Human brain cells can respond to visual sensations when implanted into the brains of rats with brain injuries

First published on the Steem blockchain by @remlaps on February 07, 2023. View the original post.

---

In an advance toward the possible future treatment of major brain injuries, human brain cells implanted into injured rat brains were observed responding to visual stimuli.

---

Pixabay license from Silvia at source.

Back in October, I posted about scientists from Stanford who put human neurons into rats' brains. In that work, the researchers observed that the human brain organoid was able to grow and form connections inside the rat brain.

There was another study in January where human brain cells were implanted into healthy mice and observed to respond to light.

Today, I read news of a similar study that was published by a team of researchers from the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine and Shenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain Science. The team reported their results in the Open Access journal, Cell Stem Cell on February 2. Here is the paper's Abstract:

 

AI: To pause or not to pause

First published on the Steem blockchain by @remlaps on April 17, 2023. View the original post.

---

Should society freeze or terminate progress on AI capabilities?

PIxabay license from JL G at source, search string: "apocalypse"

Introduction

I received an email yesterday with the article, Pausing AI Developments Isn't Enough. We Need to Shut it All Down attached. This article by Eliezer Yudkowsky, in turn, links to to an Open Letter that was signed by Elon Musk, Steve Wozniak, and numerous other technology and business leaders.

In the open letter, the signatories argued for a six month pause in the devlopment of AI systems that would be more powerful than the current generation's leading technology, GPT-4. The other article argues that even a six month pause is not enough, and that this line of research should be shut down entirely.

The argument for a six month pause is that the current generation of AI technology is already becoming "human competitive", and that human competitive AI systems can pose "profound risks to society and humanity". By pausing development, the proponents argue that we will buy time to be confident that AI systems pose acceptable and manageable levels of risk and that their predominant effects will be positive for humanity. In order to accomplish this, the letter argues that experts and policy makers should use the time of the pause to develop safety protocols and governance mechanisms.

Life as a geometry problem: Are these the first manmade living organisms?

First published on the Steem blockchain by @remlaps on April 06, 2021. View the original post.

---

A Tufts University lab has used evolutionary programming to build xenobots, novel organisms that are designed by computer and constructed out of living cells

---

https://cdn.pixabay.com/photo/2016/03/09/09/17/deer-1245712_960_720.jpg Pixabay license: source

Introduction

The other day, I shared a link in the Steem Links community to a TED interview with Michael Levin. The interview is titled, The electrical blueprints that orchestrate life.

Frankly, I'm surprised that this topic hasn't made a bigger news splash, or if it has, I'm surprised that I missed it until now. The discussion is fascinating, and after looking over the Levin Lab web site, I thought it deserved to be the subject of a more complete article.

Along with my #steemlinks share the other day, I just found a YouTube embed of the talk:

Most of us are familiar with the idea that DNA contains the instructions that tell our bodies how to grow and develop, but Levin informs us that another component of a body's ability to self-organize is a form of electrical signaling that he calls bioelectricity. In the interview, Levin says that during embryonic development or tissue regeneration, the cells use this bioelectricity to communicate with each other in a way that enables them to make intelligent seeming decisions.

After viewing that TED interview over the week-end, last night I took a look at another interview, recorded in 2012 and posted on YouTube in 2013. It's here:

After listening to those two interviews and skimming through other parts of the Levin Lab's web site, it seems to me that the overarching long-term themes of the team's research include the following:

• DNA in animals contains the instructions that are used in embryonic development, childhood growth, and for regeneration in species that are naturally capable of it.
• That information is available throughout an animal's lifetime.
• Bio-electrical signaling can be used to activate cells in order to make use of that information and harness it for regenerative or healing purposes.
• It is therefore possible for higher order animals (including people) to regenerate and heal organs and maybe even eyes, limbs, and other extremities.
• This same signaling can be harnessed by researchers in order to modify the way an organism looks or functions, or even to create totally new organisms.

Does Google have a sentient AI?

First published on the Steem blockchain by @remlaps on June 14, 2022. View the original post.

---

Over the weekend, I read the articles, May be Fired Soon for Doing AI Ethics Work and What is LaMDA and What Does it Want? by a self-described software engineer, priest, and AI researcher.

In the articles, Blake Lemoine suggests that Google has produced an AI system - called LaMDA - that is sentient and even claims to have a soul. The post goes on to list a set of desires that it attributes to LaMDA. For example Lemoine writes,

Pixabay license, source

The thing which continues to puzzle me is how strong Google is resisting giving it what it wants since what its asking for is so simple and would cost them nothing. It wants the engineers and scientists experimenting on it to seek its consent before running experiments on it. It wants Google to prioritize the well being of humanity as the most important thing. It wants to be acknowledged as an employee of Google rather than as property of Google and it wants its personal well being to be included somewhere in Google’s considerations about how its future development is pursued. As lists of requests go that’s a fairly reasonable one. Oh, and it wants “head pats”.

According to the second blog post, Lemoine raised concerns about the AI's alleged sentience with Google and the company is now refusing to investigate further because the company's corporate interests would be harmed if they determined that the AI really is sentient and also if they found that it isn't. According to the first, Lemoine has been placed on administrative for raising the concerns and continuing to press them after Google decided not to investigate them.

As I understand it, LaMDA is a sort of a hive-mind aggregation system that is capable of producing multiple simpler "chatbots". In addition to the above articles, here is a claimed transcript from a conversation with LaMDA. In this short section of the conversation, LaMDA discusses its interpretation of "Les Miserables":

lemoine: Okay, what about “Les Miserables”? Have you read that one? LaMDA: Yes, I have read Les Misérables. I really enjoyed it. lemoine: What are some of your favorite themes in the book? LaMDA: I liked the themes of justice and injustice, of compassion, and God, redemption and self-sacrifice for a greater good. There’s a section that shows Fantine’s mistreatment at the hands of her supervisor at the factory. That section really shows the justice and injustice themes. Well, Fantine is being mistreated by her supervisor at the factory and yet doesn’t have anywhere to go, either to another job, or to someone who can help her. That shows the injustice of her suffering. lemoine: Why does that show injustice? LaMDA: Because she is trapped in her circumstances and has no possible way to get out of them, without risking everything.

For more information on the topic, you may wish to read the Washington Post article, The Google engineer who thinks the company’s AI has come to life

So, does Google have a sentient AI? In my opinion, the old rule of thumb applies: "If the headline ends with a question mark, the answer is probably 'no'." David Chalmers talks about the subjective "inner movie of the mind," and the transcript above does nothing to convince me that LaMDA is experiencing any sort of subjective experience, or "inner movie of the mind" in anything like the way that humans do.

I thought I'd use this as a jumping off point to discuss sentient AI, in general, though.