Comments on: Google's Page urges scientists to market themselves
Page describes several of his areas of interest in science and technology during the hour-long talk, which was a rare engagement for the nerdy billionaire.
Page describes several of his areas of interest in science and technology during the hour-long talk, which was a rare engagement for the nerdy billionaire.
January 2, 2010 11:43 AM PST
January 2, 2010 9:41 AM PST
January 2, 2010 6:00 AM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
So there is no code embedded in CPU (not even in real computers). All the "instructions and operation springs" are given by the compiled program, usually residing in memory, or in the syngle cells themselves. This is the reason why you can't really put together a bunch of cells and expect them to form a living organism.
-Clint
Sarasota, FL
-Clint
Sarasota, FL
So there is no code embedded in CPU (not even in real computers). All the "instructions and operation springs" are given by the compiled program, usually residing in memory, or in the syngle cells themselves. This is the reason why you can't really put together a bunch of cells and expect them to form a living organism.
Such a step would push the expectations of online services to a new level. We're approaching a type of intuitive internet by perfecting interactivity (e.g. Client side coding i.e. JavaScript) and accelerating online development (Ruby on Rails, PHP and competitive frameworks, MySQL). Yet none have taken the 'net to the 'next level'. Artificial Intelligence, DNA storing; they all seemed like science fiction in the early 90s. Today, they could only be the product of the online collaboration.
Such innovations would bring about change that we can only imagine. Personally, i look froward to the day when written text could be translated into any language.
(Proper spelling courtesy of Firefox 2.0)
Such a step would push the expectations of online services to a new level. We're approaching a type of intuitive internet by perfecting interactivity (e.g. Client side coding i.e. JavaScript) and accelerating online development (Ruby on Rails, PHP and competitive frameworks, MySQL). Yet none have taken the 'net to the 'next level'. Artificial Intelligence, DNA storing; they all seemed like science fiction in the early 90s. Today, they could only be the product of the online collaboration.
Such innovations would bring about change that we can only imagine. Personally, i look froward to the day when written text could be translated into any language.
(Proper spelling courtesy of Firefox 2.0)
Developments in various areas of present day computer design, physics and neurobiology point to this assertion. Eg. Computers are capable of crunching massive amounts of numbers, yet many classes of problems are exceedingly difficult for computers to process because of the sheer amount of computation required to solve them. Quantum Computation looks to the "connections" between storage elements to solve these types of problems in the form of massive arrays of atoms, collectively tuned to be fed problems and then read out to extract solutions to those problems. At least that is the dream, currently the simplest quantum computers are only capable of processing low bit and therefor simple problems relative to even todays computers but the technology will scale. I think that biological intelligence is more like a quantum computer and less like a binary computer, though it may be possible in theory to through computation at the AI problem , it is possible that all the computers in all the world could not working together achieve the connectedness needed to span the problem space spanned by an intelligent brain and emerge a similar "intelligence".
As an engineer my guess is AI will emerge not from current traditional silicon computers but instead from a combination of quantum computers and silicon computers once commercial quantum computers are available. So I guess not for another 15 - 20 years.
at a single instant (the coordinates of each player on the pitch etc) with a concise representation of bits that
takes up 600Mb. Now what use would these bits be if you had no understanding of what soccer was or how it
was played?
DNA can take this for granted but if you trying to simulate living organisms on a silicon computer
you don't have that luxury.
Developments in various areas of present day computer design, physics and neurobiology point to this assertion. Eg. Computers are capable of crunching massive amounts of numbers, yet many classes of problems are exceedingly difficult for computers to process because of the sheer amount of computation required to solve them. Quantum Computation looks to the "connections" between storage elements to solve these types of problems in the form of massive arrays of atoms, collectively tuned to be fed problems and then read out to extract solutions to those problems. At least that is the dream, currently the simplest quantum computers are only capable of processing low bit and therefor simple problems relative to even todays computers but the technology will scale. I think that biological intelligence is more like a quantum computer and less like a binary computer, though it may be possible in theory to through computation at the AI problem , it is possible that all the computers in all the world could not working together achieve the connectedness needed to span the problem space spanned by an intelligent brain and emerge a similar "intelligence".
As an engineer my guess is AI will emerge not from current traditional silicon computers but instead from a combination of quantum computers and silicon computers once commercial quantum computers are available. So I guess not for another 15 - 20 years.
at a single instant (the coordinates of each player on the pitch etc) with a concise representation of bits that
takes up 600Mb. Now what use would these bits be if you had no understanding of what soccer was or how it
was played?
DNA can take this for granted but if you trying to simulate living organisms on a silicon computer
you don't have that luxury.
I must disagree...I posit that (nearly) all economic growth is due to market conditions, not technological conditions. Please disabuse me of my skeptisism, but I ask someone to show me one instance of a technological breakthrough that survived on it's own. Us sheep only buy what is actively marketed to us, not what is actually good for us.
Case-in-point...the Pet Rock. I rest my case.
A premise of his talk was that the information in one's DNA was essentially the "programming" for the brain.
Of course the brain will continue to take in new data through the senses, and also generate new information on its own.
But when the sperm meets the egg - DNA is all you really have information-wise, and that is the programming code.
- This guy is SO WRONG!!!
- by unc_tarheels February 19, 2007 5:49 PM PST
- Is this guy an idiot??? The amount of information contained in one's DNA has absolutely NOTHING to do with the amount of information contained in a human brain. Brain "information" or "intelligence" is related to the number of neural connections which is approximately 10^50. That is way, way more than 600 Megabytes (10^6). Inorder to duplicate the processing capability of the human brain, you would need a million, million petabytes. Although not impossible to simulate, I think that we are a few hundred years away.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- You've misunderstood.
- by dustball23 May 6, 2008 9:59 AM PDT
- He wasn't comparing the amount of information in one's DNA to the amount of information in the human brain.
- Like this View reply
Processing -
Showing 1 of 2 pages (42 Comments)A premise of his talk was that the information in one's DNA was essentially the "programming" for the brain.
Of course the brain will continue to take in new data through the senses, and also generate new information on its own.
But when the sperm meets the egg - DNA is all you really have information-wise, and that is the programming code.