So meaningful.
Meanwhile:
https://i.ibb.co/QD40jcy/afbeelding.png

He replied.
I still have doubts.

Yes, that is what I said.
Religious fan-fiction.
With zero regard to the laws of physics.

> Their body will be being atomized into nanites by a god like being

People don't believe me when I tell them that most AI fans are writing religious fanfiction.

Here is a tray of Monster power drink, and 50 bags of Doritos.
I need you to go over Google again.
Make sure what you just said is actually true.
Because there are subtle hints here in this community that you might be...
wrong.

Too cumbersome.
The mobilephone fits in the hand, and we have grown to accept the desktop computer.

It needs be 0% cumbersome.
No wires, no weight, and cheap enough.

Until it become as mainstream as cocacola, the gameing industry will keep treating as a niche.
That's why you only find new game mechanics in indie games.
The big publishers only go for sure wins.
So another Doom, another OverWatch (I think OverWatch is already another something else).

You sound like me!
AND THIS IS MY TURF!
Human gets impaled on antlers

I would like to know which company forces patients to drill holes in their skull.

Or is this like a tattoo parlor "forcing" people to needle ink in their skin for a tattoo?
Shops "forcing"people to give away money if they want to bring food back home?
Toys "forcing"kids to put batteries in toys?
Books "forcing"people to turn pages to read the story?

Anyway, images found here: https://science.xyz/products/vision/

I don't know what kind of data you hope to get into your brain, but I hope it has to do with your visual cortex.

No, I'm not even using actual bricks.
I'm using lego bricks.
And not actual mortar, I'm using spit instead.
But if you use enough, it will work, eventually.
Matter a fact, I probably couldn't even prevent it from forming a house even if I wanted to.
A house will form, and it will also be out of my control.

> dealing with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations.

Realistically, I make a house by pouring bricks and mortar on a heap until they accidentally slide into the desired shape.

Ah I see, it's referencing a number of other theories, and suddenly the author themselves mention their own theory for which they're asking the reader for funding in their indiegogo project.

Funny tho that sciencealert is just copying theconversation.com.
Is there a reason we're avoiding theconversation.com?

Is this a new test or an old test dug up by the author?

yeah no.
That will never work that way.
At best you would be stacking specifically designed components that are suppose to work by plugging into each other.
But you will never "oopsy I made sentient AI" like Wesley fucking Crusher just like you can't oopsy yourself into a net positive fusion reactor or oopsy a concoction of washing detergent into an immortality elixer.
Shit only works after painstakingly long designing and rebuilding.

But I should at least admit that you are the audience that is being celebrated in this post.
One day we will trip over ourselves carrying a large pile of random devices and the great AI savior will arise.
Fixing our problems so we don't have to.

And political themed subs keep talking about Russia, odd how current events keep creeping into discussions.

You saying that just piling up heaps of consumer level computers won't spontaneously create the machine god that also happens to want to fix our problems?
Herecy!

I only now realize you are talking about the background banner the new reddit interface provides.
It's the diffusion MRI data showing the general direction of neuron's axom.

Doubtful.

what does pfp mean?

There's nothing wrong with their fifififingrefringresesrsfiggers.

elaborate

Unless I misinterpreted the last option, it is my opinion that it's the pattern that makes the person, not the material of the substrate it's made on.
Gradual replacement maintains the pattern while it's in use.
The pattern continues uninterrupted.
Death occurs at no moment.

Your poll is missing an option

I wasn't aware that the wiring (connectome) was the data.
I kinda assumed there was a electro-chemical factor involved where the neuron had different trigger conditions which was the result of a learning process.
I was imagining that these factors could be transfered to a brain with a different connectome.

Since this image prediction was possible using fMRI data, I was wondering if our connnectome could be similar enough that the transfer of this (assumed) electro-chemical state of neurons would result in a personality that is similar enough to represent the person who's electro-chemical state you transfered to a different brain (connectome-wise).

Although this is sciencefiction stuff, it would be an interresting question wether or not you could clone yourself into a standardized artificial brain, by copying these electro-chemical variations.

> be as smart as we are.

For a certain definition of "smart" of-course.
"Takes a big bite of rainforest killing sojabean fed cowmeat filled with microplastics"

But that means a person is a dataset applied to a "generally" identical neural net.
Ok, that statement might be generally a lie but this is my question:

What would happen if we could measure all the synaptic weights/values of brain model A belonging to ZeroRelevance.
And just use those values to adjust the neurons in Brainmodel B (belonging to vernes1978).
Howmuch would Brainmodel B react differently then ZeroRelevance?

How big would the difference be?

So, even tho it's not reconstructing the image based on your fMRI data.
It is comparing your fMRI data with fMRI of other people and the related images that got associated with the FMRI data.

That means we all have the same brain-area's associated with abstract concepts?