Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Corsair4 t1_j4hoo1b wrote

>with no substance.

Welcome to Futurology.

I don't have a background in AI, but I do have a pretty good grasp on Neuroscience.

The articles and comment sections on anything related to neuro are absolutely atrocious. There is no worthwhile discussion to be had. Most comments are pop culture references, or talking about some 70s dystopian nonsense that has nothing to do with the article. It's abundantly clear that very few people read past the headlines, let alone actually reading the primary research. Most commenters don't understand the absolute basics of the field, and most of the articles that are posted here are utter horseshit anyway. There was one a while back about direct brain to brain communication, that of course, led people down the rabbit hole of big brother listening to your thoughts, etc etc. About 3 people actually read the article, which was simply talking about distinguishing what letter a person looked at, and printing that letter on a different monitor for someone to read. That's not novel, or exciting, or new. But the bullshit rises to the top.

I can only assume that neuro articles and discussion are not unique in their awfulness around here, and that every field is similarly poorly informed - I just don't have the background to identify it in other fields. Given that, I'm fairly confident that all the doom and gloom around AI discussions is completely unsubstantiated. It's just the hot new thing to speculate wildly about.

6

Sharpshooter188 t1_j4ierai wrote

I know nothing about neuroscience. But Ive noticed collected themes throughout my studies. Just because one thing ticks off 3 boxes out of 6, doesnt mean you have an accurate result. In that I means there is likely sooooo much more information that has to be looked at before even approaching a reasonable conlcusion.

1