Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


420chan is Getting Overhauled - Changelog/Bug Report/Request Thread (Updated March 22)
Brain emulation by Nathaniel Sonnerson - Thu, 26 Oct 2017 21:48:38 EST ID:rAsSDYK/ No.37333 Ignore Report Quick Reply
File: 1509068918585.png -(330875B / 323.12KB, 662x1962) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 330875
Why redesign the wheel? Brain emulation is always talked about in terms of making computers fast enough to do the job. Why not go with the design nature has already had such success with?

We've talked about replacing the brain one neuron at a time with artificial neurons that wont degenerate over time. The easier (and more controversial) way to use an artificial neuron technology though is to instead make a reconstruction of the subjects brain. The incredible sophistication levels needed for nanobots to replace neurons in a living subject is a long way off, if in fact that kind of control will ever be possible. The technology to put together a microscopic replication of a 1:1 resolution brain scan however is well within reach.

A subject could wear a high precision portable EECG device for whatever period turns out to be appropriate, plus get sessions of brain MRIs. After the patients death their brain can be scanned to generate an exact map of every brain cell and it's place in the connectome. This model then serves as the blueprint for the construction of a brain out of artificially created cells. These cells are connected in an exact copy of the connectome and also directly to a Brain Computer Interface. The data from the brain scanning is used to tune each neurons firing rate and tolerances as it is put into place.

The scanning and construction technology to do this is within sight now. This is the obvious solution to whole brain emulation; to emulate the whole brain. Those who go through the process will become beings with nearly unlimited potential. Constructed with artificial materials and carefully encased the brains would be effectively immortal. Encased with them a computer could be directly connected. This will allow emulated people to be connect with artificial bodies or to virtual/augmented reality environments. These bodies can be anything from replicas of people and animals, to machinery and spacecraft. Machinery or highly unusual body types can be controlled by using a virtual reality environment where the person has a simulated human body and uses simulated controls around them,

The use of artificial connections will increase the speed of communication between neurons to almost the speed of light. Emulated people will perceive, think and act at greater speeds than the current biological hardware is physically capable of.

We will surely learn to create new additions to the brain as well. Combinations of artificial neurons and miniature computers can be used to create new brain regions with new abilities.

The speed of travel between the stars could be increased to the speed of light for emulated people. All the needed data can easily be collected by the BCI and transmitted to the destination where another brain is constructed, exactly the same.
The person might decide to shutdown the original brain and leave it in storage on the planet they are leaving. Alternatively the original brain could remain active, with two copies of the person active at once, potentially merging back together again later.

No doubt this idea will be controversial. Many people are concerned with the fact that a whole brain emulation will be a copy rather than a direct continuation of them. Personally I'm not sure if it matters. What does matter is our freedom to choose our own way. Whatever peoples positions are on this technology, they should respect other peoples right to make their own decision about embracing it.
Phoebe Pitthall - Sat, 04 Nov 2017 22:29:13 EST ID:MGHVvWyl No.37338 Ignore Report Quick Reply
This was the basic premise of Kurzweil's most recent book 'How to Create a Mind', and in general I like the idea that nature has come up with efficient solutions to a lot of problems and we do our best when we emulate what it has already figured out.

However, there are a few remaining technical hurdles to proceeding as you suggest, mainly that brain scanning technology is not at sufficient resolution to image a living brain at the neuronal (and, what we will probably discover to be necessary, axonal, which is a further order of magnitude smaller) level, and scanning a dead brain will probably prove insufficient, as the connectome (the aggregate of the interactive patterns of the brain, not just the physical configuration of the neurons) is probably crucial to replicating the brain's functionality.

We also aren't quite at the level of miniaturization of our physical processing structures (i.e. expansion of Moore's Law in the narrow sense) where we can efficiently replicate the informational processing of a neuron at a scale smaller than the size of a neuron -- currently, we need huge banks of computers just to simulate tiny slivers of neuronal tissue.

On the other hand, these are by no means insurmountable obstacles, we just aren't quite there yet. Ultimately, however the ability to recreate our neurons using nanomachines is I think is quite feasible. This would be possible even with primitive nanomachines that we have no 'control over' (in the sense of them being little Drexlerian robots that we can control over wifi or something) but with nanophages designed to consume the kinds of gunk that cause neuronal degradation, enhanced versions of re-myleinating glial cells, even, construct organic electrochemical transmitters that could communicate or even integrate a cell with an outside network (the software that would run on this exocortical hardware.) All this using 'dumb' molecules that have just been very 'smartly' designed and administered by us.

This could be done on a gradual basis, which would eliminate all fears about the 'transfer of consciousness,' especially when you consider that none of the molecules which compose your body now are the same ones that composed it three months ago (except hair, nails, etc.) and almost all of the cells that you currently have are different ones than you had seven years ago, who are now all mostly dead. Consciousness or the perception of it, it seems, persists as long as its new medium is able to gradually intermingle with its old medium.
Edward Beckletat - Sat, 25 Nov 2017 06:22:22 EST ID:abuAa5+w No.37358 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Essentially the last part of your post is addressing continuing functionality of the brain. I won't say continuing consciousness because that's not true, but "me" as an ongoing process isn't a bad analogy. Even a lot of very spiritualist people might accept that definition of our body. What are we? We are what the universe is doing here and now. We are like a wave on the ocean. It's really just a transfer of energy but it's a continuous single transfer that causes a bulge on the surface of the water.

I think a lot of people see "me" as that on some level.

When defining the mind and brain, philosophy becomes relevant. We may not answer any questions it will pose, but we can use it to ensure solutions such as gradual replacement of the brain at least satisfy more possible final answers.
Fanny Snodville - Sat, 25 Nov 2017 16:28:46 EST ID:oBSNl6oc No.37359 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Agree 100%. This is kind of the more subtle problem of our times/the era of the singularity -- technology will make concrete and problematic philosophical issues that have for most of human history been purely philosophical and spiritual concerns. Thankfully, it also means we can grapple with such issues on more direct terms -- while certain aspects of epistemology and ontology are inescapable, the bulk of philosophy which deals with problems of the human condition will become technically solvable, rather than simply intractable.

I think that humanity will necessarily develop a new kind of spirituality/philosophy, rooted in empiricism but fed by the numinous, in order to adapt to the supercognitive revolution's complete demolition of the old intellectual hierarchies and dichotomies that our meatware came up with.
Phoebe Shittingbury - Tue, 05 Dec 2017 17:21:07 EST ID:I4lZwRzN No.37365 Ignore Report Quick Reply
why even fuckin emulate why not just hook up 100 brains in a circuit for a megabrain
Isabella Honderpot - Tue, 05 Dec 2017 23:18:35 EST ID:yvg2ILiJ No.37366 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1512533915617.jpg -(29647B / 28.95KB, 250x327) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>why even fuckin emulate
cause then you don't have to carry your NES with you everywhere. You can just play mario on your phone.

That which we emulate, we understand fully. Why rig together a hundred shitty NESs when your computer can run a thousand NESs on one of its cores? Same thing with brains.
Doris Pickspear - Sun, 17 Dec 2017 18:52:14 EST ID:uorQ4VgO No.37380 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Why even bother making a new physical copy? Just emulate the whole CNS in software. Have virtual brains that can port around from hardware to hardware; like virtual servers run the web nowadays. You could give your process access to your own process, *editable* access even; make backups, forks, run yourself slower/faster, etc.

Check out an author named Greg Egan
Simon Blangerford - Mon, 25 Dec 2017 22:38:51 EST ID:0NtRfFLg No.37382 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Because they're having trouble making that work. This is an alternative possibility with a different set of pros and cons. And it's not like we're all going to pick just one method anyway.
David Sobblepat - Fri, 29 Dec 2017 19:25:25 EST ID:9qspJYx7 No.37384 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Ebenezer Picklenure - Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:32:36 EST ID:8u62nqcQ No.37459 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I definitely wouldn't use this for life extension, but having a copy of yourself would be good for extending your social network or building a community. I can't imagine getting along with someone better than a copy of myself.
Nell Cankinmig - Fri, 01 Mar 2019 19:45:54 EST ID:o4wnYLFp No.37575 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1551487554295.png -(422687B / 412.78KB, 865x760) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>you can just play mario on your phone

Man I got sega dreamcast on my phone these days. !0 years ago I had trouble with dreamcast emulation on my desktop. Shits really getting powerful. I bet I could get PS1 or xbrick working in a gen or two.

Unrelated kind of, why do mobile games have to suck so badly when they can clearly handle games more complicated than a cash shop clicker.
Matilda Chammerdock - Sun, 03 Mar 2019 13:53:08 EST ID:xnmW28Zy No.37576 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>Unrelated kind of, why do mobile games have to suck so badly when they can clearly handle games more complicated than a cash shop clicker.
Cause mobile gamers are filthy casuals and also the interface is really only suited to strategy/management/puzzle style games. There have been attempts to bring big PC and console franchises to mobile, and they mostly suck on that point. Besides, even if you make the nicest, deepest, richest mobile game, that sort of cinematic experience isn't exactly suited to being hunched over a tiny screen for hours.

Once AR becomes more of a mobile scale thing, both of those factors will change, tho. Yet, then people will start making 'retro mobile' style games, because at that point there will be a generation that has nostalgia for those kinds of titles.
Ian Dodgeway - Sun, 10 Mar 2019 00:29:22 EST ID:o4wnYLFp No.37581 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The touch only interface is shit I agree but there are bluetooth controllers of all kinds avaliable. It would be a good way to market a decent game from a new indie/studio and have it easily monetized with dare I even suggest it... ads...But plenty of people would purchase on a low price to get rid of that shit if the game is worth playing.
Eliza Cledgeforth - Thu, 14 Mar 2019 18:20:43 EST ID:xVKSLbP7 No.37586 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I think they have a connection to a mainframe with all the games, direct to your phone so you don't need a huge or futuristic phone. I haven't looked into the latency delays between pushing buttons, but if they are already doing, it's probably not too much.
Polly Sottingstodge - Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:21:19 EST ID:xnmW28Zy No.37587 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Game streaming is something you can do today. Valve, Sony and Microsoft all have popular solutions for it, and Google is working on a new one. It's not that great, latency is pretty rough so you can forget about anything multiplayer/action based. Putting everything into the cloud is fashionable nowadays, but when latency is a factor nothing will ever beat on-site processing.
Shitting Simmlehure - Fri, 22 Mar 2019 03:53:25 EST ID:kfTkzi+6 No.37592 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>adding lag to all your single player games

and people pay for this? Instead of saving for a "good" tier cheap box that will run every thing just not on high?

Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.