Artificial Intelligence for human evolution

[.Scott]

I can almost assure you that the former camp, the "brain-computer interface" camp, which is currently in vogue, is going to fall by the wayside in the next decade or two and the latter camp will persevere. The future (in my opinion) is not going to one of us hooked up to brain-machine interfaces as you see in the sci-fi movies. Far from it. Biological neurons are much too slow, sloppy and crude to have much of a future in the rapidly evolving field of machine cognition. The future will be one where we have human-like robots with our cognitive architecture only running many times faster than the cable delays of our neurons allow, along with good old Homo sapien with his skull intact and not "cyborged" to some printed circuit board. Trust me on this.

As long as there are homo sapiens, there will be reasons to "open the skull". For example, if Steve Hawking is still alive in 25 years, he will probably have a brain implant.

 

[.Scott]

I wonder whether we can use Artificial Intelligence technology to develop our brain power, intellect, memory capacity, brain capacity.
Is there any possibility for this?

I have an issue with the semantics here. Current AI would perform poorly at the kind of tasks you envision. However, new techniques will be developed that can do these tasks and they will be added to the list of techniques considered "Artificial Intelligence".

 

[DiracPool]

As long as there are homo sapiens, there will be reasons to "open the skull".

Of course there will always be reasons to open the human skull; just ask Katie Hopkins:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/katie-hopkins-undergoes-12-hours-7429134

Actually, don't ask her, you'll never get her to shut up...

As far as brain-computer interfaces (BCI) to deal with pathological conditions such as brain damage, paralysis, etc., I see a big future for BCI's. My comment is that they will not be used to any successful extent to enhance the native cognitive capacities of otherwise healthy human brains. Perhaps I should have been more clear on this point in my earlier post.

 

[GTOM]

Of course there will always be reasons to open the human skull; just ask Katie Hopkins:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/katie-hopkins-undergoes-12-hours-7429134

Actually, don't ask her, you'll never get her to shut up...

As far as brain-computer interfaces (BCI) to deal with pathological conditions such as brain damage, paralysis, etc., I see a big future for BCI's. My comment is that they will not be used to any successful extent to enhance the native cognitive capacities of otherwise healthy human brains. Perhaps I should have been more clear on this point in my earlier post.

Even if they don't enhance the native cognitive capacities of healthy human brains, there can be lots of useful applications of them, for healthy humans too, like droning, entertainment, faster training.

Otherwise why do they think, that there should be one superintelligent (artificial) brain, and that would be so good? I think it is far more realistic, that lots of computers and humans do cloud computing to solve something great. (Unless we make machines random, i think they are completely unable to think outside the box.)

 

[HyperTechno]

i think they are completely unable to think outside the box.

I agree with you!