Quote from: iamnotback on February 22, 2017, 05:14:32 PM

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

To take up the thread again on this. I will try to list my "axioms":

1) a human brain is just a physical device that computes. So it is essentially a deterministic computation function, with information input (sensory neural input) and entropy input (noise in all of its kinds: quantum noise in chemical processes, thermal noise, external noise in different parameters like temperature, cosmic rays, whatever).

The entropy of the human brain is not independent of the entropy of the human body. Our body influences our personality, the way we think and react, etc.. Which shows up as entropy in the millions of petabytes of data that the NSA is storing. Your TeraBytes claim was so incredibly ridiculous (and off by many orders-of-magnitude) and I am really surprised that you can't give up on this failed conceptualization of yours. I expected your intellect is higher than this.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

2) the human body construction extracted a lot of information from the 3.8 billions of evolution, but this information is summarized in the genetic and epi-genetic record: all the information needed to make a human body.

Dude human bodies don't just appear fully matured instantly after fertilization. There is an environment contributing to that entropy all along the way of life of the human. Even the infant gradually take on trillions of microflora which wasn't present at birth, which is why they need the natural immunity in the mother's milk (70% of our immune system is in our gut and highly involved with the microflora).

And the network is alive and continuous. That entropy is transferred and mixed with the new humans added to it.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

The genetic information is about 4 GB (in fact much less). The epigenetic information is harder to estimate, but probably of the same order of magnitude. In order not to delve into this, I admit a factor of 1000.

You are farting hand waving nonsense out of your arse.

And you are wasting my time. That gets you in trouble with me, because I don't have time to waste. You are wasting my time because apparently you don't have the intellect to comprehend or your stubborn and foolish pride won't allow you to look at the situation more objectively.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

3) The human brain being a sophisticated computing device of given (large) computing capacity, and evolving only very slowly (the brains of the ancient Greeks are comparable to ours), and given Moore's law, sooner or later, silicon devices will reach comparable computing power.

Processing power has nothing to do with the entropy issue.

You are raising irrelevant concerns. And that you don't understand why it is irrelevant exemplifies that you haven't yet comprehended what I've been trying to teach you.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

4) Silicon computing devices enjoy higher sensory data streams and higher entropy (noise) streams than humans. The highest level of human sensory input is the visual input, which is less than the visual input of an iphone camera. Silicon devices can be equipped with tens of MB / s of genuine noise entropy with very little electronics (and they can generate much higher fluxes of pseudo-random noise).

You continue to emphasize the capabilities of individual machines (which the human can add and leverage to itself), which is entirely irrelevant to the point of there the incalculable scale of human entropy derives. Until you get this point, you are going to continue to be oblivious to your error in conceptualization of the issue.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

5) the data storage capacity of a human brain is estimated to be of the order of 2.5 Petabytes. That's still 6 orders of magnitude higher than your average PC ram. Moore's law tells us that we will reach that in an ordinary PC in about 30 years (20 steps of 2, and 18 months per step of 2).

Google is my external storage. I have much more storage than that. You seem to forget that humans leverage machines and tools.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

From these axioms, it follows trivially that in some point in the future, all computing that a human brain can do, can be done also in silicon.

By this logic, we could dice up a human into individual cells and say that given that a cell is very limited in capabilities, then humans will be very limited.

By only focusing on one aspect of human (his brain) and only humans in isolation from their network and environment which is integrated into the entropy of the human species, you are basing your conclusion on irrelevant conceptualization.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

I'm giving myself a century for the singularity

Then you are a smart idiot, and can join Kurzweil and other doomsday Mathusians who have always been incorrect.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

This is just to illustrate that a single silicon entity has enough *hardware* to be more powerful in its computing than a human brain is, in all its respects.
But then there is the "software".

A gallon of gasoline has more energy than a human can produce by himself in a month, yet gasoline has accomplished very little by itself.

Your conceptualization is now giving me the idea that your IQ isn't as high as I thought it might be.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

Concerning now the "human network": the entropy flow in the human network flow is NOT huge at all. In fact, most of it is only a very small fraction of the sensory data flow (the spoken word is at most a few KB per second ; visual human contact is smaller than the visual data flow, less than a few MB/s). All these "raw data" fluxes are way way redundant, and the actual data flow between humans to make up "humanity" is ridiculously smaller than this. I would estimate it to be lower than a few KB/s per human.

Oh I see you haven't learnt Chaos Theory, the Butterfly Effect, and the pendulum example from Chaos theory. How much entropy is there in a relationship that can be used to generate the unbounded number of digits of Pi? Yet how many KB does it take to transfer that initial condition (similar to the pendulum initial state).

When someone reads something on the Internet, then they do something which leads to a Butterfly effect which boomerangs as side-effects in the network in unbounded way. You should really understand even the simple case of unbounded nondeterminism in Hewitt's Actor model.

Come on man, you are out of your league debating with me on this topic. Have a little respect and maybe go spend some time learning why you are incorrect.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

All of humanity's "knowledge" is available also as network resource, so this information is just as well available to machines as it is to humans. Wikipedia gives most of human's general knowledge ; arxiv gives a lot of scientific knowledge. These databases are in fact relatively small. They can fit into one single RAM of a single machine when those machines will have PB of RAM.

You still don't seem to understand that the network (i.e. the free market) is alive and dynamic and no one can capture that information ever.

If you tried to extract that information then due to Chaos theory, you'd add to it in the process and then when you tried to extract what you added it to it, you add to it some more. You'd never get to the edge of the universe, because this would require that we don't exist in the first place.

You entirely don't comprehend why total orders don't exist and you don't even comprehend what information is.

Quote from: dinofelis on February 22, 2017, 03:01:41 PM

That's the essence of my argument.

It is pitiful and insulting that you are wasting my time. Please go get an education first.

I tried to be nice, but you are determined to fill up this thread with off topic posts. You could have messaged me in private or started a new thread in Meta forum or some where else.