Re: [MURG] minduploading.org: Bulletin on the Status of Mind Uploading - Newer, More Realistic Evidence Emerging -

From: Alejandro Dubrovsky (s328940@student.uq.edu.au)
Date: Sat Apr 06 2002 - 07:19:55 MST


On Sat, 2002-04-06 at 20:34, Rüdiger Koch wrote:
> On Saturday 06 April 2002 09:24, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, William wrote:
> > 2020, that's just 18 years. We will certainly slay the mighty worm C.
> > elegans by then, and maybe will have progressed as far as the fruit fly,
>
> As far as I am concerned uploading C.Elegans was solved by Ferrée
> ( http://www.csi.uoregon.edu/members/ferree/publications.html ) in 1996 until
> someone explains what's wrong with his solution. The fruit fly is orders of
> magnitude more difficult (200,000 spiking neurons vs 302 graded signal
> neurons). IMO it should be possible to emulate a fruit fly on a PC cluster of
> 20-100 processors.

i'm assuming you are referring to the paper titled 'Neural network
models of chemotaxis in the nematode C. elegans.' . Very interesting
stuff, and thanks for the pointer. I would not, though, consider it an
upload of C. Elegans, but an emulation of one of its functions
(chemotaxing). I really haven't read anything about C. Elegans'
biology, but i'm assuming they do other things besides chemotaxing
(reproduce, for example), which are not modelled. Also, their results
for chemotaxing don't seem 'good enough' (i'm referring to the diagrams
on page 6, they obviously don't pass the nematochemotaxturing test, even
though they get close). If we are able to spot the difference from this
far away, it doesn't seem correct to me to call it a succesful upload.

Alejandro



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:16 MST