And if a baby has a form of "memory" which is activated at birth, it would argue for the existence of a neural network which has transferred some information during gestation, it would be as easy as transferring data from computer to computer..
Actually I doubt that because if a person has been locked away for years they certainly have not gained any knowledge. and according to your suggestion, knowledge should be inherent but it is proven that knowledge MUST be acquired.
So you know better than the scientists who are studying AI and what they have discovered about how children learn.
You still fail to note that it is the 'how', not the 'what'.
Understand now?
Babies are intelligent not because of what they learn, but how they learn.
I believe this is due to microtubular catastrophe.
You are quoting things without linking to them. I don't even know what you are quoting, nor its source or context or content for that matter.
A scroll down the page sees a link in a different and later response to James, which says absolutely nothing about what you are claiming.
You can believe whatever you want to believe. From where I am sitting you have proven diddly squat and you are peddling woo.
Of course, as do all delivery systems. You need to be able to read a map (or rely on a GPS computer...)
That's nice.
But I was not talking about GPS, maps or a delivery system. I was responding to your comment about something else entirely.
Why are you responding to my quote out of context like this?
Maybe you are behind the times. Sci-Fi is constantly proving to be prescient.
How's that hive mind going?
No, that's programming. This is copied in human learning by rote. On the fly learning is assimilating new information while executing a programmed command.
This is not what Sohpia the robot was doing. The questions and answers were pre-programmed. Literally.
Then why did you address IT as a HER? A female chatbox?
Because it had a female name. If it was named Bob, I'd have probably referred to it as he.
Is it really something to get one's panties in a twist over?
I also refer to my car as 'her',
because she is a beast of a car and she's alright even when she's not.. But I have stopped short of naming
her.
You didn't. You did say they start learning the moment they're born which means they are born stupid. They know nothing at the moment they are born. Until that time they have been parasite floating in a liquid in total darkness. It is possible that audible sounds may have registered, but my point is that 'learning" starts after birth, not before, unless there is indeed a copying of information as well as cells! Microtubules.
If they were born with developed intelligence why not get up and start walking directly after being born? Are fawn intelligent because they can walk with the herd in just a some 20 minutes.! Now that's fast learning.
Welp, the light really is dim..
I said,
repeatedly and linked that article that also said ... The intelligence of babies stems from how they learn.
Not what they know or learn.
But how they view the world, how they extrapolate information, how they interpret that information and how they analyse the world around them.
What part of that is so hard for you to actually understand?
Oh yes, I understand. Here is that fawn learning to walk, from gathering the physical strength, to the mathematically balanced technique of rising without falling over, a feat that will take a baby a few years to learn.
These hardwired survival programs are present to a degree in every living thing that has evolved dependent on its environment.
But it has to be executed in the real world before it is "intelligent behavior". That's the "on-the -fly learning" to execute knowledge and the fight or flight program.
You claim to understand, but you keep repeating the same bullshit and frankly stupid argument that shows you clearly do not understand.
And by the way, that fawn is also smarter than any AI will ever be.
You also need to read up on some evolutionary biology. Pay particular attention to a mature brain, narrow pelvis and how the human brain evolved to be the size that it is.
Yes, that's where it starts. A single cell dividing itself into two cells. MITOSIS is the original biological proto intelligent computation. A remarkable feat of (quasi) intelligence. Every Eukaryotic and some Prokaryotic cells in the world, from single celled bacteria to human cells, have a common denominator which manages their cell division. Microtubules.
And yet, it still cannot deliver my pizza.
And if I give a person a lobotomy, It'll just sit there also and not learn when It is awake.
The irony of your fit pitching at my referring to Sophia as "she" and "her" and you refer to a person as an "it" because of a lobotomy? Do you refer to people who suffer brain trauma, have brain tumors or have had brain tumors removed, have suffered severe strokes as "it" as well?
It depends on the lobotomy.
Yes, because the little cleaner you take out of of the box is born when you turn it on and it learns as it goes, ignoring the fact that it is programmed to do it...
Because it is programmed to map the room or house.
It's not "learning". It's mapping the room or house.
I'll give you an example. Take a VR headset. Before you use most of them, you have to 'map' the room or the area. With my son's Rift, that entails holding the hand controllers and carefully walking around the area where he will be using it, so the sensors on the wall map that space. That VR system is not "learning". The Roomba and other such devices do the same thing as what my son is doing when he is mapping the area.
Why do you keep comparing Human intelligence with Artificial Intelligence in a discussion of consciousness? The ability to experience emotional states.
Because you keep bringing it up...
AI does NOT employ microtubules. Humans and almost every biologically complex organisms do!
RIP bacteria....
Please note that I stay away from the more esoteric interpretations. I want to concentrate only on the physical phenomena that may give rise to an emergent consciousness.
You also stay away from scientific criticisms and studies that disprove it...
Can we acknowledge that "sensory" or other kinds of "deprivation" is harmful to brain development?
That is not what he asked.
Here is what he asked, specifically:
Now, tell me what evidence you have that links brain damage in stressed children to "microtubular catastrophe", if you can.
Nothing you have provided is actual evidence that brain damage in stress children is due to "microtubular catastrophe".
You are literally making stuff up.
