Clarification
I just reread my last post and feel the need to clarify. I have the greatest respect for cognitive neuroscientists. To me they're the pioneers of the true final frontier, the mystery of consciousness, something that has fascinated me all my life. I'm honored that my twist on Hawkins' Memory-Prediction Framework is being taken seriously by true scientists, especially Bernard Baars and Christof Koch (assuming Christof was in fact inspired to write The Movie in Your Head after reading my MPT article at SCR).
When I stated - too bluntly, I'm afraid - that the MPT will be proven correct by technologists before scientists, I certainly had no intention of implying there's a race on. I wished only to draw attention to the fact itself, that technologists are in this case apparently taking the lead in proposing and proving a scientific theory. It seems significant to me. Could it be symptomatic of the accelerating change phenomenon currently consuming our species, a harbinger of the coming technological singularity?
My goal with this blog is to reach out to the scientific community on behalf of a point of view consisting of Hawkins' ideas about the brain mixed with a few of my own. Christof Koch was kind enough to tell me that my hypothesis can't be validated with modern scientific tools. I wish only to express appreciation for that, and wonder how science might participate in the proving of my theory. It's rumored that Dale Antanitus, whose work I reference, is close to publishing a new book. Perhaps the answer is there.
When I stated - too bluntly, I'm afraid - that the MPT will be proven correct by technologists before scientists, I certainly had no intention of implying there's a race on. I wished only to draw attention to the fact itself, that technologists are in this case apparently taking the lead in proposing and proving a scientific theory. It seems significant to me. Could it be symptomatic of the accelerating change phenomenon currently consuming our species, a harbinger of the coming technological singularity?
My goal with this blog is to reach out to the scientific community on behalf of a point of view consisting of Hawkins' ideas about the brain mixed with a few of my own. Christof Koch was kind enough to tell me that my hypothesis can't be validated with modern scientific tools. I wish only to express appreciation for that, and wonder how science might participate in the proving of my theory. It's rumored that Dale Antanitus, whose work I reference, is close to publishing a new book. Perhaps the answer is there.
posted by Carl Carpenter at 7:13 PM
3 Comments:
No clarification is necessary. Your postings are quite clear and to the point. I enjoyed your article in Science and Consciousness Review, and posted a reference to it on my blog.
Now that I know you have a blog, I'll need to update my posting and include that information.
Thanks for your efforts in promoting these promising concepts in intelligence/consciousness research.
Thank you very much for the kind words, Al, and for the reference. I agree entirely with your primary interest, it's my own as well. Funny, I just finished rereading Bill Joy's seminal piece in Wired, Why the future doesn't need us. Highly recommended if you haven't read it. Best wishes,
I agree with both Bill Joy and Ray Kurzweil. Joy is right that humans could easily design themselves completely out of the future. Kurzweil is probably right that somehow humans will ride the future well into the next era, through luck or through planning.
Only people like Kurzweil, Ralph Merkle, and a few others seem to be planning for the most likely future--the most incredible one.
I agree with you that technicians seem to have a bit more internal drive to solve some of these problems than academic researchers. The researcher too often lives to publish, to publish anything. The technician wants to see results.
Post a Comment
<< Home