Uploading Conciousness to Computer

[FallentoReason]

I don't think that will ever be possible. Subjective experience can't be programmed, because if it can be traced back to a source (the cogs if you will) then it's an objective triviality.

I think a sufficiently complex computer could be used to accurately map and model the human mind, even a specific person/personality. After all, it's all just electro-chemical reactions. Our current digital computers won't be able to manage it, but quantum computing...

Sure, a computer could model the logical processes and such. I don't think that it could model e.g. the sensation of hunger, or an appreciation for Bach's music. These things aren't processes. They're experience-based.

[Surgenator]

I think a sufficiently complex computer could be used to accurately map and model the human mind, even a specific person/personality. After all, it's all just electro-chemical reactions. Our current digital computers won't be able to manage it, but quantum computing...

Sure, a computer could model the logical processes and such. I don't think that it could model e.g. the sensation of hunger, or an appreciation for Bach's music. These things aren't processes. They're experience-based.

How do you know experiences aren't process-based?

[FallentoReason]

Sure, a computer could model the logical processes and such. I don't think that it could model e.g. the sensation of hunger, or an appreciation for Bach's music. These things aren't processes. They're experience-based.

How do you know experiences aren't process-based?

Because if we imagine mental processes as a series of pulleys, ropes and cogs, and we blew this up to a proportion big enough where we could walk in and inspect it, could you then point to where the experience of me 'liking the colour blue' is happening? Can physical processes even represent the proposition 'blue is my favourite colour'?

Similarly, sensations/experiences in relation to our brain are like the speed a car can attain from its motor. Except, a car's mechanical processes can't ever feel the sensation of "going fast", whereas our "motor", the brain, *does* give us sensations related to its processes ergo we can experience. There's no way to reduce this intrinsic difference about us into a physical explanation, because it's simply not a process. It's something *more*.

[AFTT47]

I wonder how far our current technology can take this. Suppose you did this with a higher animal like a mouse. Would you then have a conscious machine?

Just thinking about the memory space needed for the mapping.
Human brain has ~100 billion neurons with each neuron makes over 1000 connections.
A mouse's brain is ~0.03% smaller in mass than a human brain.
If we assume the neurons between mouse and human are rougly the same, then a mouse will have 30 million neurons and 30 billion connections in total. You would need a 64bit integer to give each neuron a unique id. You will also need 64bit integers for each connection. So that is 64*(30 million + 30 billion) ~ 240 GB of memory just to store the map. This doesn't included other variables (like activation thresholds) for processing.

Back to your question, we have 1 TB drives now. So we probably can do the same thing with a mouse as with the worm with our current technology.

I was thinking in terms of how complex a brain can we accurately scan so we know what to replicate. That seems like the harder part.

[Aoi Magi]

No I believe emotions are nothing "more" than process based mechanisms just like everything else in our brain, and thus can be mapped to a computer as well. For example: http://www.wired.com/2012/06/google-x-neural-network/

As you can see, the AI in the link above, developed a likeness/fondness/attachment/attraction/whatever towards cats. Now we might be able to deduce why exactly that happened, because that system is relatively simplae compared to our brains. But the simple fact that this happened is proof that our emotions can be and in all likelihood are process based.

[Alex K]

I don't think that will ever be possible. Subjective experience can't be programmed, because if it can be traced back to a source (the cogs if you will) then it's an objective triviality.

I think a sufficiently complex computer could be used to accurately map and model the human mind, even a specific person/personality. After all, it's all just electro-chemical reactions. Our current digital computers won't be able to manage it, but quantum computing...

Yes, I know that quantum computers have been a long time coming and are still at the fringe of computer development, but once EA figures out how to port their crappy games...

I'm not convinced that we need a quantum computer for this task. There doesn't seem to be anything in the brain that really relies on long range quantum superpositions to work..?

[FallentoReason]

No I believe emotions are nothing "more" than process based mechanisms just like everything else in our brain, and thus can be mapped to a computer as well. For example: http://www.wired.com/2012/06/google-x-neural-network/

As you can see, the AI in the link above, developed a likeness/fondness/attachment/attraction/whatever towards cats. Now we might be able to deduce why exactly that happened, because that system is relatively simplae compared to our brains. But the simple fact that this happened is proof that our emotions can be and in all likelihood are process based.

You're reporting something that isn't there.

However, Google’s latest offering appears to be the first to identify objects without hints and additional information.

They've taught a machine to do a categorical task. This isn't to do with anything "emotional" or related to developing a "likeness/fondness" etc. like you've dressed it to be. And it's certainly nowhere near the substance of an experience.

[Darkstar]

There's no way to reduce this intrinsic difference about us into a physical explanation, because it's simply not a process. It's something *more*.

Like... a soul? Sorry, not buying it.

[FallentoReason]

There's no way to reduce this intrinsic difference about us into a physical explanation, because it's simply not a process. It's something *more*.

Like... a soul? Sorry, not buying it.

No one said you had to

[Regina]

Might sound like a stupid question, but is it safe to start thinking about making robots think like humans? I know the whole "robot uprising" theme is blown way out of proportion by sci-fi, but theoretically is it possible?

I suppose as long as these robots always have an "off" switch there's no harm...