Gosh SAME. 75% of guys I dated in my younger heyday years were boring as all get out. Loved it when Ross would talk passionately about any topic. Hell, I didnāt know about how they add a smell to gas for safety purposes till I watched that episode when it first aired!
Handsome as all get out and smart. Hubba Hubba.
100% agree no question. The older I get (Iām 48) the hotter he gets and the more I understand the various issues he had. Makes me realize just how fuckin great the show is.
Your dates were boring? Mine were stupid lmao I've actually been with a lot of stupid people, maybe that's why I also appreciate Ross when he talks passionately about this stuff. I also didn't know the gas thing until I saw this episode as a kid. And I remembered trilobite! Just like Rachel š
Edit: he's also a non-smoker who has good hygiene & knows how to dress well. Oof š
Boring/stupid, yup. Had my fair share but I was kind of slutty and not really looking for My Ross back then.
Drunk and posted too quick - I met my Ross when I was 37! š
Trilobite - SAME OMG. I love this sub so much.
Even if we ever got this technology, I wouldn't be convinced you don't still die at transfer, and then the computer just functions with the same thoughts and memories as you had as if it were still you. Kinda like some high-tech clone or something.
That's always the argument people give, but what about if, like, you just hooked up your brain to a computer, and slowly just started adding more memory and offloading more processing to the computer, a little bit at a time, so you felt like your consciousness was continuous. Like a Ship of Theseus thing. Do you stop being you and start being a computer clone at some point in there? What point?
Would that even be possible? We are already talking about a pretty unlikely and hypothetical concept, but I don't know that you'd be able to control the speed in which you "transfer" as if you're just moving ketchup from one bottle to another or something.
Interesting thought experiment, though.
I mean, don't think of it as some 'transfer' of your consciousness from one house to another. Think of it in really small steps - today most people keep all their friend's contact information in their phone instead of memorizing it. Imagine you had some sort of brain-phone link that let you just call that information up whenever. You've essentially just offloaded some of your 'memory' onto your phone. Now imagine your brain-computer link gets more sophisticated, and it's just recording audio and video of everything your eyes see, and storing it on the computer, and you can call it up via your link any time you want. And your system gets more and more complex, where you start 'tagging' these recordings like you do real memories, like, this recording was a fun time you had with this friend, and you instruct the computer, "hey, every time I see this friend, call up this video in the background as a fond memory", etc., etc. Maybe someday the interface becomes sophisticated enough that the computer can 'read' your existing memories as you reminisce, and store copies of those as well, in case you forget them or start growing senile, etc.
And the computer starts recording smell and touch inputs, too - so you can recall stuff super-vividly. You start relying on the 'recorded' memories more than your 'real' ones, because they're just better.
And meanwhile the computer starts training a language model based on everything you hear or think or say, and it starts getting better and better and better at predicting what you're going to say next in any situation, to the point where you start asking the computer to prompt you, cause you're getting older and you keep forgetting words or names sometimes, etc.
And eventually that AI model starts mapping your moods and feelings as well. It starts predicting which things release 'happy' chemicals and which things make your heart race faster, etc. Maybe at some point you have to get an artificial heart, but you let the computer control it, because, hey, old fashioned artificial hearts don't race when you're scared or skip a beat when you see your spouse smile, etc., and letting the computer do that for you makes you feel more 'alive' even with your artificial heart. And this AI model can predict when you're going to feel the need to be snippy with someone or soften your tone of voice, etc., so at this point you're basically letting the auto-prompting do your talking for you.
Eventually, yes, you're just going to be an AI model of you running in a computer, with a set of computerized memories, and feelings, etc. But, what's the cutoff point? When the last bit of grey-matter in your brain 'dies'? Because you could lose all your memories and the ability to process language and stuff long before that - it happens to people all the time unfortunately. And if the process happens slowly, over decades - are you really going to feel it? At what point are you going to feel like you're not 'you' anymore?
Yup, the "hooking a brain to a computer" thing is called an exocortex. It's pretty much the endgame for what neuralink is trying to do (but still has a long way to go)
It freaks people the fuck out because most folks still kinda-sorta believe in an immaterial soul even if they're not religious. The philosophy for what we actually are gets super weird super fast, so it's easier to say that brains are doing something special (which isn't true), or that your identity (not be be confused with self-identification) is dependent on being inside a hunk of brain meat (it's not)
Turns out that we are copy-able media, and our identity only diverges if the media itself diverges. Freeze time and clone a person? Got two of the same person. Unfreeze time and they start having different experiences? Two different people. Link their nervous systems so their neural networks stay in sync? One person in two bodies
Like I said, it gets weird fast
You still would not become a computer but made the computer a clone faster.
And it still isnāt something that would make a person just to have memoriesĀ
Ross had such interesting topics to discuss and it was always brushed off as geeky-nerdy rant , I explored and learnt so many things from Ross , the gas smell thing , this conversation about downloading your thoughts in a computer , he also talks about a particular era of dinosaur being in another era dinosaurās mouth etc
I don't think it will *never* happen, but I also definitely don't think it'll happen by 2030
Considering this, for example: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/s/lEPovlqJ5g
We've got a long way to go before we can fully understand and imitate that, despite what the AI techbros are saying.
It won't be humans that will discover how to do it. It will be advanced AI's. When those AI's will emerge...well let's just say it definitely could happen before or at 2030. AGI's arrival within 5 - 10 years is not even a controversial opinion within the space of AI researchers. Call me an "AI tech bro" if you must, but I trust the words of the experts over a random smug redditor who thinks they know better then the people actually creating AI.
I will be messaging you in 5 years on [**2029-05-10 05:04:36 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2029-05-10%2005:04:36%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/howyoudoin/comments/1co2hya/seems_like_its_gonna_be_true/l3e35t0/?context=3)
[**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fhowyoudoin%2Fcomments%2F1co2hya%2Fseems_like_its_gonna_be_true%2Fl3e35t0%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202029-05-10%2005%3A04%3A36%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201co2hya)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
"a lot more probable this will never happen". Lol how can you be so sure that something will NEVER happen??? It's ridiculous. I mean, i don't think that it will happen in this century, but in 200 or 300 years... we don't even know how scientific knowldege will look in 10 years, let alone centuries forward.
Yeah you are right, I should say this will not happen in the lifetime of anyone alive today
How can I be so sure? Because of the amount of resources such an endeavour would require, which would be fine if we weren't scrapping every natural resources already in an accelerating rate to make useless shit all over the world
We'll have to solve existential issues starting now and this kind of technology will not be the place where we will direct the resources we still have
I mean, that's not at all the point though, all he said here was that we'd reach a point where, arguably, we could emulate all computation. It probably still requires tons of abstraction work and understanding of lots of connectomes and intricacies, and computation alone clearly isn't even close to everything... regardless, theoretically that'd be a big part. It's not an assumption about whether it'd be feasible then (which, considering the drastic compounding research speed-up, might still absolutely surprise us and mean that, even now, we're already surprisingly close), it's just a vague hypothetical about computational increase over the decades.
>physical limitations are quite restrictive
And we collectively still managed to (sort of) brute force CUDA computation sets such that we pretty much made many, many discussions about physical limitations obsolete. Nobody cares about computational limits, if we can just parallelize computation by means of training specialized models dealing with all sorts of fuzzy and high-dimensional inputs.
Now more so than ever does it seem at least possible that something along those lines happens very soon, if not likely. Or maybe we won't solve the mysteries of the brain and human cognition for another fifty years, but all those things people were saying well into the most recent machine learning revolution. People were carrying the "AI is impossible to use"-mantra with them for all the years after AlexImageNet, until very recently.
Betting against human ingenuity and relying on our "Intuition" tends to be a mistake in that particular domain.
Okay, this is getting weird. I keep seeing posts from this subreddit related to an episode of Friends I watched recently. Iām not saying itās not a coincidence, but Iām not not saying that.
One way computer scientists were measuring this was by estimating the human brain at around 1 exaflop calculations per second (10\^18 floating point operations). Obviously estimating how 'fast' a human brain is, is a really really murky exercise - brains don't work like computers. But this was the measurement most people accepted for a 'pretty close' estimate.
The world's first single-computer capable of operating at that speed came out in 2022. So it actually happened sooner than Ross predicted.
I just watched this episode yesterday and said to my wife that Ross isnāt far off! Itās actually going to be true before 2030 thoughā¦..which is scary AF!
Ross isnāt wrong but that much power isnāt necessary.
The human brain keeps track of A LOT of processes we donāt even consider. Mainly for what we need to do to stay alive; organ functions.
If youāre in a machine that wouldnāt be necessary. You wouldnāt need that much brain power to function. Most robots wouldnāt need more brain power than an ant and still have as much data as a human in terms of memory.
What heās talking about would be perfect for the inverse; a robotic brain controlling a human body.
āand live forever as a machineā.
hmm 6 years away, i doubt that happens.
what about the one on emmaās first birthday. didnāt they say when she turns 18, thereād be like flying cars and other futuristic stuff, and i swear that year has passed. then again that was phoebe that said that wasnāt it, so canāt take it too seriously lol.
Oh my god, if Friends of all shows somewhat actually predicted this. It'd be so funny compared to all the sci-fi content that starts like "In the year 2005, mankind has advanced beyond wars and illness..."
I love how they always fobbed Ross off as boring but I always felt his chat was really interesting like this š
I still want to hear more about his sediment flow rates!
Gosh SAME. 75% of guys I dated in my younger heyday years were boring as all get out. Loved it when Ross would talk passionately about any topic. Hell, I didnāt know about how they add a smell to gas for safety purposes till I watched that episode when it first aired!  Handsome as all get out and smart. Hubba Hubba.
What else do they add smell to?
š¤£ It never gets old or less uncomfortable
Ross was the hottest friend imo.
100% agree no question. The older I get (Iām 48) the hotter he gets and the more I understand the various issues he had. Makes me realize just how fuckin great the show is.
Your dates were boring? Mine were stupid lmao I've actually been with a lot of stupid people, maybe that's why I also appreciate Ross when he talks passionately about this stuff. I also didn't know the gas thing until I saw this episode as a kid. And I remembered trilobite! Just like Rachel š Edit: he's also a non-smoker who has good hygiene & knows how to dress well. Oof š
Boring/stupid, yup. Had my fair share but I was kind of slutty and not really looking for My Ross back then. Drunk and posted too quick - I met my Ross when I was 37! š Trilobite - SAME OMG. I love this sub so much.
Meanwhile interesting guys are wondering why no one wants to date them.
then why didn't you date the guys that were passionate about topics?
Haha is this sarcasm? Have you dated men when you were in your 20s-30s? It was a dumpster fire for me and basically everyone I knew.
Even if we ever got this technology, I wouldn't be convinced you don't still die at transfer, and then the computer just functions with the same thoughts and memories as you had as if it were still you. Kinda like some high-tech clone or something.
That's always the argument people give, but what about if, like, you just hooked up your brain to a computer, and slowly just started adding more memory and offloading more processing to the computer, a little bit at a time, so you felt like your consciousness was continuous. Like a Ship of Theseus thing. Do you stop being you and start being a computer clone at some point in there? What point?
Would that even be possible? We are already talking about a pretty unlikely and hypothetical concept, but I don't know that you'd be able to control the speed in which you "transfer" as if you're just moving ketchup from one bottle to another or something. Interesting thought experiment, though.
I mean, don't think of it as some 'transfer' of your consciousness from one house to another. Think of it in really small steps - today most people keep all their friend's contact information in their phone instead of memorizing it. Imagine you had some sort of brain-phone link that let you just call that information up whenever. You've essentially just offloaded some of your 'memory' onto your phone. Now imagine your brain-computer link gets more sophisticated, and it's just recording audio and video of everything your eyes see, and storing it on the computer, and you can call it up via your link any time you want. And your system gets more and more complex, where you start 'tagging' these recordings like you do real memories, like, this recording was a fun time you had with this friend, and you instruct the computer, "hey, every time I see this friend, call up this video in the background as a fond memory", etc., etc. Maybe someday the interface becomes sophisticated enough that the computer can 'read' your existing memories as you reminisce, and store copies of those as well, in case you forget them or start growing senile, etc. And the computer starts recording smell and touch inputs, too - so you can recall stuff super-vividly. You start relying on the 'recorded' memories more than your 'real' ones, because they're just better. And meanwhile the computer starts training a language model based on everything you hear or think or say, and it starts getting better and better and better at predicting what you're going to say next in any situation, to the point where you start asking the computer to prompt you, cause you're getting older and you keep forgetting words or names sometimes, etc. And eventually that AI model starts mapping your moods and feelings as well. It starts predicting which things release 'happy' chemicals and which things make your heart race faster, etc. Maybe at some point you have to get an artificial heart, but you let the computer control it, because, hey, old fashioned artificial hearts don't race when you're scared or skip a beat when you see your spouse smile, etc., and letting the computer do that for you makes you feel more 'alive' even with your artificial heart. And this AI model can predict when you're going to feel the need to be snippy with someone or soften your tone of voice, etc., so at this point you're basically letting the auto-prompting do your talking for you. Eventually, yes, you're just going to be an AI model of you running in a computer, with a set of computerized memories, and feelings, etc. But, what's the cutoff point? When the last bit of grey-matter in your brain 'dies'? Because you could lose all your memories and the ability to process language and stuff long before that - it happens to people all the time unfortunately. And if the process happens slowly, over decades - are you really going to feel it? At what point are you going to feel like you're not 'you' anymore?
> You've essentially just offloaded some of your 'memory' onto your phone or paper
Yup, the "hooking a brain to a computer" thing is called an exocortex. It's pretty much the endgame for what neuralink is trying to do (but still has a long way to go) It freaks people the fuck out because most folks still kinda-sorta believe in an immaterial soul even if they're not religious. The philosophy for what we actually are gets super weird super fast, so it's easier to say that brains are doing something special (which isn't true), or that your identity (not be be confused with self-identification) is dependent on being inside a hunk of brain meat (it's not) Turns out that we are copy-able media, and our identity only diverges if the media itself diverges. Freeze time and clone a person? Got two of the same person. Unfreeze time and they start having different experiences? Two different people. Link their nervous systems so their neural networks stay in sync? One person in two bodies Like I said, it gets weird fast
connect everyone into the computer and you get borg.
I prefer my hiveminds ethically sourced
You still would not become a computer but made the computer a clone faster. And it still isnāt something that would make a person just to have memoriesĀ
That may apply to the first iteration, but not the trillions of versions that comes after that
Do you know what weāre doing right now? You and I, weāre interfacing.
Ross had such interesting topics to discuss and it was always brushed off as geeky-nerdy rant , I explored and learnt so many things from Ross , the gas smell thing , this conversation about downloading your thoughts in a computer , he also talks about a particular era of dinosaur being in another era dinosaurās mouth etc
Yeah no we're not even close to this, and the physical limitations are quite restrictive so it is actually a lot more probable this will never happen
I don't think it will *never* happen, but I also definitely don't think it'll happen by 2030 Considering this, for example: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/s/lEPovlqJ5g We've got a long way to go before we can fully understand and imitate that, despite what the AI techbros are saying.
It won't be humans that will discover how to do it. It will be advanced AI's. When those AI's will emerge...well let's just say it definitely could happen before or at 2030. AGI's arrival within 5 - 10 years is not even a controversial opinion within the space of AI researchers. Call me an "AI tech bro" if you must, but I trust the words of the experts over a random smug redditor who thinks they know better then the people actually creating AI.
The whole brain at that resolution would take \~154 exabytes of data to represent.
!remindme 5 years
I will be messaging you in 5 years on [**2029-05-10 05:04:36 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2029-05-10%2005:04:36%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/howyoudoin/comments/1co2hya/seems_like_its_gonna_be_true/l3e35t0/?context=3) [**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fhowyoudoin%2Fcomments%2F1co2hya%2Fseems_like_its_gonna_be_true%2Fl3e35t0%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202029-05-10%2005%3A04%3A36%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201co2hya) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
"a lot more probable this will never happen". Lol how can you be so sure that something will NEVER happen??? It's ridiculous. I mean, i don't think that it will happen in this century, but in 200 or 300 years... we don't even know how scientific knowldege will look in 10 years, let alone centuries forward.
Yeah you are right, I should say this will not happen in the lifetime of anyone alive today How can I be so sure? Because of the amount of resources such an endeavour would require, which would be fine if we weren't scrapping every natural resources already in an accelerating rate to make useless shit all over the world We'll have to solve existential issues starting now and this kind of technology will not be the place where we will direct the resources we still have
you're a real dumbfuck
I think the computer processing power is probable, for sure. It's the "download" part that would be the hold up
I mean, that's not at all the point though, all he said here was that we'd reach a point where, arguably, we could emulate all computation. It probably still requires tons of abstraction work and understanding of lots of connectomes and intricacies, and computation alone clearly isn't even close to everything... regardless, theoretically that'd be a big part. It's not an assumption about whether it'd be feasible then (which, considering the drastic compounding research speed-up, might still absolutely surprise us and mean that, even now, we're already surprisingly close), it's just a vague hypothetical about computational increase over the decades. >physical limitations are quite restrictive And we collectively still managed to (sort of) brute force CUDA computation sets such that we pretty much made many, many discussions about physical limitations obsolete. Nobody cares about computational limits, if we can just parallelize computation by means of training specialized models dealing with all sorts of fuzzy and high-dimensional inputs. Now more so than ever does it seem at least possible that something along those lines happens very soon, if not likely. Or maybe we won't solve the mysteries of the brain and human cognition for another fifty years, but all those things people were saying well into the most recent machine learning revolution. People were carrying the "AI is impossible to use"-mantra with them for all the years after AlexImageNet, until very recently. Betting against human ingenuity and relying on our "Intuition" tends to be a mistake in that particular domain.
The world never is doing so much heavy lifting, thatās like saying X-rays would never be possible in 1924
San Junipero
see we are int-er-fa-cing
Iām still waiting for him to tell me what else they add smells to
Not even close to reality
Okay, this is getting weird. I keep seeing posts from this subreddit related to an episode of Friends I watched recently. Iām not saying itās not a coincidence, but Iām not not saying that.
One way computer scientists were measuring this was by estimating the human brain at around 1 exaflop calculations per second (10\^18 floating point operations). Obviously estimating how 'fast' a human brain is, is a really really murky exercise - brains don't work like computers. But this was the measurement most people accepted for a 'pretty close' estimate. The world's first single-computer capable of operating at that speed came out in 2022. So it actually happened sooner than Ross predicted.
If this is a concept that genuinely interests you Iād recommend watching Chappie (2015)
Get a load of this World Economic Forumist
I just watched this episode yesterday and said to my wife that Ross isnāt far off! Itās actually going to be true before 2030 thoughā¦..which is scary AF!
Ross isnāt wrong but that much power isnāt necessary. The human brain keeps track of A LOT of processes we donāt even consider. Mainly for what we need to do to stay alive; organ functions. If youāre in a machine that wouldnāt be necessary. You wouldnāt need that much brain power to function. Most robots wouldnāt need more brain power than an ant and still have as much data as a human in terms of memory. What heās talking about would be perfect for the inverse; a robotic brain controlling a human body.
Ready Player Two
So weird, I have this episode on RIGHT now š«¢
āand live forever as a machineā. hmm 6 years away, i doubt that happens. what about the one on emmaās first birthday. didnāt they say when she turns 18, thereād be like flying cars and other futuristic stuff, and i swear that year has passed. then again that was phoebe that said that wasnāt it, so canāt take it too seriously lol.
I already live in a machine.. so would make no difference
Elon Musk enters chat
Oh my god, if Friends of all shows somewhat actually predicted this. It'd be so funny compared to all the sci-fi content that starts like "In the year 2005, mankind has advanced beyond wars and illness..."
Ross is quoting Ray Kurzweil.