What’s the biggest obstacle that is slowing down numentas progress?
Is it funding? Lack of scientists who need to be trained? Lack of neuroscience research that is slow/hard?
Hope this is the right place to post
What’s the biggest obstacle that is slowing down numentas progress?
Is it funding? Lack of scientists who need to be trained? Lack of neuroscience research that is slow/hard?
Hope this is the right place to post
Numenta existing at all has greatly increased the chances of the creation of neuroscience inspired AGI being developed. Is there some obvious bottleneck to this process? If someone gave numenta $1B dollars would that help a lot? Do we just need more scientists working on these problems? Is it an issue of marketing? Do we need to wait for technological breakthroughs in brain imaging? Do we need faster computers to be able to run bigger/better simulations?
If I had to pick any of those three, I’d imagine the last one plays a big part.
If there was more sophisticated equipment to instrument a live brain with, it would surely make it easier to understand what’s going on.
Hi all. Here is my answer to your question. I have a close view on this having been part of Numenta from the start.
Again, the biggest obstacles to our progress are hard scientific and engineering problems. I believe we can, for the first time, see the end goal, and our progress will hopefully accelerate going forward. I hope you will be excited by what we are working on.
A"G"I has a G for General. Which I haven’t heard one bit in any Numenta talk.
Numenta wants to copy the cortex and subcorticals to accelerate machine learning. They explicitly say they will leave out IMPORTANT topics like qualia, emotions etc (which i don’t agree).
The thing that holds them back is the thing that holds anyone back: a theory for the brain. How do you get the best features from the brain without going full cargo-cult science? Put a symbol somewhere and abstract away the rest. But abstract away WHAT?
I personally appreciate the great progress made both by the field of neuroscience as well as by Numenta. I would dare to say (as my subjective opinion) that progress does not come in a linear continual process but rather as a series of quantum jumps. Some big ones and a few smaller jumps in between.
With each jump, we narrow the search space of possibilities that lead to AGI but also increase the focus. Within the new focal points, we can better identify some missing pieces, but can never predict when and how these pieces will be discovered. We know what we know. We also know some of what we don’t know. But we don’t know if there is more to what we don’t know. (The eternal dilemma of basic research).
I would be very interested in a high-level roadmap of what we expect to find on the path to AGI. (The expected milestones on our path to AGI.). Many of these milestones lie in the past, behind us. Numenta has been instrumental in many. But what do we expect to find ahead of us, on this path?
Finally, I would like to add, that in my opinion, this roadmap should be defined in terms of given functional capabilities and not in terms of areas of application. (Often times, goals and milestones are described as areas of application. That is not scientific in my opinion). Capabilities at a neurological, computing or cognitive set of dimensions would make more sense.