Technology

59133 readers

2265 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

340

Cubic millimetre of brain mapped in spectacular detail (www.nature.com)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think of LLMs like digital bugs, doing their thing, basically programmed.

They're just programmed with virtual life experience instead of a traditional programmer.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Back in the early 2000s CERN was able to simulate the brain of a flat worm. Actually simulate the individual neurons firing. A 100% digital representation of a flatworm brain. And it took up an immense amount of processing capacity for a form of life that basic, far more processor intensive than the most advanced AIs we currently have.

Modern AIs don't bother to simulate brains, they do something completely different. So you really can't compare them to anything organic.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-put-worm-brain-in-lego-robot-openworm-connectome

2014, not early 2000s (unless you were talking about the century or something).

OpenWorm project, not CERN.

And it was run on Lego Mindstorm. I am no AI expert, but I am fairly certain that it is not "far more processor intensive than the most advanced AIs we currently have".

Citation needed on that comment of yours. Because I know for a fact that what I said is true. Go look it up.

Maybe you should be a little less sure of your "facts", and listen to what the world has to teach you. It can be marvelous.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

far more processor intensive than the most advanced AIs we currently have

This is the second comment I've seen from you where you confidently say something incorrect. Maybe stop trying to be orator of the objective and learn a little more first.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Citation needed on that comment of yours. Because I know for a fact that what I said is true. Go look it up.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

I think the claim that 24 year old technology is more computationally intensive than the ground breaking tech of the modern day needs the citation.