Jeff Hawkins: Brain science is about to fundamentally change computing

http://www.ted.com Treo creator Jeff Hawkins urges us to take a new look at the brain -- to see it not as a fast processor, but as a memory system that stores and plays back experiences to help us predict, intelligently, what will happen next.

TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers are invited to give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, and Design, and TEDTalks cover these topics as well as science, business, politics and the arts. Watch the Top 10 TEDTalks on TED.com, at
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/top10

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• TED
• TEDTalks
• talks
• Jeff Hawkins
• brain science
• computing
• brain
• neuroscience
• computer
• computers
• brain theory
• the brain
• about the brain
• what is brain
• what is the brain
• a brain
• your brain
• intelligence
• AI
• artificial intelligence
• real intelligence
• theory
• knowledge
• behavior
• prediction
• science
• technology
• engineering
• research
• programming
• physics
• future

[ooLevityoo]

Haha, absolutely love his out-of-nowhere stab at dualism :)

[oneyedo]

brilliant

[bsujit]

Too much chatter - less information. Disappointed.

[dimitriosmichael]

@zeebenzine hi. not talking about conventional religion. I am talking about the metacarnal

[zeebenzine]

@dimitriosmichael its useless in the development of AI.

[zeebenzine]

@souravbindia However I also would say that this 'robotic intelligence' that you quote is also definitely a large part of things that we consider as intelligent. But it definitely does not deal with creativity. Actually, I'm interested in what he has to say about the issue of creativity.

[JonmanXmusic]

@trivea That, I agree with. I think that attempting to understand the brain is a noble endeavor. We'll be able to actually answer some questions about what makes up a human when we understand the functioning of neural circuitry. But until then, I think we should hold our horses on the implications! Science says nothing definitive about anything outside of it's current capabilities. Jeff Hawkins certainly has a lot of influence, and I feel like he's presenting his own philosophy with his science.

[trivea]

@JonmanXmusic True. I guess he went about it wrong, but I think he means to say that a metaphysical approach from the outset is probably bad because it could lead us to put up false logical barriers (ie. brain can't understand itself so no use trying).

[JonmanXmusic]

@trivea Mhm. Yes, we could definately try to model knowledge structures biologically. But I just dislike how Jeff Hawkins bashes dualism based upon his work in neuroscience. Materialism is a good working assumption for the feild of neuroscience as it leads the scientist to be more ambitious and to leave no rock unturned, but to say that a science as incomplete as brain science somehow implies a metaphysical position such as materialism is making a total leap of faith in my opinion.

[oproski]

3-CPO lol

[trivea]

@JonmanXmusic I see where you're coming from, but you seem to be mixing philosophical and biological definitions of "understanding understanding." The question of whether or not epistemology can be understood on a level higher than epistemology is one of philosophy. The question of whether or not we can find out how the brain creates epistemology in an anatomical context is a more scientific one.