Intel and a Brain

Posted By: Ran Man

Intel and a Brain - 07/12/06 20:32

Hi,

My company is soon to come out with the most advanced microprocessor yet. It has over 1 billion transistors in it.

Intel's "Montecito" Will be a BILLION transistors

Yeah, too funny and everyone around the world will know that we created it.

Yet, the more complex human brain with 120 trillions inter-connections, some still think has no creator.

ESSAYS ON ORIGINS:

Let me quote the site below:

Quote:

The human brain consists of approximately 12 billion cells, forming
120 trillion interconnections.

Yeah really nice, but when Intel comes out next week with their super advanced 1 billion chip processor, then some of you brainiacs will think they caught up with God's invention, which is the human body.

Nope they did not. They are still light years behind. LOL

And yes there still is a creator.

Any comments?

Posted By: Marco_Grubert

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/12/06 21:12

So I guess this analogy is proof for polytheism then ?
Just like the chip was created by a department full of people, so the brain was created by a department full of gods ?

Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/12/06 21:56

lol, I guess it could be polytheism.

The theory is that any complex design needs a designer or designers.

Posted By: Matt_Aufderheide

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/12/06 23:16

This really makes no sense at all. How does a microchip prove that there is a creator? Come on...

Anyway, I'm really sure that Ran Man works for Intel... what's his job there, janitor?

Posted By: Irish_Farmer

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/12/06 23:19

Science won't accept a creator, therefore any theory that presupposes no creator is automatically correct. Quit asking questions.

Posted By: Matt_Aufderheide

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/12/06 23:23

Your statement is equally non-sensical. Not every theory is automatically correct, whether or not it denies a creator...

Science doesnt work that way.

Posted By: Sebe

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/13/06 10:46

Cool - microprocessors already are 1/120 as capable as our brain, and AI gets better and better too. Soon we won't be the most intelligent being on this planet anymore => good night

Posted By: capanno

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/13/06 12:30

Dude, AI will NEVER be as advanced as a human brain. We dont even know how it works, so its redicilous that we claim that we are getting close. AI will never be concious. Its an appealing concept for science fiction junkies though.

Posted By: ROMAC

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/13/06 12:59

What is "concious" exactly? That you are aware of yourself? What makes you think you are aware of yourself and not programmed to think you are.

Posted By: Sebe

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/13/06 13:36

We don't have to know how our brain works to create machines that are conscious. All that we have to teach them is how to _learn_, that's all. We too have developed being conscious over millions of years, by learning, in- and output of information. Just create something with 120 billions of transistors and give it the ability to learn, and in some time you'll have Human Species V. 2.00

And remember, 500 years ago everybody was absolutely sure that flying would never be possible

Posted By: Michael_Schwarz

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/13/06 16:20

Quote:

Anyway, I'm really sure that Ran Man works for Intel... what's his job there, janitor?

you made my day

Posted By: Ran Man

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/13/06 18:16

Lol, very funny...

I do clean the doo-doo in the lab toilets over here. HAHA! <just joking>

Actually though, I was promoted last year and now am a product engineer and responsible to create programs for large IC testers in the "C" language.

Our production factory in Malaysia depends on me to program good stuff.

Anyways, we all gladly accept that our TV's and radios and PC's all are made by a designer, because they have very complex circuits in them, right?

But, in the case of the more hugely complex "Human Brain", we discard any notion of a designer.

Why is this? Is this not illogical to do so?

Hey listen folks, ---> There HAS to be a designer or designers! Because it is way too complex!

Posted By: Matt_Aufderheide

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/13/06 20:34

I dont see why a computer cant be conscious, there seems nothing to forbid the possibility. Certainly AI programming has a long way to go, but I dont doubt that at some point there will conscious AIs..

Posted By: Marco_Grubert

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/13/06 21:48

Quote:

I dont see why a computer cant be conscious

Because we only know consciousness in humans and maybe higher animals. All of which are radically different from computers, which are nothing but elaborate light switches. Unless and until consciousness can be reduced to a physical process that causes it, and this process included in a computer's design, there's no reason to assume that computers will become conscious. Now if you are saying that computers could be made to appear intelligent (i.e. Turing Test) then that's a possibility, but so far the results have been disappointing.

Posted By: Matt_Aufderheide

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 08:42

computers may be eleborate light switches, but the brain is a big pile of gunk. So what? This doesnt mean much.

The important thing is in the structure, and nothing forbids a computer or computer program from becoming conscious. Is it likely to happen soon? I doubt it. But eventually, It seems almost inevitbale that a computer will be as conscious as we are.. the fact is, at a certain point, you cant really say for sure...

Posted By: ello

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 08:59

Quote:

Dude, AI will NEVER be as advanced as a human brain. We dont even know how it works, so its redicilous that we claim that we are getting close. AI will never be concious. Its an appealing concept for science fiction junkies though.

"We dont even know how it works"

and exactly THAT makes it possible.

Posted By: Joozey

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 11:02

I know who the creator is... and I met HER personally, I saw her when I had this peacefull moment alone somewhere... outside...

She's called nature.

Posted By: PHeMoX

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 12:20

Quote:

The theory is that any complex design needs a designer or designers.

And what this theory gladly denies is the fact that life didn't start as a full grown man or woman ...

So exactly why does this theory make any sense?

Cheers

Posted By: Matt_Aufderheide

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 15:45

Certainly a complex *design* needs a designer. This is the old problem with explaining evolution to people; they cant grasp that organisms arent "designed". That is to say, the present state of an organism is NOT an inevitable one--it could have just as easily turned out differently. The fact that it does exist however discounts the improbability of it existing. Think about this.

This is perhaps the most fundamental change in thinking that is needed before any meaningful debate about life origins can take place. Otherwise, its all basically a question of observing something so complex that one is likely to assume it cant possibly have developed without an intelligent designer.

In fact, an organism is complex but not irreducibly so. All organs are made of cells, which are made of organelles and membranes, those are made of proteins and so on, etc. The fact that they function in complex systems is the result of many small incremental changes--as hard as it may be to believe.

Posted By: Ran Man

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 15:51

Quote:

but the brain is a big pile of gunk. So what?

Because that gunk stuff is very complicated.

If you ever shoot a bullet hole in that "GUNK", for example, then you are probably dead, but if you shoot a bullet hole in your arms "Gunk", then you most likely will live.

Thus your brain is more important and complicated than your arm is.

Quote:

So exactly why does this theory make any sense?

Because everything of a highly technical design that we know of has creators. Everything does, your stereo's, DVD players, televisions and yes Intel's new processor.

These highly technical things listed above also have no ability to generate offspring and are therefore less complicated, but the more complex human brain was not designed by anything we say?

Com'on guys, you know that is wrong. Admit it?

Shoot me with a bullet hole to see my gunk how complicated and important I'am to ya!!!

Posted By: Michael_Schwarz

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 16:58

why do i think this is just a sublime advertising campaign for Intel's new Montecito dual-core Microprocessor with whopping 18 megabytes of level 3 cache ?

Posted By: Ran Man

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 17:33

Quote:

why do i think this is just a sublime advertising campaign for Intel's new Montecito dual-core Microprocessor with whopping 18 megabytes of level 3 cache ?

Hey, It's coming bro and it has 1.7 billion transistors!

The gargantuan chip, with 1.7 billion transistors, will be the new flagship

---> This has been a recording. LOL

Posted By: Alberto

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 18:57

Ran Man

What about Intel developing time ? Let's say 1 or 2 or 10 years

Nature took some bilions years

How many lab's do you have in Intel ? 1 or 10 or 100 ?

Nature have several bilions

As you see the brain complexitity is not a serious argument

However, it is a matter of fact that PC are not just simple "brains"
A brain is something completely different

A super PC does not work same as, for example, a mouse brain

The mouse heart beat drammaticaly increases if a cat is attacking his children

Posted By: Doug

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 21:23

Quote:

All organs are made of cells, which are made of organelles and membranes, those are made of proteins and so on, etc. The fact that they function in complex systems is the result of many small incremental changes--as hard as it may be to believe.

I've been coding too long, this quote reminds me of Test Driven Design.

As far as technology needing a designer, even that isn't always true. I've written simple programs that, when executed, write their own programs that, when executed, write their own programs... In this way, a simple set of commands can "evolve" into something so complex that the original programmer can't figure out why it works.

Posted By: Joozey

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/14/06 22:05

o_O I knew it, this was just an advertise for that microprocessor whatever-thingy.

Quote:

Because everything of a highly technical design that we know of has creators. Everything does, your stereo's, DVD players, televisions and yes Intel's new processor.

Hey, we invented the television, and nature designed life, what's your point? Can't you accept the fact that life is formed by coincidence?

Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/17/06 20:31

" Can't you accept the fact that life is formed by coincidence? "

Hmmnn, good point and yes I can !

I also accept the fact that my wrist watch did form by coincidence.

It formed itself by using the evolution of TIME and it works well.

Posted By: PHeMoX

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/17/06 23:40

Quote:

As far as technology needing a designer, even that isn't always true. I've written simple programs that, when executed, write their own programs that, when executed, write their own programs... In this way, a simple set of commands can "evolve" into something so complex that the original programmer can't figure out why it works.

Lol, add that program to a machine creating different car parts and watch what happens.

Actually the coding thing sounds a bit like the ID theory in a way

.

Anyways, I agree, why should live be designed anyway, maybe it was one of those random programs going rogue, with life as we know it as it's final result .. ?

Besides, how random could the outcome of designed life be?

Cheers

Posted By: Doug

Re: Intel and a Brain - 07/18/06 19:39

Quote:

Lol, add that program to a machine creating different car parts and watch what happens.

I don't think anybody has tried making cars yet, but they have used this technique to create things like micro-chips, robots, and super-computers.

I can't see any reason why a machine couldn't "evolve" a car, it would just be extremely complex since it is very hard to simulate every factor, and creating and testing millions of actual physical cars would be very expensive.