All I’m saying is that I think it will be challenging to produce a commercial product that achieves product-market fit for an application other than basic neuroscience research. It’s a cool tool but the practical drawbacks are myriad, and when you say “the brain is the single existing example of general intelligence,” that’s true of the
whole thing, with glial ion buffering, ephaptic coupling, global oscillations, and so much more. We should be honest here: the system being studied in DishBrain is very far removed from that, so it’s tough to use the existence proof like you are doing.
I hope I don’t come across as uncivil, but you guys alienated a lot of people both in how you talked about “sentience” and also seemed to heavily hype this as totally novel.
I would never root against cool progress in neural engineering, but I would be curious as to what you think your first big product will be based on this. Past attempts have usually ended up pivoting to stuff like artificial noses.
Edit: I tried to ignore it but the bad faith attack on neuralink, which, look, I have complicated feelings about too — you should know the animal use data in the press is extremely out of context (to the point of simply being wrong) and also neuralink has had zero chimpanzees in its entire history.
I hope I don’t come across as uncivil, but you guys alienated a lot of people both in how you talked about “sentience” and also seemed to heavily hype this as totally novel.
I would never root against cool progress in neural engineering, but I would be curious as to what you think your first big product will be based on this. Past attempts have usually ended up pivoting to stuff like artificial noses.
Edit: I tried to ignore it but the bad faith attack on neuralink, which, look, I have complicated feelings about too — you should know the animal use data in the press is extremely out of context (to the point of simply being wrong) and also neuralink has had zero chimpanzees in its entire history.