Which people is most like the Na vi?

[Sempu]

Originally Posted by Banefull

I have never been fully convinced that logic is the final frontier in all things.

Quite.

Although I understand you were heading in a different direction...

[Human No More]

Originally Posted by Sempu

I didn't mean that people compared telephone exchanges to neural networks. I meant that back when a telephone exchange was the hottest new technology, people compared the human brain to them.

Incorrectly, then. More likely was that people compared them to the brain - although honestly, there is extremely little common ground in their operation, but far less was known about the nervous system back then.
Trust me, I have studied AI, knowledge systems and genetic algorithms as well as biology.

Originally Posted by Banefull

Out of curiosity then, do you think that humans have free will? Or are we merely slaves to the pattern input we receive our senses?

Free will, clearly. There are chances taken every millisecond, things that work out randomly, from whether someone decides to go out or not to which parts of a chromosome cross over during meiosis, potentially completely changing the biological characteristics of a person. Humans (and all animals) make their own decisions, and basic physical processes are always applied consistently.

A computer is slave to its input. You can trace the series of processes that lead up to the output. Even a program that modifies itself from runtime to runtime is still subject to its initial input in the original program.

Not always. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_game_of_life. It's a series of patterns that evolve without input other than the initial state, but follow definable mathematical rules, and it is by no means a unique example. The underlying code was obviously written by a human, but the results are generated completely procedurally.

The entire point of advanced machine learning systems is to have only a basic framework, to start from no assumptions and build up to the required system. Most will use a domain of facts which are generally input manually, but this is by no means the only (or best) approach.

I myself have always wondered why we as beings exist seemingly in control of a body and not just some mass of complex organic cells that act out and simulate everything in our lives based upon automatic pattern recognition from senses and preprogrammed genetic responses and tendencies. This "knowledge" or "ability" that indigenous people could very well exist.

Every single action and response can be mapped. There is very little that is not fully understood, and the theory is understood. Every single (reputable, methodologically correct, published and peer reviewed) study investigating any kind of paranormal capabilities of humans has soundly debunked those claims.

[Sempu]

Originally Posted by Human No More

Incorrectly, then. More likely was that people compared them to the brain - although honestly, there is extremely little common ground in their operation, but far less was known about the nervous system back then.

Yes, that is exactly the point I was making. That analogy was incorrect; the neural network is therefore likely to be not much better of an analogy to the human brain. At every point in history the favorite "model" of the human brain has been whatever the most advanced device we had made at the time. Just because that's now the neural network is no reason to think that we've found an adequate model.

[Banefull]

Originally Posted by Human No More

Not always. See Conway's Game of Life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. It's a series of patterns that evolve without input other than the initial state, but follow definable mathematical rules, and it is by no means a unique example. The underlying code was obviously written by a human, but the results are generated completely procedurally.

The keyword here is initial state. You can trace it all the way back to its initial state. And what is considered to be that single initial state in software is most likely a great multitude of inputs combined together on a hardware design level.

Originally Posted by Human No More

Every single action and response can be mapped. There is very little that is not fully understood, and the theory is understood. Every single (reputable, methodologically correct, published and peer reviewed) study investigating any kind of paranormal capabilities of humans has soundly debunked those claims.

I am always highly suspicious about claims of paranormal activity or extraordinary claims; however, I would not immediately dismiss it. It may very well be that we have missed some fundamental law or that some fundamental law is wrong (though such claims would warrant some evidence before investigation).

In the end, math, logic and science is our interpretation of what we know of the universe. Some things may be very elusive or some things may lie outside of what we can perceive.

[Human No More]

Originally Posted by Sempu

Yes, that is exactly the point I was making. That analogy was incorrect; the neural network is therefore likely to be not much better of an analogy to the human brain. At every point in history the favorite "model" of the human brain has been whatever the most advanced device we had made at the time. Just because that's now the neural network is no reason to think that we've found an adequate model.

A neural network isn't a parallel development, it is actually based on the structure of those found in animals, just as genetic algorithms are based on the mechanisms of selection. Thinking 'latest theoretical development' would actually be quantum computing, which IS an unrelated development and using the same approach as older systems but applying it based on advanced physics (rather than biological systems) - nobody has or would compare it to a naturally occurring system other than in the most basic sense (e.g. Schrodinger's Cat scenarios).

Originally Posted by Banefull

The keyword here is initial state. You can trace it all the way back to its initial state. And what is considered to be that single initial state in software is most likely a great multitude of inputs combined together on a hardware design level.

Systems can unfold unpredictably, which is very different from tracing backwards to a state. It is perfectly possible to trace neural activity back to initial states. There's no special quality about a biological system - they have been very commonly replicated at the basic (DNA/cellular) level.

I am always highly suspicious about claims of paranormal activity or extraordinary claims; however, I would not immediately dismiss it. It may very well be that we have missed some fundamental law or that some fundamental law is wrong (though such claims would warrant some evidence before investigation).

That's the nature of how knowledge is gained. If there is an apparent gap in a theory, a new hypothesis is developed and tested.

In the end, math, logic and science is our interpretation of what we know of the universe. Some things may be very elusive or some things may lie outside of what we can perceive.

If it exists, it can be determined as such (neutrinos are an excellent example, which don't physically interact with most matter, but can be detected), or if it doesn't exist, then there isn't an issue. If its existence is implied or predicted, then the goal is to prove that.

[caveman]

Not following the computer talk. Point is, check out the book. Many of these indigenous peoples have incredible wisdom that modern society could and should adapt to.

[redpaintednavi]

A sort of wireless contact between people, machines and living machines (living spaceships and living space stations) can be seen in Peter F Hamiltons Nights Dawn trilogy. In the books a part of humanity, called Adamists, have wireless computers in their brain with which they can communicate with each other and with computers and other machines. Another branch of humanity, the so called Edenists, have their brains modified, or carries symbionts, to be able to communicate with each other and with living spaceships and spacestations and also with so called affinity bonded animals. It is a little bit like the Navi, just wireless.

Edenism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Adamism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Night's Dawn Trilogy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia