[xenadu02]

> When we finally understand how the brain actually does it

If you dig into how neurons work in the brain you'll discover that a single neuron has the complexity of a large neural network internally and it's behavior is not nearly as simple as the typical model explanation. Different ion channels, time-dependent behavior, up/down regulation of neurotransmitter receptors and release, and much more.

It is entirely possible that the brain "does it" by throwing vastly more computing resources at the problem than we previously believed.

[IIAOPSW]

I have and while its true a neuron does more than the simple on/off of their artificial peers, I'd hardly call it "the complexity of a large neural network internally". There just aren't that many bits needed to represent all the parameters you just mentioned. Stuff you mention like ion channels and neurotransmitters feels like excessively mimicking biological constraints rather than something actually relevant. Who cares if the real neurons use chemical channels and electrical channels to communicate, the artificial ones can just send the same information in electrical channels for everything.

[fireant]

While brain has vastly more computing resources, they are probably operating very far from the theoretical optimum. There must be so much baggage, inefficiency and dead pathways left which do not have much purpose at all. The brain was evolved, not designed, which means that any random features/mutations which did not inhibit individuals ability to procreate got to stay.

I think that even when we understand the brain completely, it will be very difficult disentangling what is useful for artificial neural networks and what doesn't really matter.