BRN Discussion Ongoing

[miaeffect]

I was really hoping that our SP would get a wriggle on today as the US version closed at US 78c which equates to AUD$1.04 with an exchange rate of .7480. Yet another offshore movement not followed up at home. Soon, soon........

One more massive IP announcement soon please. Ba-am! soon.

 

[McHale]

An interesting insight into your main man. LOL:

“He Has an Incredible Knack to Smell the Next Fad”: How Klaus Schwab Built a Billionaire Circus at Davos

The überrich flock annually to the World Economic Forum, where they can schmooze and strike deals under the guise of saving the world. A new book reveals how its founder benefits from this gathering of the global elite.

www.vanityfair.com

FF

Hi FF, That "Vanity Fair" article is a shallow synopsis, which does not speak to the real Schwab and what he is up to,
his main work is the "Great Reset" ("in ten years time you will own nothing, but you will be happy" and much more really scary stuff).
He has recently boasted about the amount of control he has over the Canadian Parliament, Justin Trudeau is one of his "Young Global Leaders" (so is Ardern and many other left leaning politicians).
He is really a socialist economic academic, with no real experience in the markets who is a big fan of Thomas Piketty (big mover in the Modern Monetary Theory group of morons), IMO Schwab is the deepest rabbit hole on earth at the minute has profound and pervasive connections, if you deeply research him it is truly the stuff of nightmares.
I was speaking with a Local Gov't Member the other day in flood stricken Murwillumbah, who told me about how this Great Reset is a big talking point in NSW Local Gov't Conferences and was known in Gov't circles all over Australia - yet most people have never heard of Schwab or the fact that his Reset is well known to our politicians.

 

[McHale]

Come the revolution, there's a lot of billionaires lined up against the wall ...

It was years ago when "gardening" at my place became jungle warfare.

Still, the frogs love it ...

Well Dio, we know what happened to the "let them eat cake" lady, and so many friends.

And pleasing to hear that the frogs are so happy.

 

[chapman89]

There is no doubt that Elon Musk and others are watching very closely what Mercedes is doing.

Mercedes Drive Pilot Beats Tesla Autopilot By Taking Legal Responsibility

Mercedes will accept full legal responsibility for the vehicle whenever Drive Pilot is active. The automaker hopes to offer the system in the U.S. by the end of 2022.

www.roadandtrack.com

 

[Diogenese]

Well Dio, we know what happened to the "let them eat cake" lady, and so many friends.

And pleasing to hear that the frogs are so happy.

These aren't the cake-eating frogs.

 

[Jumpchooks]

An interesting article indeed, but by no stretch of the imagination can it be called a “simple read”.

I assume using that word was somewhat tounge-in-cheek, but I often fail to pick up on sarcasm and hence I gave it a quick read. I admit to not reading all of it, I did skim over the quantum physics content and mathematics as I didn‘t need a refresher course.

But firstly, thanks for sharing it, it did cause me to stimulate my mind a little more than normal this morning.

Most importantly, I do hope Brainchip comes up with a method of modelling cortical columns, as that WILL take use cases to the next level and will, as @FactFinder most correctly stated, “blow the semiconductors market socks off”.

My following response is merely an alternate view formed by a casual read of the referenced material. I don‘t pretend to know much about the subject matter nor do I intend to discredit the author or anyone for sharing it. Well maybe the author(s) of the scientific paper, slightly—for the way the information is presented.

And I apologise in advance if I am completely off the mark. As I said—it was not a “simple read” and I only skimmed it.

IMHO, the referenced article is quite a difficult read, not from a content stance , but rather by the way it is presented. I feel it really doesn’t need to delve into quantum physics and electron spin theory nor a lot of the mathematics. The metastable dynamics involved in quantum physics is a completely different concept, and far more complex, I doubt they are at play in brain cells. For one thing, brain cells are far too big for quantum effects to be at play.

Even 28nm electronic circuits may be too large. But getting closer, than a brain cell, to the orders of magnitude required for quantum effects to have an impact.

Using quantum physics to explain the concept is probably using too big a sledge hammer and only alienates many potential readers. But that may be the entire point of the author(s) also!

I saw a lot of the content as the “I’m so smart” padding that normally proliferates scientific papers. I’ve read quite a few in the past. Unfortunately they are often judged as less useful if using an economy of words, or if written so a lay-person can understand them. “Judged by weight of the paper” is a term that is often used.

Academia certainly has a weird way of creating a protectionist bubble that excludes a lot of open discussion. Somewhat like job protection by obfuscation in some ways. Just my opinion!

A simple read would have been: the postulation of Cortical columns (or actually metastable dynamics, as is the true subject of the article) in the notion of preconception and thinking.

It seems they could physically measure brain activity before an event, and it is true that these were fleeting activities that quickly disappeared. Hence calling this metastable dynamics is probably appropriate. My objection is to the postulate that no impetus preceded this activity.

IMHO the author is excluding the wholistic approach of the body and the fact that the human brain does not control ALL aspects of the body. Hormones play a VERY significant role and maybe, in only looking at brain cell stimuli, the study has not appropriately considered hormones as the cause of these seemingly mystical responses in the supposed absence of stimuli.

The human body also can get trained on timing. Like getting hungry at 3 decently standard times of the day. There’s no physiological reason for having 3 meals, yet most people do.

Then there are many other synaesthesias at play, where one sense seems to autonomously elicit a response in another sense. You’ve all heard the saying “We eat with our eyes” for instance.

Now on to thinking. Do we truely understand what thinking is? I won’t go down that rat hole here but needless to say—we certainly don‘t know how the brain achieves the act of thinking. And then there’s thinking about thinking, or meta thinking etc.

Most certainly, every response needs a stimulus. Nothing happens spontaneously in the human brain. Even an unperceived stimulus is still a stimulus. We just have to look harder to notice it.

ZEN and the Art of Electronics meets Psychology, that just about ticks all the boxes! I love your thinking, even if it is way beyond mine.

 

[Fact Finder]

Afternoon mkg6R,

For the month of April I only have three events penciled in so far,

1, April 2 , Pod cast, Chit chat with Chairman of Foundries.io.

2, April 17, OTC Markets, Technology Virtual Investor Confrence, BRN presenting.

3, April 29, 4C, Quarterly Report, ( possibly disclosing multiple billion $ contracts ) , * That last bit I added, unlikely but possible.

& today , March 31, I thought we were going to receive the Audited Accounts.???

BRN Shareholders need some, Positive reverbiration driven by recurrent synaptic exitation.

I have stolen this bit from one of Diogenese posts.

Regards,
Esq.

Hi Esq
I just realised you left off I am having a hair cut tomorrow afternoon. FF

 

[McHale]

These aren't the cake-eating frogs.

What have you got them on ???

 

[Fact Finder]

What have you got them on ???

I think @uiux supplies him with mosquitoes. FF

 

[Fact Finder]

Hi FF, That "Vanity Fair" article is a shallow synopsis, which does not speak to the real Schwab and what he is up to,
his main work is the "Great Reset" ("in ten years time you will own nothing, but you will be happy" and much more really scary stuff).
He has recently boasted about the amount of control he has over the Canadian Parliament, Justin Trudeau is one of his "Young Global Leaders" (so is Ardern and many other left leaning politicians).
He is really a socialist economic academic, with no real experience in the markets who is a big fan of Thomas Piketty (big mover in the Modern Monetary Theory group of morons), IMO Schwab is the deepest rabbit hole on earth at the minute has profound and pervasive connections, if you deeply research him it is truly the stuff of nightmares.
I was speaking with a Local Gov't Member the other day in flood stricken Murwillumbah, who told me about how this Great Reset is a big talking point in NSW Local Gov't Conferences and was known in Gov't circles all over Australia - yet most people have never heard of Schwab or the fact that his Reset is well known to our politicians.

It’s all over then if he has the two greatest living leaders in the world in his pocket. LOL FF

 

[Diogenese]

What have you got them on ???

Thigh-building hormones.

 

[MrNick]

NOTE TO MANAGEMENT:
Please hold off on the big announcement until April 2nd. Thanks.

 

[Boab]

Thigh-building hormones.

 

[wilzy123]

NOTE TO MANAGEMENT:
Please hold off on the big announcement until April 2nd. Thanks.

 

[Jumpchooks]

Well said @FactFinder. I’d be happy if the world stopped trying to emulate the way our brain works and rather concentrated on emulating what I believe to be a true definition of intelligence. The art of using past experience to arrive at a reasonable conclusion for a new problem, and learning from that experience.

Doing the above in isolation is even a better measure of intelligence.

So what IS NOT Artificial Intelligence:
- Looking up an answer from a huge lookup table/data set is not a measure of intelligence, and is not AI.
- Doing something fast is not a measure of intelligence, and is not AI.
- Doing something complicated is not necessarily intelligence nor AI.

I do like the plastic bag analogy, and I do remember that being spoken of before. Determining that a plastic bag floating in front of an EV is not a dramatic event in need of drastic behaviour to avoid, is bordering on a level of artificial intelligence that I would like to experience. It’s a nice target—for want of a better word!

Working the way a human brain works, as in neuromorphic processors, brings efficiencies to the table.
One shot learning, or even just the ability to learn on the fly, brings other efficiencies to the table.

These are areas in which Akida excels. And this DOES border on AI.

I particularly like the idea that solutions involving Akida only rely on seed programming. The limitations of a human programmer not being able to code for unknowns has been a concern of mine for a very long time. AI solutions need the ability to adapt to situations that were not known of when they were first conceived.

Some examples that’s drivers may encounter in varying situations, there is a Moral issue

Driver with his family in car on tour

1 60 kph drivers sees child on bike come out suddenly ,,,,,, [swerve to miss]

Or, Plastic bag example. Keep driving and ignore ,,,,,, [drive on]

2 100 kph , wet road , driver sees a Kangaroo/Deer jump out from the verge and most advise says they are better to brake and stay driving straight, hit the Roo/Deer and Right-toff the car. All occupants survive. Logic, being that to swerve at that speed could roll car kill the occupants ,,,,,, [ brake hard hit target and survive]

Or, 100 kph drivers sees a child on bike come out suddenly,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[Moral dilemma?]

Just two examples give the complexities of Autonomous Vehicle control decisions.

How does Intelligence fit in to these examples?

When to Brake? ,,,,,,,, When to Swerve?

The human psyche has a high degree of complexity

 

[wilzy123]

 

[Jumpchooks]

Thanks once again.

I had a mate who would tune the twin su’s on my sports car with a piece of hose stuck in his ear and the other end held in front of each air intake and he would move the hose back and forth until he had them sounding exactly the same.

I wonder if Robot Ken could do this.
FF

I was taught to set the Ignition Timing on my vehicles with a cigarette paper in the points. I did it for years until I realized that there was a device called a Timing Light. Still prefer the paper, it gives a very slight advantage (advance)

 

[Diogenese]

Some examples that’s drivers may encounter in varying situations, there is a Moral issue

Driver with his family in car on tour

1 60 kph drivers sees child on bike come out suddenly ,,,,,, [swerve to miss]

Or, Plastic bag example. Keep driving and ignore ,,,,,, [drive on]

2 100 kph , wet road , driver sees a Kangaroo/Deer jump out from the verge and most advise says they are better to brake and stay driving straight, hit the Roo/Deer and Right-toff the car. All occupants survive. Logic, being that to swerve at that speed could roll car kill the occupants ,,,,,, [ brake hard hit target and survive]

Or, 100 kph drivers sees a child on bike come out suddenly,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[Moral dilemma?]

Just two examples give the complexities of Autonomous Vehicle control decisions.

How does Intelligence fit in to these examples?

When to Brake? ,,,,,,,, When to Swerve?

The human psyche has a high degree of complexity

Radar transponder with Akida SNN at roofline detects child 0.3 sec before eyesight and reacts 0.3 sec before human driver could.

0.6 sec at 100 kph ~ 16.6 m.

Even cutting that in half still gives an extra 8 m - ADAS emergency program calculates angle of turn to miss child.

 

[miaeffect]

View attachment 3557


View attachment 3558

 

[Fact Finder]

Some examples that’s drivers may encounter in varying situations, there is a Moral issue

Driver with his family in car on tour

1 60 kph drivers sees child on bike come out suddenly ,,,,,, [swerve to miss]

Or, Plastic bag example. Keep driving and ignore ,,,,,, [drive on]

2 100 kph , wet road , driver sees a Kangaroo/Deer jump out from the verge and most advise says they are better to brake and stay driving straight, hit the Roo/Deer and Right-toff the car. All occupants survive. Logic, being that to swerve at that speed could roll car kill the occupants ,,,,,, [ brake hard hit target and survive]

Or, 100 kph drivers sees a child on bike come out suddenly,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[Moral dilemma?]

Just two examples give the complexities of Autonomous Vehicle control decisions.

How does Intelligence fit in to these examples?

When to Brake? ,,,,,,,, When to Swerve?

The human psyche has a high degree of complexity

The thing about morale dilemmas is there is no right answer the clue is in the question and cheating is impossible.

My experience tells me that best not to drive straight into animals on four legs such as deers, moose, cows, horses, zebra, wilder beast, giraffe etc; because they roll onto the bonnet and through the windscreen and probably kill at least the driver and front seat passenger.

At a practical level do not dismiss this advice as being irrelevant because you live in Sydney as I had a client who survived seriously impaired when on Anzac Parade coming home late at night a horse that had escaped from Centennial Park riding school came through his windscreen.

I think an autonomous vehicle with radar and Lidar would hopefully reduce the surprise factor by very early recognition of terrified horses etc;

FF