[sigmoid10]

Lets not treat our mind as something magical. It's just another program that learned to speak by consuming lots of training input. The implementation might look slightly different from the outside, but from a mathematical perspective, artificial neural networks are proven to be at least as capable as the human mind.

[baq]

The best part is, your comment works both when sarcastic and completely serious.

[ben-schaaf]

> artificial neural networks are proven to be at least as capable as the human mind

Do you have a source for this? I know we have models of neural networks designed to act like neurons, but those aren't what're being used.

[sigmoid10]

See the universal approximation theorem for fully connected perceptrons.

[ben-schaaf]

That's really nowhere near enough of a proof. You'd need to prove that a human brain is equivalent to a mathematical function, and that that function can be sufficiently approximated by a NN to be functionally identical.

Additionally UAT doesn't actually prove NNs can approximate any function. Non-continuous functions and infinitely large domains aren't covered.

[xpe]

Define ‘capable’ and most of the confusion and potential controversy goes away.