I get into a vehicle every day that I don't fully understand, yet it still seems to perform its function.
I use vast swathes of computational resources every day for various tasks, the operation of which I understand even less. They still seem to accomplish those tasks without issue.
Sometimes those computational resources run ML workloads. Very very few people on this planet can honestly claim to understand how neural networks work, and in many cases, the minutiae are inscrutable to all of us. They still seem to work fine.
I most certainly do not understand how my own brain works, yet here it is, shitposting on hackernews.
We have yet to find a single shred of evidence that the human brain makes use of quantum principles in aggregate to do its thing, and have even specifically excluded a few such explanations. And even if consciousness strictly requires quantum hardware...we'll get there eventually.
Although you're certainly right about one thing, most laypeople would have a real tough time accepting a world where consciousness is synthetically reproducible, and instead tend to reach for comforting thoughts of "maybe quantum is required", "maybe consciousness is magic" or "maybe consciousness can only be created by a deity".
Non-laypeople know that at normal temperatures and pressures, quantum effects don't really extend into the macroscopic realm.
> We have yet to find a single shred of evidence that the human brain makes use of quantum principles in aggregate to do its thing, and have even specifically excluded a few such explanations. And even if consciousness strictly requires quantum hardware...we'll get there eventually.
Isn't a random generator for a neural network act as its "inception"? If so, it's exactly quantum principles in aggregate.
One does not require true random number generation to perform SGD. And once trained, most neural networks in-use today are completely deterministic. So no.
You are also making a baseless assertion that consciousness requires randomness of any kind, let alone quantum-based true random number generation.
Why would a random generator be important for a neutral network?
Furthermore, not all sources of noise/randomness arise from quantum measurement (the only part of QM which can be interpreted to have randomness at all). Classical chaotic systems are also random if you were unable to measure the initial conditions to cosmic precision.
In fact, it's unclear at the moment how QM can actually give rise to randomness. In principle, in QM a perfectly isolated system of any complexity would behave entirely linearly with no randomness or even any chaos involved.
I use vast swathes of computational resources every day for various tasks, the operation of which I understand even less. They still seem to accomplish those tasks without issue.
Sometimes those computational resources run ML workloads. Very very few people on this planet can honestly claim to understand how neural networks work, and in many cases, the minutiae are inscrutable to all of us. They still seem to work fine.
I most certainly do not understand how my own brain works, yet here it is, shitposting on hackernews.
We have yet to find a single shred of evidence that the human brain makes use of quantum principles in aggregate to do its thing, and have even specifically excluded a few such explanations. And even if consciousness strictly requires quantum hardware...we'll get there eventually.
Although you're certainly right about one thing, most laypeople would have a real tough time accepting a world where consciousness is synthetically reproducible, and instead tend to reach for comforting thoughts of "maybe quantum is required", "maybe consciousness is magic" or "maybe consciousness can only be created by a deity".
Non-laypeople know that at normal temperatures and pressures, quantum effects don't really extend into the macroscopic realm.
reply