Gary Marcus

Rank 10 of 47
|
Score 116
10/3/2024, 6:07:26 PM
X
In reply to:
Thomas Hope
@tmhhope
·
287d
@GaryMarcus All sensible points. It would be convenient if the many cell types were irrelevant to the larger algorithm, and if synaptic transmission was the only important type. I doubt we can solve the whole problem under those assumptions but I might be wrong. I hope I'm wrong!
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
288d
I think this is totally wrong, and that (a) we will never understand the brain without having a better handle on why brains have so many cell types and (b) that neural networks as we currently build them are too impoverished to get to general intelligence

But I would also say…
AGIHound
@TrueAIHound
·
288d
The large number of cell types is not something we need to worry about too much imo. Biological brains develop from tiny embryos. The various cell types are needed to achieve the correct innate synaptic connections during the growing phase. All neurons process events (spikes).

The statement engages in a scientific discussion about the complexity of the brain and its implications for understanding neural networks and AI. It questions the evolutionary rationale behind the diversity of cell types in the brain, suggesting skepticism about simplifying assumptions in neuroscience.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and contributes to a scientific debate. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by engaging with complex scientific ideas, though it could be more explanatory. [+1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism by questioning assumptions in the field. [+1]