The Mind and How to Build One
August 12, 2010 by Ray Kurzweil
At the Singularity Summit in San Francisco at 11:00 am on Saturday, August 14, Ray Kurzweil will present an overview of “arguably the most important project in the history of the human-machine civilization”: to model and reverse-engineer the brain, with the goal of creating intelligent machines to address the grand challenges of humanity. He prepared the following statement on his talk at the conference.
What does it mean to understand the brain? Where are we on the roadmap to this goal? What are the effective routes to progress – detailed modeling, theoretical effort, improvement of imaging and computational technologies? What predictions can we make? What are the consequences of materialization of such predictions – social, ethical? I will address these questions and examine some of the most common criticisms of the exponential growth of information technology including criticisms from hardware (“Moore’s Law will not go on forever”), software (“software is stuck in the mud”), the brain (“the brain is too complicated to understand or replicate”), ontology (“software is not capable of thinking or of consciousness”), and promise versus peril (“biotechnology, nanotechnology, and artificial intelligence are too dangerous”).
There is now a grand project comprising at least a hundred thousand scientists and engineers working in diverse ways to understand the best example we have of an intelligent process: the human brain. It is arguably the most important project in the history of the human-machine civilization. The goal of the project is to understand precisely how the human brain works, and then to use these revealed algorithms as a basis for creating even more intelligent machines.
As we learn the algorithms underlying human intelligence, we will similarly be able to engineer it to vastly extend the powers of our intelligence. Indeed this process is already well under way. There are literally hundreds of tasks and activities that used to be the sole province of human intelligence that can now be conducted by computers usually with greater precision and vastly greater scale.
Was it inevitable that a species would evolve that is capable of creating its own evolutionary process in the form of intelligent technology? I will argue that it was.
According to my models we are only two decades from fully modeling and simulating the human brain. By the time we finish this reverse-engineering project, we will have computers that are millions of times more powerful than the human brain. These computers will be further amplified by being networked into a vast world wide cloud of computing. The algorithms of intelligence will begin to self-iterate towards ever smarter algorithms.
This is how we will address the grand challenges of humanity such as maintaining a healthy environment, providing for the resources for a growing population including energy, food, and water, overcoming disease, vastly extending human longevity, and overcoming poverty. It is only by extending our intelligence with our intelligent technology that we can handle the scale of complexity to address these challenges.
Comments (4)
by melajara
Let’s start by fully reverse engineer tiny brains with circa 100’000 neurons but brains nevertheless capable of amazing feats (e.g. bees who solve everyday ‘on the fly’ an equivalent of the salesman travelling problem, i.e. the optimized order of flowers visitation to spare their tiny resources). Think of it that way, the humble bees seemingly suggesting that actually P = NP !
By the way, the true power and capability of a single neuron is grossly underestimated IMHO, and so is the implicit computational power of chemical pathways among neurons (neurotransmitters). It’s even possible that some form of quantum computation is harnessed at some infra level of neural activity, unravelling incredible hidden powers.
Remember, for ancient engineers, the brain was like a complex set of connected clepsydra, then cogs, then an electrical switchboard and now most proponents of strong AI are still thinking the “wetware” would be in principle reducible (emulated) in purely electrical “neural nets”. But each age is revealling a new order of complexity with implicit computations performed herein. The current view, even Kurzweil’s one, is very probably still way too much simplist.
I’m still longing for a functionalist computational equivalent of a fly brain. Let’s do it before attacking the bigger version we are endowed with!
Unfortunately, we are still very very far from understanding the true capability of a bee brain.
At the root of evil, again and again, hubris and over confidence in the possible achievements of a too reductionist epistemology…
by Granola
Luckily, it’s a lot easier to reverse-engineer something than it is to understand it. We’ve already been doing it for a while with smaller regions of the brain, as Kurzweil has noted.
by dragger2k
building a brain is NOT the equivalent of building a mind.
by kendall
How long til the book is available? Psyched about it. And will it be available in the ibookstore or on the kindle?