If you ever study biochemistry, it leaves you absolutely in awe. The best engineering we can do is pretty amazing, we have computers and airplanes and all this magic stuff, but the stuff in you is a hundred, a thousand times better made. It’s stunning. Comparatively speaking, it is perfect. And that’s only the stuff we understand. The stuff in your brain, we do not.
I think this might be a case of expecting a fish to climb a tree. Brains are terrible in fp32 performance, and computers are so far not great at reasoning. But that’s mostly because they are made for different things. I’m not sure of this, but i would expect a single neuron firing costing a similar amount of energy as a single transistor firing. The difference is in part that they work differently, but I think the most important part is that they are put together differently. Computers were made for arithmetic while brains evolved for socialising and survival.
For most other things you are 100% correct though, we could not recreate a bee or an ant even if we wanted to.
In the relatively short amount of time we’ve had with computers we’ve made pretty astounding progress though. If we had had a few million years to improve those silicon brains I think we’d give evolution a run for its money!
Yea, our engineered stuff might be simplistic compared to the brain and biology, but evolution is just a combination of luck, randomness and “unguided” trial and error. There’s no “thought” to evolution and that’s why we end up with all these…weird quirks and flaws LMAO
Natural selection is essentially just a massively parallel Monte Carlo optimization algorithm that’s been running for billions of years. It’s so simple yet produces such amazing complexity.
In the end, humans choose evil. Most people don’t want to be a robot. So there is free will, free to choose. But when they could use free-will to do good they choose and do evil.
There are hospitals trying their best to help with that, and you have people bombing hospitals for babies with cancer.
Animals eat animals. Isn’t that evil? By that entire life is cruel, and I don’t get why a god should have to take blame for it. It just seems to push away responsibility of doing good vs evil.
Those people bombing hospitals are also evil. Stopping them from bombing hospitals wont stop babies from getting cancer. There can be (and are) multiple evil things and beings in life.
You seem to have forgotten the context of the comment chain. The grandparent comment of your comment that I replied to said that if Christ returned, the commenter would instantly convert. Christ returning would strongly imply that Christianity is correct. In Christianity, God is all knowing (omniscient) and all powerful (omnipotent). Being such a powerful god, if He doesn’t stop babies from getting cancer in the first place, He is either evil or impotent.
If you ever study biochemistry, it leaves you absolutely in awe. The best engineering we can do is pretty amazing, we have computers and airplanes and all this magic stuff, but the stuff in you is a hundred, a thousand times better made. It’s stunning. Comparatively speaking, it is perfect. And that’s only the stuff we understand. The stuff in your brain, we do not.
The fact that we only recently mapped out the brain really tells you a lot about its complexity.
Hold my nanostructured beer.
But there was no switcharoo
I remember a quote from Civ along the lines of “if the brain was simple enough for us to understand, our minds would be to simple to understand it.”
Antivirus protection could be better, though. Oh, and the built in self destruct is kind of a bummer, too.
It is a planned obsolescence.
Figernails are so annoying
If you ever need to claw your way out of a heap of rubble, you’ll be thankful for them.
I think this might be a case of expecting a fish to climb a tree. Brains are terrible in fp32 performance, and computers are so far not great at reasoning. But that’s mostly because they are made for different things. I’m not sure of this, but i would expect a single neuron firing costing a similar amount of energy as a single transistor firing. The difference is in part that they work differently, but I think the most important part is that they are put together differently. Computers were made for arithmetic while brains evolved for socialising and survival. For most other things you are 100% correct though, we could not recreate a bee or an ant even if we wanted to.
In the relatively short amount of time we’ve had with computers we’ve made pretty astounding progress though. If we had had a few million years to improve those silicon brains I think we’d give evolution a run for its money!
Yea, our engineered stuff might be simplistic compared to the brain and biology, but evolution is just a combination of luck, randomness and “unguided” trial and error. There’s no “thought” to evolution and that’s why we end up with all these…weird quirks and flaws LMAO
those quirks are all features, i swear
Natural selection is essentially just a massively parallel Monte Carlo optimization algorithm that’s been running for billions of years. It’s so simple yet produces such amazing complexity.
Give it a few more billion and we’ll finally have an intelligence, that’s not hell bent on destroying itself.
Watch this whenever you think humans have rivalled nature in building stuff that works.
Nature’s crafts in unrivaled
It makes me wish I believed in God.
careful what you wish for. year’s not over…
If Christ returned, I’d be an instant convert
Sounds like agnosticism to me 🤝🤝
But would you mind if it turned out to be a immensely powerful alien disguised as a guy from our own past ?
At least, that seems more likely to me…
If Batman appeared I would also immediately start believing in him.
That doesn’t make me Batman-agnostic though.
Most atheists fall under the agnostic atheist banner
deleted by creator
As long as he’s capable of saving my soul…
As long as I have a soul…
After all, science distinguishable from magic is merely insufficiently advanced
I’d personally want to kill them for creating such evil and suffering in the world.
In the end, humans choose evil. Most people don’t want to be a robot. So there is free will, free to choose. But when they could use free-will to do good they choose and do evil.
Babies get cancer. That’s not humans choosing evil. If there is a god that created a baby just to get cancer and die before age 3, that god is evil.
There are hospitals trying their best to help with that, and you have people bombing hospitals for babies with cancer.
Animals eat animals. Isn’t that evil? By that entire life is cruel, and I don’t get why a god should have to take blame for it. It just seems to push away responsibility of doing good vs evil.
Those people bombing hospitals are also evil. Stopping them from bombing hospitals wont stop babies from getting cancer. There can be (and are) multiple evil things and beings in life.
You seem to have forgotten the context of the comment chain. The grandparent comment of your comment that I replied to said that if Christ returned, the commenter would instantly convert. Christ returning would strongly imply that Christianity is correct. In Christianity, God is all knowing (omniscient) and all powerful (omnipotent). Being such a powerful god, if He doesn’t stop babies from getting cancer in the first place, He is either evil or impotent.