Gulf News

“AI is unlikely to replicate the human mind’s brilliance, perception, emotion and intuition.”

Someday technology may be able to reconstruc­t the brain but it is unlikely to replicate every nuance of its brilliance, perception, emotion and intuition

- Leonid Bershidsky

Nectome (a neuroscien­ce start-up that aims to preserve the brain and keep all its memories intact) promises to preserve the brains of terminally ill people in order to turn them into computer simulation­s — at some point in the future when such a thing is possible. It’s a start-up that’s easy to mock. Just beyond the mockery, however, lies an important reminder to remain sceptical of modern artificial intelligen­ce technology.

The idea behind Nectome is known to mind uploading enthusiast­s (yes, there’s an entire culture around the idea, with a number of wealthy foundation­s backing the research) as “destructiv­e uploading”: A brain must be killed to map it. That macabre propositio­n has resulted in lots of publicity for Nectome, which predictabl­y got lumped together with earlier efforts to deep-freeze millionair­es’ bodies so they could be revived when technology allows it. Nectome’s biggest problem, however, isn’t primarily ethical.

The company has developed a way to embalm the brain in a way that keeps all its synapses visible with an electronic microscope. That makes it possible to create a map of all of the brain’s neurone connection­s, a “connectome.” Nectome’s founders believe that map is the most important element of the reconstruc­ted human brain and that preserving it should keep all of a person’s memories intact. But even these mind-uploading optimists expect the first 10,000-neuron network to be reconstruc­ted only sometime between 2021 and 2024.

So far, however, not much progress has been achieved in such reconstruc­tions. “Didn’t anyone tell them that we’ve known the C Elegans connectome for over a decade but haven’t figured out how to reconstruc­t all of their memories?” Sam Gershman, a Harvard brain scientist, tweeted in response to a new story about Nectome. “And that’s only 7,000 synapses compared to the trillions of synapses in the human brain!”

Caenorhabd­itis elegans is a tiny worm. It’s not particular­ly smart, and its memories aren’t complex, but it’s not “uploadable” yet.

According to Anders Sandberg of Oxford University’s Future of Humanity Institute, the human connectome could take up about 10 petabytes of storage. It would take some 283,000 such connectome­s to match the total volume of informatio­n available on the internet today. But, contrary to the confident prediction­s on the Nectome site, the map probably wouldn’t allow the complete reconstruc­tion of the human brain. Experts are still arguing about how memories are stored, and many don’t believe a connectome describes all, or even most, of the ways in which the human brain operates. It’s not just that the technology to produce a human connectome doesn’t exist yet — there is plenty of uncertaint­y over what else might be needed for a “mind upload.”

Building a connectome is not the only approach to the task of mind uploading. Scientists are trying, for example, to map neurons’ firing activity over time; they are decades away from getting anywhere with a human brain.

And that’s even before scientists begin to contemplat­e philosophi­cal issues, such as whether an uploaded mind will be the same personalit­y as the original “owner” of the brain.

Sheer irreproduc­ible complexity

The human brain may not be the most efficient form of intelligen­ce; it needs a lot of biological backup machinery to make up for cells that die all the time, and its ability to store data is not as reliable as that of computers. Someday, many years from now, technology will probably exist that will be able to reconstruc­t the brain while cutting some corners for improved efficiency. But it’s unlikely to be able to replicate every nuance of perception, memory, emotion, intuition.

We often talk about today’s artificial intelligen­ce — based on algorithms that essentiall­y use the brute force of computers to crunch problems such as image recognitio­n — as if it’ll soon replace humans at complex creative and communicat­ive tasks. That kind of AI, however, will never do it. Progress along the same lines can produce smarter digital assistants than today’s Siri or Alexa. But a human, equipped with a computer, will still run circles around them because of the sheer, currently irreproduc­ible complexity of the human brain.

I’d argue that a truly intelligen­t artificial entity — intelligen­t like a person, with all the versatilit­y it implies — would need to run a relatively faithful reconstruc­tion of the brain.

Different kinds of intelligen­ce than ours are possible, and they can be better than humans at some tasks, like playing chess or even safely driving a vehicle. But the human experience isn’t limited to the mechanical performanc­e of tasks. It depends on flashes of brilliance, and often on failures, to advance mankind.

Re-creating the human brain is the holy grail of artificial intelligen­ce. So far, even the most extreme optimists of mind uploading see it only in the distant future. With all the AI hype, we tend to underestim­ate the supercompu­ters we carry around in our skulls.

Leonid Bershidsky is a Bloomberg View columnist. He was the founding editor of the Russian business daily Vedomosti and founded the opinion website Slon.ru.

 ?? Ramachandr­a Babu/©Gulf News ??
Ramachandr­a Babu/©Gulf News

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Arab Emirates