[MURG] Uploading via memory implants?

[Thomas Weber]

 --- Eric Zilli <digfarenough at gmail.com> wrote: 
> It's a minor point, but old information isn't so
> much deleted as
> overwritten or interfered with.
> 
> You're confusing two uses of the word information,
> though. In the
> first half of what you say, information seems to
> mean only memories.

Thomas: No it's not only memories. The information
necessary for uploading at least must include plans
for the future and be explanatory how various things
relate to each other.

> But it isn't memories we try to directly extract
> from the brain, it's
> synaptic weights and neural activities: a different
> sort of
> information. Selectively recording from only
> particular parts of the
> brain (i.e. only things immediately accessable from
> the surface)
> doesn't selectively record memories, it selectively
> records neurons.

Thomas: Isn't that external neuron activity strictly
related to what the brain / mind is processing at a
given time? I will give the Mona Lisa example again. I
suppose when we stare at a specific image - a neural
activity takes place on the vision area of the cortex
which is specific to that image. Suppose this activity
is recorded and observed again on the cortex.
Emergence of the same activity patterns would indicate
that the person is staring at Mona Lisa again. This is
my guess - correct me if I am wrong. Another question
to you: If my guess is right - except now we don't
stare at the painting, but just recall and imagine it
- will the cortex activity be any similar to when we
stared at the actual painting?

> Memories are stored rather component-wise: all the
> visual aspects of
> memories are in one place, auditory aspects in
> another, temporal
> aspects in yet another, and some of these aren't
> reachable from the
> surface (to name one example, the most important
> part of V1, the area
> representing the fovea, is located along the medial
> wall of the
> occipital lobe, out of reach of the electrode
> array). Thus recording
> from a particular part of the brain can record the
> aspects of memories
> associated with that region, but not any other sorts
> of aspects.
> An example: say your understanding of formal social
> situations (i.e.
> you must wear pants, you shouldn't shout,
> vulgarities tend to be
> unwelcome, etc) is encoded along the medial wall of
> prefrontal cortex,
> along with your understand of all other sorts of
> social situations (I
> don't know that this is accurate, but it's a valid
> example of the sort
> of things you'd miss with your method of uploading).
> Your method may
> be able to record memories such as the words for
> different social
> situations, sensory memories of past social events,
> and so forth, but
> no matter how long you record, you won't get the
> understanding of such
> events.

Thomas:
I understand that some important aspects of the mind
may be impossible to transfer by the brain - computer
interface I propose. But at least some aspects can be
transfered. I envision that at some stage of the
project the computer counterpart should contain enough
information - that verbal or typed communication
should become possible. That vital information which
cannot be transfered to to the computer via the brain
interface can be simply communicated by words.
> 
> I hope that makes clear the problem of recording
> only from cortical
> surface: you may get a lot of information, but you
> simply won't get
> all the information you'd need.

Thomas: As I mentioned above. We can patch up the gaps
with words.
> 
> You can't duplicate a hot dog factory just by
> studying its walls, no
> matter how closely you study them: vital information
> will remain
> unobserved, and thus unaccounted for in the
> duplicate factory. Even
> duplicating the doors in all their detail won't make
> hot dogs come out
> of them. (Worst example ever).

Thomas: No, it is a good example. To duplicate the
factory we would need the "contour" symbolic 
information regarding all vital components. Fragments
of walls and doors would cover the building, other
symbols would cover the machines and a written recepe
would take care of the hot dogs.


> 
> Of course, given the definition of a successful
> upload that you
> offered in your previous email, this won't matter,
> since you don't
> require personality to be the same before and after
> uploading. The way
> I read what you said, it seems the upload need only
> inherit what would
> amount to cortical activity patterns, but that it
> needn't "act" the
> "same" as the original.
> 
>Thomas:
You misunderstood me. The upload will continue the
mind actions and this continuation may call for a
change. Therefore not all actions by the upload will
be the same as before. The fact of uploading itself
will also lead to changes in personality as does every
experience we go thru. I tend to believe that your own
personality has been affected (positively) by the fact
that you went thru university.

Kind Regards,
Thomas





______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca