Re: hive mind

From: Tennessee Leeuwenburg (
Date: Tue Aug 01 2006 - 20:39:16 MDT

Mike Dougherty wrote:
> It would depend on how tightly woven the mesh was. As Joel suggested,
> the likelihood of every developing the kind of inter-brain
> communication that we have for in-brain/inter-neuron communication is
> pretty impractical. Even if several uploaded human brain models were
> interested trying this experiment, the amount of cpu needed to
> simulate every neuron connecting to every other neuron would be
> immense. [something like O(probably-not-worthwhile) to use an inexact
> qualitative measure]
> I wonder what emergent thoughts arise in the global level of
> organization from a relationship between neuron:brain::brain:global
> "hive" mind. It may be that we're already part of a project like
> this, but we don't understand it any better than a single neuron would
> understand the totality of brain it occupies. Likewise the
> superstructure comprised of all sentient computation has as little
> overall concern for each human as we might for a single neuron.
> Forgive me if this sounds overly simplified (it is) - but I tend to
> see a fractal nature in everything.
> On 7/31/06, *Tennessee Leeuwenburg* <
> <>> wrote:
> With a proper link, such as an electrode mesh or similar direct
> contact
> with the brain, which is transmitted to another human brain, such that
> each 'human' grows and develops with the link constantly in existence,
> do you think it is possible that only one mind would exist, or do you
> think that human brains are so designed that even with such a link,
> there would be two minds?
My thinking had been more philosophical -- could two literal human
brains produce only one mind? It would be my thought that we don't have
the science to carefully design the nature of the link, but we probably
have (or nearly have) the science to create a physical link.

Even if it was by using electrode stimulation of a skin patch from an
electrode mesh around the scalp, some kind of channel could be formed.
It seems to be the kind of practical test that could actually be performed.

I believe that some work has already been done on both sides of the
channel. One example is the ability to give a sense of vision to blind
people using a camera feed to stimulate a patch of skin. Another is (and
I forget what this is called) where people learn to control their mental
states by using a computer game which rewards the entering of those
mental states.

Another is the example of using rat brain cells to form a neural network
capable of flying a plane in a flight simulator.

It seems like it should be possible to perform an animal experiment of
some kind in order to test the technology.

I find successful practical demonstrations more "shocking" that the mere
concept of the potential for technological advance. Even though, in and
of itself, it is less shocking that something like a Singularity (or
other SL4), because of the weight it adds to the argument for practical
achievement of an SL4 event, it is in a sense SL4.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:57 MDT