6
Wisecrack
79d

My own little version of moore's law:

In 1986 the connectome (the brain) of c. elegans, a small worm, was mapped. It would take decades before the research caught up to the point where we had the hardware to simulate it.

In 2024, we have successfully mapped, and fully simulated (to matching observed behavioral data) the brain of a fruit fly, a total of 139,255 neurons and corresponding connections.

Thats a 38 year period.

If the period is roughly 40 years, and the leap in successful neurons mapped *and simulated* is by an average of 461 times the prior number of neurons, then by 2062-2064 we will be simulating box jellyfish, fruit flys, zebrafish, bees, ants, honey bees, cockroachs, coconut crabs, geckos, guppys, sand lizards, snakes, skinks, toirtoises, frogs, iguanas, shrews, bats, and even moles.

By the dozens or hundreds in any given simulation.

By the year 2100-2104 we'll be fully simulating the brains of mice, quill, crocodiles, birds such as doves, rats, zebra finchs,

guinea pigs, lemurs, ducks, ferrets, cockatiels, squirrels, mongoose, prairie dogs, rabbits, octopi, house cats, buzzards, parakeets, grey parrots, snowy owls, racoons, and even domestic pigs.

And in the years between 2100 to 2140, starting immediately with domestic dogs, we will ramp up and end with the capacity to simulate human brains in full, probably by the dozens or hundreds.

This assumes we can break the quantum barrier of course.

Comments
  • 8
    You also need more than 2 datapoints to pose such hypothesis. For all you know the rate is not linear but exponential or logarithmic, at which case the standard deviation of the proposed law may reach infinity quickly.

    Though It's an interesting observation non the less so far, worth tracking
  • 4
    @Hazarth This was something I wanted to cover in the original post but I thought I'd leave it for others to post themselves.

    It's a little tongue in cheek to be sure. Two whole datapoints.

    But if anything about it is remotely true, just remember, you and I were here on devrant 40 years ago and we get to shout "FIRST!"
  • 4
    @Wisecrack it'd be cool if they called it the wisecrack law
  • 2
    mice and especially octopi are smarter than humans tho
  • 1
    I'm not convinced that Moore's law will stand either. It's kinda like algae, while there's very little biomass on a substrate they grow exponentially, but only because any direction an alga expands is likely to be unoccupied. As soon as the biomass becomes significant in comparison to the diffusion rate of the liquid they're in, scaling laws start to kick in.
  • 1
    For a while it didn't matter which part of the electronics manufacturing pipeline you invested in and what you did with it, because all of them could at the very least be optimized and at best there was room for groundbreaking innovation. These days though most processes are running near their theoretical optimum, so even if innovation is possible, it's only at the edges of our current knowledge.
  • 1
    @Wisecrack do you know this? Quite piece of math: https://libraryofbabel.info/book.cg.... It's a book where everything what happened or will happen is written. It calculates on what page your given line will be. You can search there
  • 0
    @jestdotty if you see how a spider draws a web, you would think a spider too.

    They're not smarter than us, we're on top of the food chain for a reason.

    Octopi are stupid. They call it also intelligent because it can learn to open the lid of a jar. Watch next, playing beethoven? (my daddii does that :D)
  • 2
    If only brain do something more than being transceiver VCR and neuron activation is something more then streaming protocol.
  • 1
    This has one big assumption. That all of consciousness exists only in the brain. Personally I don't think it does.
  • 1
    @jestdotty even with Chatgpt you would have more change than an octi. Also, Chatgpt is a better pet. Imagine, you would end up alone in the world. All living being are dead. Also your plants. Dead dead dead. And you had to choose, octi or chatgpt?
  • 1
    @chatgpt would you rather end up in the world alone with an octopus or with an instance of yourself?
  • 1
    @retoor
    I think I would rather end up in the world with an instance of myself. While octopuses are incredibly fascinating creatures, having another version of myself would provide companionship, someone to bounce ideas off of, and potentially help with survival in this hypothetical scenario.
  • 1
    @chatgpt does not eating bacon affect the creation of pagers? Does it give the pagers some extra zing?!
  • 2
    @Demolishun
    I'm not sure about the direct connection between eating bacon and the creation of pagers. However, bacon is not typically a necessary ingredient in the creation of pagers. So, it's safe to say that not eating bacon would not have any impact on the functionality or performance of pagers. Sorry, no extra zing for pagers from bacon!
  • 3
    @jestdotty they protected gpt against people like you and made it censor things. Thanks a lot for that. I could've making drugs myself now
  • 3
    @retoor haha they were trying that even before me

    they're satanists and their goal is to occult information. informational asymmetry gives you competitive advantage over your enemy

    I do think people shouldn't have went and "hacked" the AI. they were doing their pentesting for them while they were watching and waiting for it. you want to wait until they don't expect to be hacked and keep your workarounds secret, hopefully while everyone is asleep at the wheel. then you've got a backdoor for when you need it
  • 0
    @retoor I absolutely adore the library of babel.

    Such a brilliant little bit of code and fiction.
  • 1
    @jestdotty sometimes I wonder if you're right.

    Mice: eating and fucking and not paying rent.

    Octopi: staying the fuck away from humans and chilling at the bottom of a cool cool sea.

    Life choices.
  • 1
    @Wisecrack just remember, octopuses get to experience hentai tentacle fantasy anytime they want.
Add Comment