logo.jpg

Live to see it.


Main

April 05, 2008

Transforming Consciousness

Neuroanatomist Jill Bolte Taylor has identified what she calls "the deep inner peace circuitry" of the human brain. She believes that we can tap into that circuitry to transform not only our own conscious state, but the state of the world around us.

I would certainly have to agree with Taylor that our brains can transform the world. Our most recent Better All the Time feature focused on various good news developments having to do with the human brain. The news was all over the map -- hope for treating brain cancer, an improved understanding of what a single neuron is capable of doing, thoughts on the proper care and feeding of our brains. All of this is great stuff, to be sure, but I wonder if by looking at individual news items we aren't missing out on a hugely significant big picture?

The human brain is what brought us down from the trees and into art galleries. It is the reason we can build bridges, compose sonnets, cure diseases. It's one thing to get all excited about incremental developments in biofuels or LED-based light bulb solutions -- and I don't mean that disparagingly, we should get excited about those things -- but any improvement in how we use, care for, or even just understand our brains is good news with a multiplying effect. The human imperative is improvement of the human condition, and the human brain is, well, the brains of that operation. When we make better use of our brains, or care for them better, or understand them better, we are improving our Improvement Machine.

brainstairway.jpg

Continue reading "Transforming Consciousness" »

April 09, 2007

It's Thinking

"Way" back in '05, we wrote with enthusiasm about the then up-and-coming Blue Brain project:

The neocortex is that special core brain part that only mammals have. That's how you can tell a mammal brain from a reptile brain. Look for the neocortex. From this site, I learned that the neocortical column (NCC) is a handy building block for higher brain function, and that a human brain is really nothing more than a robust collection of specilaized NCCs working together in harmony.

So in other words, once IBM gets a single NCC emulation running, they are well on their way to emulating an entire neocortex and, eventually, an entire brain. The question, then, is this: will a computer emulation of a brain produce a computer emulated mind?

If so, Blue Brain will be the first step towards electronic immortality via mind uploading. And even if the "playback" piece doesn't work yet, the "backup" piece will be very encouraging to those who are looking to upload eventually. After all, if IBM can create a working electronic replica of a brain, they should, before long, be able to make a working replica of any brain, including yours or mine. And if the whole brain is backed up, it's just a matter of time before we have computers sophisticated enough to tease out that elusive "mind" thing. (Unless it turns out that there really is something more to a mind than brain function, but I doubt it.)

So, what has become of Blue Brain? Well, an update reveals that the project has made tremendous strides towards creating a virtual rat brain in a computer. This passage in particular caught my attention:

Though the first artificial brain may seem simple, it will be a useful model. Brain researchers can use it to reproduce functions from the real organ and test their theories. As they build in new processes, the model grows ever more detailed -- a sort of wiki project of the mind. It also offers an important advantage over a natural brain, since it lets researchers monitor each and every (simulated) mental activity in the machine.

But -- has there been mental activity?

The newborn "Blue Brain" surprised the designers with its willfulness from the very first day. It had hardly been fed electrical impulses before strange patterns began to appear on the screen with the lightning-like flashes produced by cells that scientists recognize from actual thought processes. Groups of neurons started becoming attuned to one another until they were firing in rhythm. "It happened entirely on its own," says Markram. "Spontaneously."

computerbrain.gif

Perhaps my title for this entry is a little overstated. This isn't quite "thinking" yet. But it's something: self-organizing virtual "mental" activity. What's the brain trying to do? Probably just find the rest of the brain, not to mention the spinal chord and nervous system. I doubt that it's thinking any ratty thoughts so far. On the other hand, that this level of response occurred raises interesting -- and somewhat disturbing -- questions about what will happen a few generations later when we're simulating complete animal and eventually human brains.

What will a virtual mouse brain experience? By then, will we have a virtual body and virtual environment for it, or will a fully functioning brain come on line in a complete perceptual void? That's a pretty troubling question when we're talking about a human brain rather than a mouse brain. Years ago, Harlan Ellison wrote a short story whose title sums it up: I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream.

Yikes. On the other hand, it might not be horrifying at all. Maybe just a little boring. Or maybe like being asleep.

All the same, I don't think I'll be offering up a copy of my brain for the initial experiments.

March 26, 2007

Old Brain, New Brain

I may have more to say later, but let me start by just throwing out this quote from Psychologist Daniel Gilbert:

The brain is a beautifully engineered get-out-of-the-way machine that constantly scans the environment for things out of whose way it should right now get. That's what brains did for several hundred million years -- and then, just a few million years ago, the mammalian brain learned a new trick: to predict the timing and location of dangers before they actually happened.

Our ability to duck that which is not yet coming is one of the brain's most stunning innovations, and we wouldn't have dental floss or 401(k) plans without it. But this innovation is in the early stages of development. The application that allows us to respond to visible baseballs is ancient and reliable, but the add-on utility that allows us to respond to threats that loom in an unseen future is still in beta testing.

UPDATE:

Commenter Triticale asks:

Hey, I've done beta testing before. Where do I download a copy to try?

Triticale is being too hard on himself. He, like all the rest of the human race, is already beta-testing a neocortex. That is the problem with this theory. There probably isn't a sizable control group of people with lessor developed or greater developed neocortices. So it would be hard to test whether our inability to accurately predict long-term risk is something that could be improved upon, or whether we are facing a limit on biological computation.

Acknowledging this major problem with proof, I have my own neocortex theory. Perhaps the conflict between the amygdala and the neocortex can explain why we humans enjoy rollercoasters and horror movies. Of course neither activity is really dangerous. Intellectually we know that even a hypercoaster like Superman: The Escape is safe, but we feel a sense of accomplishment when we overcome the primitive amygdala to get on the ride.

November 18, 2005

Turning off the Fear Switch

This is interesting:

Deactivating a specific gene transforms meek mice into daredevils, researchers have found. The team believe the research might one day enable people suffering from fear – in the form of phobias or anxiety disorders, for example – to be clinically treated.

The research found that mice lacking an active gene for the protein stathmin are not only more courageous, but are also slower to learn fear responses to pain-associated stimuli, says geneticist Gleb Shumyatsky, at Rutgers University in New Jersey, US.

So here we have the beginnings of a technique which, ultimately, a meglomaniac could use to breed an army of truly fearless warriors. Or a fanatical dad could use to produce the perfect football player.

This idea reminds me of one of those self-help-seminar questions you run across sometimes: what would you do if you knew you couldn't fail? Of course, living without fear isn't exactly the same as knowing you can't fail. Presumably, it would be more like not caring that you can fail. That sounds kind of dangerous.

On the other hand, we read this:

The lack of the protein does not appear to affect other learning experiences, as both sets of mice were able to memorise the paths out of mazes equally well. “This is a good sign for an eventual clinical application that could let people deal with their fears in an entirely different way,” Shumyatsky says.

If I could be smart enough to assess risks rationally and then operate without fear, that sounds like a pretty good deal. But I might go for a boost of intelligence before I think about turning off the fear switch.

October 24, 2005

Doping the Math Majors

Arnold Kling, in the second in his series of essays inspired by Kurzweil's The Singularity is Near, writes:

Perhaps the last unenhanced human to make a significant contribution in the field of mathematics has already been born. In twenty years, the tenure track at top university mathematics departments may consist entirely of people who depend on drugs, direct neural-computer connections, genetic modification, or a combination of all three in order to achieve high-level performance.

Some people would argue that the leading edge of this phenomenon is athletes' use of steroids. I would caution, however, that athletics is atypical in that it is a zero-sum game, and we should not automatically adopt zero-sum bioethics.

Kling is skeptical about strong AI, but less skeptical about the possibility of augmenting human potential. However, even the non-strong-AI route is fraught with potential difficulties:

Over the next twenty to forty years, these enhancement technologies are going to make their appearance. Early adopters of these inventions may achieve dramatic benefits while incurring significant risks. The long-term side-effects and unintended consequences will be necessarily uncertain.

Kling has some thoughts on who those risk-takers might be, but I don't think he tops the suggestion we made in the most recent Better All the Time.

October 19, 2005

Priorities

With genetic engineering, we will be able to increase the complexity of our DNA, and improve the human race. But it will be a slow process, because one will have to wait about 18 years to see the effect of changes to the genetic code. By contrast, computers double their speed and memories every 18 months. There is a real danger that computers will develop intelligence, and take over. We urgently need to develop direct connections to the brain, so that computers can add to human intelligence, rather than be in opposition.

- Stephen Hawking

February 06, 2005

They Used to Call this "Wisdom"

FuturePundit reports:

The long-held belief that older people perform slower and worse than younger people has been proven wrong. In a study published today in Neuron, psychologists from McMaster University discovered that the ageing process actually improves certain abilities: Older people appear to be better and faster at grasping the big picture than their younger counterparts.

In this study, wisdom takes the form of high-contrast pattern recognition. The results lead Randall Parker to pose an intriguing question: is this an aspect of aging that we would want to reverse?

November 02, 2004

Mouse Brains to the Rescue

Huge news via Kurzweil AI :

Harvard scientists have manipulated stem cells already present in the brains of mice to induce the birth of new neurons, an advance once considered impossible by most scientists.

They induced the birth of new cells by killing nearby neurons in mice, which set off a cascade of events that led to stem cells, producing new neurons in the cerebral cortex. If scientists can turn this into a therapy for humans, it would mean that patients could literally heal themselves with stem cells already present in their brains.

This development holds incredible promise for the treatment of any number of degenerative diseases, not to mention brain damage caused by accidents or other trauma. Excellent news! Moreover, we can add this to the arsenal of brain enhancements that might soon be avilable.

Interestingly, neither the editors at Kurzweil nor the author of the original Wired piece have the guts to speculate as to how this development impacts the possibility of one day producing a super-intelligent mouse.

For the record: it makes it much more likely.



Be a Speculist

Share your thoughts on the future with more than

70,000

Speculist readers. Write to us at:

speculist1@yahoo.com

(More details here.)



Blogroll



Categories

Powered by
Movable Type 3.2