Your message was perhaps one of the strangest pieces of email I have ever received. Although it is flattering to have a ``fan club'', in fact, it is a very bad idea. Unlike most of human society, science and engineering are based on the idea that each of us is capable of evaluating evidence and thinking on our own. Each of us can do experiments, work out the reasoning, and determine the truth for ourselves. There is no room in science or engineering for ``fans'' representing group approval over individual thought. One of my heros, Galileo, put it very well:
In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.
I am pleased to talk with people about matters of science or engineering, so you and your colleagues may certainly send me mail. I hope to learn as much from your experiences as you may learn for me. But please get rid of the ``cult of personality'' way of thinking. It is unscientific and ultimately destructive.
Name:
Anonymous2011-08-23 13:11
I AM THE KING OF FARTS, BOW DOWN AND SMELL MY HEAVENLY ODORS
Name:
Anonymous2011-08-24 9:02
>>198 Bigger patches result in a frog or a snake.
'-._ ___.....___
`.__ ,-' ,-.`-, ALWAYS KNEW
`''-------' ( p ) `._ THAT SUSSMAN READS [spoiler]/prog/[/spoiler]
`-' \
\
. \
\---..,--'
................._ --...--,
`-.._ _.-'
`'-----''
Name:
Anonymous2011-08-24 9:05
>>199
|The human genome — the information required to build a human from a single, undifferentiated eukariotic cell — is about 1GB.
Yet the library of the universe required to launch that genome is infinitely large...
A mammalian neuron takes about ten milliseconds to respond to a stimulus. A driver can respond to a visual stimulus in a few hundred milliseconds, and decide an action, such as making a turn. So the computational depth of this behavior is only a few tens of steps.
Has he ever heard of parallelism or pipelining?
SICP is mush-brained drivel by a pseudo-intellectual cockpouch. It's right up there with TAOCP and K&R as things that idiots read to make people think they're smart.
Actually, when any idiot looks at what they use to incode the genome, any idiot can do it in about 256 MB... pre-compression.
Name:
Anonymous2011-08-25 4:06
So the computational depth of this behavior is only a few tens of steps. We don’t know how to make such a machine, and we wouldn’t know how to program it.
It's essentially an analog circuit with comparators that have huge fan-outs and fan-ins.
>>199
That's surprising. I expected neurons to be a lot faster. At least now I have a new excuse for being socially inept -- my speech handling neural network has computational depth a few magnitudes larger than the average Homo Sapiens.
Name:
Anonymous2011-08-25 13:00
So when are we going to have enough computational power to run a simulated neural network powerful enough to simulate the visual and linguistic capabilities of the brain at, say, 1/100 of its speed?
>>221
Nah. Give me enough computational power and I'll get you strong AI.
Name:
Anonymous2011-08-25 23:19
>>223
Simulating one step of a neural network with N neurons is asymptotic to O(N2) if you want it to learn by itself (like humans do) instead of having a separate learning phase.
Oh, and we still haven't figured out what the fuck is going on during sleep.