a squirrel, take robotics for example or hell even an AI simulated animal, the AI don't even come close in it's ability to problem solve and react to novel situations. A squirrel powered by a few acorns is able to achieve things that even our most powerful supercomputers consuming 8.2 megawatts could never do.

Problem is we are currently limited by our computer architecture, brains operate in a wildly different way, for one it's continuous/non discrete collection of neurons that in themselves are quite complex.

IMO true AI will need to closer to a network of analog computing parts.

[quacked]

Hilarious analogy. "Nuclear power vs. acorns".

How's the computing power of a squirrel's brain compared to our best AI in terms of "number of system states"? I'm not in the field, so I'll elaborate my poorly-phrased question below:

My understanding is that you can calculate the number of "system states" of a computer by calculating how many different combinations of open-closed its logic gates can support. It's a mind-bogglingly huge number, but no matter what, the set of "all possible open-closed gate combinations" will be larger than the set of "the smartest, best simulation of an AI we have".

So--if memories, instincts, etc. are defined by things like "angle of neuron twist, number of transmitter molecules fired at second 0.0001, age of neuron in nS", etc., then just how many more "system states" can a squirrel's brain hold then a supercomputer can?