Comments on: Blue Brain project accurately predicts connections between neurons http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons Accelerating Intelligence Sat, 25 May 2013 08:30:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: MrFriendly http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-34739 MrFriendly Sun, 23 Sep 2012 21:06:24 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-34739 Their discovery was made a few years ago while reconstructing the cortical column. Since then, they've been validating the results. It is old news, but it's important news, and a nice proof of concept for the project. Btw, the blue brain project hasn't been renamed. They exist in parallel. If the grant isn't offered to Markram and his team, they'll continue on with the BBP, reverse-engineering the rat brain. Their discovery was made a few years ago while reconstructing the cortical column. Since then, they’ve been validating the results.

It is old news, but it’s important news, and a nice proof of concept for the project.

Btw, the blue brain project hasn’t been renamed. They exist in parallel. If the grant isn’t offered to Markram and his team, they’ll continue on with the BBP, reverse-engineering the rat brain.

]]> By: Guillermo http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-34326 Guillermo Sat, 22 Sep 2012 00:05:55 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-34326 This new study is not old news. Althought the project has now been renamed the Human Brain Project This new study is not old news. Althought the project has now been renamed the Human Brain Project

]]> By: Todor Arnaudov http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33702 Todor Arnaudov Wed, 19 Sep 2012 07:56:05 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33702 Wolfram or Markram didn't "discover" the principle, the Earth and Universe, and every living being are obvious examples of a "simpler" system producing a more "complex" result after "unfolding" and collecting data from the environment (eating is also "collecting data"). Brain won't grow intelligent if put in a dark silent room with no limbs etc. Both the beginning and the end are "apparently" simple or complex, for the evaluators the beginning seems "simple" and the result "complex", but it's because the initial data seems to be better compressible than the final one, and because it's wrongly analyzed. Even the 110 rule - try to make a 110 rule machine in this Universe having the physical laws as we know them. Building the first electronic computer required billions of years, and many many brains working together, and still - as of current knowledge of physics, how do you translate "110" in quarks, electrons and atoms? The 110 is not simple in terms of the "machine language of Universe", it's simple in your mind, after your brain is trained maths etc., which is a result of thousands of years of human evolution, which is a result of billions years ... In fact the end results are "simple"/"complex either, but the evaluator misses it - e.g. now you have billions of humans, which would say for themselves "we are unique" etc. - their * is unique, the humans are almost clones, even in their attitudes, capabilities, etc. There are sets of humans which are almost identical in their brains (in meaningful functional terms) - that's how sociology predicts correctly. The same goes for technologies - millions and billions of duplicates or very slightly different (not essentially different) objects. All forms of "mass production" are examples of that fake higher complexity. Body has trillions of cells, but they work for themselves and grow like a plan, there's no central entity that knows the state of those cells (neurons don't connect to all cells). That's an example of how the "simple" becomes "complex". I've written more about the fake grow of complexity back 10 years ago in some of the works available there (some are not): http://research.twenkid.com/ Wolfram or Markram didn’t “discover” the principle, the Earth and Universe, and every living being are obvious examples of a “simpler” system producing a more “complex” result after “unfolding” and collecting data from the environment (eating is also “collecting data”). Brain won’t grow intelligent if put in a dark silent room with no limbs etc. Both the beginning and the end are “apparently” simple or complex, for the evaluators the beginning seems “simple” and the result “complex”, but it’s because the initial data seems to be better compressible than the final one, and because it’s wrongly analyzed. Even the 110 rule – try to make a 110 rule machine in this Universe having the physical laws as we know them. Building the first electronic computer required billions of years, and many many brains working together, and still – as of current knowledge of physics, how do you translate “110″ in quarks, electrons and atoms? The 110 is not simple in terms of the “machine language of Universe”, it’s simple in your mind, after your brain is trained maths etc., which is a result of thousands of years of human evolution, which is a result of billions years … In fact the end results are “simple”/”complex either, but the evaluator misses it – e.g. now you have billions of humans, which would say for themselves “we are unique” etc. – their * is unique, the humans are almost clones, even in their attitudes, capabilities, etc. There are sets of humans which are almost identical in their brains (in meaningful functional terms) – that’s how sociology predicts correctly. The same goes for technologies – millions and billions of duplicates or very slightly different (not essentially different) objects. All forms of “mass production” are examples of that fake higher complexity. Body has trillions of cells, but they work for themselves and grow like a plan, there’s no central entity that knows the state of those cells (neurons don’t connect to all cells). That’s an example of how the “simple” becomes “complex”. I’ve written more about the fake grow of complexity back 10 years ago in some of the works available there (some are not):
http://research.twenkid.com/

]]> By: MrFriendly http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33687 MrFriendly Wed, 19 Sep 2012 06:29:42 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33687 Looks like it isn't accepting my url. The source is actually on this website. Markram discusses this in the video of him at the supercomputing conference of 2011, "International Supercomputing Conference | Henry Markram on simulating the brain — the next decisive years" 2nd part. Looks like it isn’t accepting my url. The source is actually on this website. Markram discusses this in the video of him at the supercomputing conference of 2011, “International Supercomputing Conference | Henry Markram on simulating the brain — the next decisive years”

2nd part.

]]> By: MrFriendly http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33685 MrFriendly Wed, 19 Sep 2012 06:26:05 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33685 http://www.kurzweilai.net/henry-markram-simulating-the-brain-next-decisive-years 2nd video. http://www.kurzweilai.net/henry-markram-simulating-the-brain-next-decisive-years

2nd video.

]]> By: Vlad http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33672 Vlad Wed, 19 Sep 2012 05:33:55 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33672 Yes, I know very well that the mapping of 1% of the the human genome took 7 years and the remaining 99% took another 7 years, and that the cost of it was $3 billion two decades ago and today it costs only $1000, the power of exponential growth is an amazing thing, but unfortunately the mapping of the human genome is not the same as the reverse engineering of the human brain, with that 1% of the human genome we had 99.99% accurate map of the genome and we will have 1% of the map of the human brain very soon but unfortunately that map of the human brain will not be 99.99% accurate, so the most important thing we need is a 99.99% accurate model of a single neuron, we don't have it today so for the reverse engineering of the brain we need exponential progress in understanding of a singe neuron. Yes, I know very well that the mapping of 1% of the the human genome took 7 years and the remaining 99% took another 7 years, and that the cost of it was $3 billion two decades ago and today it costs only $1000, the power of exponential growth is an amazing thing, but unfortunately the mapping of the human genome is not the same as the reverse engineering of the human brain, with that 1% of the human genome we had 99.99% accurate map of the genome and we will have 1% of the map of the human brain very soon but unfortunately that map of the human brain will not be 99.99% accurate, so the most important thing we need is a 99.99% accurate model of a single neuron, we don’t have it today so for the reverse engineering of the brain we need exponential progress in understanding of a singe neuron.

]]> By: Mindsight http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33664 Mindsight Wed, 19 Sep 2012 05:04:02 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33664 I wonder if this understanding will motivate research into new treatments for neurodegenerative diseases or traumatic brain injuries. It would be wonderful if we could leverage more of the automatic workings of biology to help heal people. Imagine the benefits if fresh, healthy neurons might be precisely injected into a damaged brain (or towed into position by tiny robots?), and then trusted to grow themselves into the form needed to recover at least some of the injured person's lost functionality. I wonder if this understanding will motivate research into new treatments for neurodegenerative diseases or traumatic brain injuries. It would be wonderful if we could leverage more of the automatic workings of biology to help heal people.

Imagine the benefits if fresh, healthy neurons might be precisely injected into a damaged brain (or towed into position by tiny robots?), and then trusted to grow themselves into the form needed to recover at least some of the injured person’s lost functionality.

]]> By: Editor http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33642 Editor Wed, 19 Sep 2012 01:54:21 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33642 "pretty old news": source? “pretty old news”: source?

]]> By: Gabriel http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33637 Gabriel Wed, 19 Sep 2012 01:32:34 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33637 Kurzweil relies and places much faith into exponential growth - he mentions alot the Human Genome Project and the Internet which critics both derided as hopeless halfway through, until the growth kicked in and they were finished, not just ahead of schedule, but finished at all. The human brain, and really everything else, he views the same way...that it seems hopeless now, but progress will kick in faster and faster and we will accomplish in a very short amount of time what people once thought we'd never finish whatsoever. I guess we'll just have to wait and see :) Kurzweil relies and places much faith into exponential growth – he mentions alot the Human Genome Project and the Internet which critics both derided as hopeless halfway through, until the growth kicked in and they were finished, not just ahead of schedule, but finished at all. The human brain, and really everything else, he views the same way…that it seems hopeless now, but progress will kick in faster and faster and we will accomplish in a very short amount of time what people once thought we’d never finish whatsoever.

I guess we’ll just have to wait and see :)

]]> By: Gabriel http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33636 Gabriel Wed, 19 Sep 2012 01:21:39 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33636 Ugh, sorry for the choppy response - I wish we could edit posts on this website. Ugh, sorry for the choppy response – I wish we could edit posts on this website.

]]> By: Gabriel http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33635 Gabriel Wed, 19 Sep 2012 01:18:35 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33635 I don't agree that individuality will end -- if anything individuality in the future will be more for the right reasons then the wrong ones. People with all sorts of physical problems, from the tangible to the perceptive, have had to rationalize what they have because perhaps their is nothing they can do about -- if I wish I had something physically that I don't, and I don't want to opt for say, plastic surgery to get it, in time I will become content and love what I have and feel pride for it. This is the normal train of thinking and is what makes for this fear of supposedly losing individuality...I find that wrong -- when biotech advances enough that we will be able to make ourselves biologically 'perfect', we will no longer have to rationalize our physical problems, whether tangible and objective like being handicapped, or perceptive such as me hating a blemish that others don't notice or even enjoy....again, it's this (excessive) rationalizing of our faults that makes us overblow them and value them more then we should - its not too different then advocates of Death and that immortality is wrong. These beliefs are natural, even beneficial, up to a certain point because their has been, for things like death, nothing else we can do about it till now and it gives us hope, and for things like appearance, it teaches us to see beyond the physical and feel more pride for yourself...however, rationalizing something bad because their is nothing else you can do about it, doesn't make it a good thing: Death, in the end, is not something to advocate by any means, and a physical handicap/scarring/or what-have-you that I suffer from, is still a bad thing...you can rationalize the handicap you can't change it, but that doesn't make it. If my blemish is more fickle and not something that I really suffer from, it's still my choice to eliminate it even if others don't see it as a fault, and perhaps I really am better without it. I'm all for individuality, liberty, expression...however, when we live in a world when a person can have a 'perfect' brain and body, we will not lose individuality - if anything, we will gain more because people will be more unique for the right reasons, such as excelling in a certain skill, then for the wrong ones such as rationalizing our physical blemishes - it's good to feel pride for your appearance and for yourself, but that doesn't mean we should celebrate our limits or our blemishes anymore then we should. I understand having respect for your body and yourself and not treating it as a toy to alter at any whim, but you can't let that fear stop you from expressing your own individuality to enhance yourself if that is how you really view it. There is alot to say on this issue, but hopefully you understand what I'm saying - I'm of the exact opposite viewpoint in that individuality will actually increase in the future...everyone will want to become genetically 'perfect', but that's only skin-deep and we still will have to live and learn -- like Kurzweil wrote, I can change my genes to make myself predisposed to music, I'd still have to take lessons. And once nanotech, and especially (if) Mind-Uploading become possible, individuality will increase even more -- when I can take on the appearance of somebody else, merge my thinking with someone else and so on...I will be far more expressive and unique then I ever was when I worried about getting a tattoo or not. I don’t agree that individuality will end — if anything individuality in the future will be more for the right reasons then the wrong ones. People with all sorts of physical problems, from the tangible to the perceptive, have had to rationalize what they have because perhaps their is nothing they can do about — if I wish I had something physically that I don’t, and I don’t want to opt for say, plastic surgery to get it, in time I will become content and love what I have and feel pride for it.

This is the normal train of thinking and is what makes for this fear of supposedly losing individuality…I find that wrong — when biotech advances enough that we will be able to make ourselves biologically ‘perfect’, we will no longer have to rationalize our physical problems, whether tangible and objective like being handicapped, or perceptive such as me hating a blemish that others don’t notice or even enjoy….again, it’s this (excessive) rationalizing of our faults that makes us overblow them and value them more then we should – its not too different then advocates of Death and that immortality is wrong.

These beliefs are natural, even beneficial, up to a certain point because their has been, for things like death, nothing else we can do about it till now and it gives us hope, and for things like appearance, it teaches us to see beyond the physical and feel more pride for yourself…however, rationalizing something bad because their is nothing else you can do about it, doesn’t make it a good thing: Death, in the end, is not something to advocate by any means, and a physical handicap/scarring/or what-have-you that I suffer from, is still a bad thing…you can rationalize the handicap you can’t change it, but that doesn’t make it. If my blemish is more fickle and not something that I really suffer from, it’s still my choice to eliminate it even if others don’t see it as a fault, and perhaps I really am better without it.

I’m all for individuality, liberty, expression…however, when we live in a world when a person can have a ‘perfect’ brain and body, we will not lose individuality – if anything, we will gain more because people will be more unique for the right reasons, such as excelling in a certain skill, then for the wrong ones such as rationalizing our physical blemishes – it’s good to feel pride for your appearance and for yourself, but that doesn’t mean we should celebrate our limits or our blemishes anymore then we should. I understand having respect for your body and yourself and not treating it as a toy to alter at any whim, but you can’t let that fear stop you from expressing your own individuality to enhance yourself if that is how you really view it.

There is alot to say on this issue, but hopefully you understand what I’m saying – I’m of the exact opposite viewpoint in that individuality will actually increase in the future…everyone will want to become genetically ‘perfect’, but that’s only skin-deep and we still will have to live and learn — like Kurzweil wrote, I can change my genes to make myself predisposed to music, I’d still have to take lessons.

And once nanotech, and especially (if) Mind-Uploading become possible, individuality will increase even more — when I can take on the appearance of somebody else, merge my thinking with someone else and so on…I will be far more expressive and unique then I ever was when I worried about getting a tattoo or not.

]]> By: MrFriendly http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33625 MrFriendly Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:41:35 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33625 This is pretty old news that's been repackaged to help the Human Brain Project's chances at securing a very large grant in Europe. I really hope they get it. This is pretty old news that’s been repackaged to help the Human Brain Project’s chances at securing a very large grant in Europe.

I really hope they get it.

]]> By: JamesG76 http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33623 JamesG76 Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:53:50 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33623 The two problems of mapping C elegans' brain, and a human brain, are not necessarily directly related. It's almost certain that mapping the C elegans' brain is not going to get us much of anything directly, it may help with mapping the human brain to a degree, but maybe not enough to make it worth it. I think there will be relatively more resources put into the human brain eventually offsetting the simplicity of the C elegans' brain. The two problems of mapping C elegans’ brain, and a human brain, are not necessarily directly related. It’s almost certain that mapping the C elegans’ brain is not going to get us much of anything directly, it may help with mapping the human brain to a degree, but maybe not enough to make it worth it. I think there will be relatively more resources put into the human brain eventually offsetting the simplicity of the C elegans’ brain.

]]> By: Spikosauropod http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33593 Spikosauropod Tue, 18 Sep 2012 19:33:31 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33593 Marcos, Wolfram showed how a simple rule can generate complexity. You have it backward. Marcos, Wolfram showed how a simple rule can generate complexity. You have it backward.

]]> By: Spikosauropod http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33592 Spikosauropod Tue, 18 Sep 2012 19:29:20 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33592 Wolfram showed how a simple rule can create complexity. You have it backward. Wolfram showed how a simple rule can create complexity. You have it backward.

]]> By: infinitos http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33589 infinitos Tue, 18 Sep 2012 19:05:45 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33589 I was reading an article back in july about the synapse and how they are critical in building a silicon brain , watching this video and the announcing of this discovery really made my day ! :) I was reading an article back in july about the synapse and how they are critical in building a silicon brain , watching this video and the announcing of this discovery really made my day ! :)

]]> By: Bri http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33580 Bri Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:33:11 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33580 This approach reminds me of Craig Ventors, in relation to the human genome project. It should help reduce the tangle of connections that are being studied by numerous groups world wide. As computers get stronger they will help define what each area of the brain is actually doing. I still think they should focus on simpler organisms to figure out the principals of brain function. Each area of research adds another piece to the puzzle, no matter where it comes from. This approach reminds me of Craig Ventors, in relation to the human genome project. It should help reduce the tangle of connections that are being studied by numerous groups world wide. As computers get stronger they will help define what each area of the brain is actually doing. I still think they should focus on simpler organisms to figure out the principals of brain function. Each area of research adds another piece to the puzzle, no matter where it comes from.

]]> By: melajara http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33568 melajara Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:02:06 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33568 Well, Wolfram's rule 110 is the exception, not the rule, LOL. I applaud Markram's approach, not too reductivist but reductivist enough to make seemingly ungraspable problems tractable, here a realistic connectome. Well, Wolfram’s rule 110 is the exception, not the rule, LOL.

I applaud Markram’s approach, not too reductivist but reductivist enough to make seemingly ungraspable problems tractable, here a realistic connectome.

]]> By: Guy http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33561 Guy Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:30:45 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33561 @Marcos, could you clarify your comment? Which "site" are you referring to, BBP? KurzweilAI? And what "argument" are you referring to? I'm not clear on how Wolfram proved something 10 years ago that was only discovered now. I, for one, welcome dissenting voices, but summary dismissal gets us nowhere. @Marcos, could you clarify your comment? Which “site” are you referring to, BBP? KurzweilAI? And what “argument” are you referring to? I’m not clear on how Wolfram proved something 10 years ago that was only discovered now. I, for one, welcome dissenting voices, but summary dismissal gets us nowhere.

]]> By: GatorALLin http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33560 GatorALLin Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:28:47 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33560 ....liked that ending....."You go first." ......LOL ….liked that ending…..”You go first.” ……LOL

]]> By: Hoss http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33556 Hoss Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:12:06 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33556 These are the types of articles that separate kurzweilai from the gadget blogs. However, I see the same dilemma which Aldous Huxley foresaw, and that is once the perfect brain and physical appearance is achieved and made available to everyone, it will be the end of individuality. A 75-95% accuracy is certainly impressive, but the 5-25% unaccounted for in the model could be what makes us unique. This is one of those technologies that will have to be perfect the first attempt. You go first. These are the types of articles that separate kurzweilai from the gadget blogs. However, I see the same dilemma which Aldous Huxley foresaw, and that is once the perfect brain and physical appearance is achieved and made available to everyone, it will be the end of individuality. A 75-95% accuracy is certainly impressive, but the 5-25% unaccounted for in the model could be what makes us unique. This is one of those technologies that will have to be perfect the first attempt. You go first.

]]> By: Marcos Marin http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33534 Marcos Marin Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:45:46 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33534 Are you even aware who this site is owned by?! Unfortunately Wolfram's New Kind of Science proved this argument wrong more than 10 years ago. Are you even aware who this site is owned by?!
Unfortunately Wolfram’s New Kind of Science proved this argument wrong more than 10 years ago.

]]> By: Vlad http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33532 Vlad Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:43:42 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33532 This project is very interesting, it is not some 'high-flying' project like BBP but it is far more realistic, they're trying to reverse engineer the nervous system of the little worm that is called C. elegans which has only 302 neurons and 7000 synapses: http://www.openworm.org/ BTW I don't know why is Kurzweil so sure that reverse engineering of the human brain would be possible by 2029 or 2025 when today we cannot reverse engineer even the simplest nervous system of the C. elegans which consists of only 302 neurons and 7000 synapses!? And the first artificial neural network of the C. elegans nervous system has been around since 1986, the progress since then in understanding this simplest nervous system is very disappointing... :( Kurzweil doesn't mention C. elegans in his book 'The Singularity is Near', unfortunately the fact is that the artificial neural networks are zillion times more simple than the real neurons in the brain, so we need exponential progress in understanding of this simple nervous system and of a single neuron, so I hope that the outcome of this project will be successfully and accurately simulated C. elegans nervous system, it could be a breakthrough that could pave the way for reverse engineering of the brain of higher organisms including humans in the coming decades but I'm a little bit skeptical, I believe it will be possible to reverse egnieer the human brain sooner or later but I'm pretty sure it will not be possible by 2025, but anyway Kurzweil and his ideas are great inspirations for me :) This project is very interesting, it is not some ‘high-flying’ project like BBP but it is far more realistic, they’re trying to reverse engineer the nervous system of the little worm that is called C. elegans which has only 302 neurons and 7000 synapses:
http://www.openworm.org/
BTW I don’t know why is Kurzweil so sure that reverse engineering of the human brain would be possible by 2029 or 2025 when today we cannot reverse engineer even the simplest nervous system of the C. elegans which consists of only 302 neurons and 7000 synapses!? And the first artificial neural network of the C. elegans nervous system has been around since 1986, the progress since then in understanding this simplest nervous system is very disappointing… :( Kurzweil doesn’t mention C. elegans in his book ‘The Singularity is Near’, unfortunately the fact is that the artificial neural networks are zillion times more simple than the real neurons in the brain, so we need exponential progress in understanding of this simple nervous system and of a single neuron, so I hope that the outcome of this project will be successfully and accurately simulated C. elegans nervous system, it could be a breakthrough that could pave the way for reverse engineering of the brain of higher organisms including humans in the coming decades but I’m a little bit skeptical, I believe it will be possible to reverse egnieer the human brain sooner or later but I’m pretty sure it will not be possible by 2025, but anyway Kurzweil and his ideas are great inspirations for me :)

]]> By: Marcos Marin http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33530 Marcos Marin Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:34:50 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33530 "painstaking experimentation on slices of living brain tissue." Sounds like a Zombie's Paradise. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg “painstaking experimentation on slices of living brain tissue.”

Sounds like a Zombie’s Paradise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg

]]> By: John Middlemas http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33526 John Middlemas Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:18:06 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33526 A truly landmark discovery that could make brain simulation possible. To individually map 100 billion neurons and their trillions of synapses was always an almost insurmountable problem. If much of that mapping can now be predicted by simple rules then the problem may finally be manageable. It might have been expected that there are simple rules since DNA could not contain enough information for the entire mapping. This could really accelerate AI. A truly landmark discovery that could make brain simulation possible. To individually map 100 billion neurons and their trillions of synapses was always an almost insurmountable problem. If much of that mapping can now be predicted by simple rules then the problem may finally be manageable. It might have been expected that there are simple rules since DNA could not contain enough information for the entire mapping. This could really accelerate AI.

]]> By: H.K. Fauskanger http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33519 H.K. Fauskanger Tue, 18 Sep 2012 14:39:28 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33519 I should like to see an update as well. Did she manage to raise the amount of cash needed for her remains to be preserved, in the hope that the information defining her can eventually be extracted and reactivated? I should like to see an update as well. Did she manage to raise the amount of cash needed for her remains to be preserved, in the hope that the information defining her can eventually be extracted and reactivated?

]]> By: star0 http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33500 star0 Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:49:58 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33500 Sounds good for making accurate models of the brain. I wonder, though, whether it could prove helpful in scanning the connectome. I can imagine some ways that it might help. Sounds good for making accurate models of the brain. I wonder, though, whether it could prove helpful in scanning the connectome. I can imagine some ways that it might help.

]]> By: Gorden Russell http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33493 Gorden Russell Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:26:24 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33493 Mapping the brain like this is just one of the things that will save young Kim Suozzi. Ms. Angelica, can we have an update of the progress of reaching the goal for her donations? Mapping the brain like this is just one of the things that will save young Kim Suozzi. Ms. Angelica, can we have an update of the progress of reaching the goal for her donations?

]]> By: Bri http://www.kurzweilai.net/blue-brain-project-accurately-predicts-connections-between-neurons/comment-page-1#comment-33476 Bri Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:23:10 +0000 http://www.kurzweilai.net/?p=163518#comment-33476 I always wondered what happened to the Blue Man Group! LOL!!! I always wondered what happened to the Blue Man Group! LOL!!!

]]>