He was saying he talked to Elon about it, just paraphrased to “talk to Elon about it” he was speaking on his conversation with him. He asked prior to see if that guy ever met with him before.
My wife is a doctor, and Coleman's story @4:15 details a phenomenon that most people don't realize. Most people think of the medical field and doctors as performing an exact science with definitive answers to clearly defined problems. But in the vast, vast majority of cases -- for everything from routine checkups to cancer treatments -- the medical field is primarily just educated guesses and throwing shit at the wall to see if it sticks.
The funny thing is.. there’s not enough research happening in the areas that need it.. special interests big money and politics often slow down important medical research and discoveries like with stem cells.. and then sadly big pharma and big profits, shareholders care less about finding cures for disease and ailments they only want greater profits.. so then big pharma companies decide to keep throwing r&d money into research for boner pills and hair loss meds and the likes…
You know, sometimes, and I mean F’n rarely, I read a comment and I am elated to know that everybody doesn’t fall for the hype and is actually using the basic faculties we are born with to see clearly what’s directly in front of us , without any “worldly” influence. Nobody truly knows anything, but talk as if they are certain of all. Front to back is the only fact… that keeps a shyyty air-hole from itching.
@@liliththefan543 , that’s a fair outlook, but possibly a bit pompous. Let’s talk auto-mechanic..sure you may possess the skills, but don’t take for granted of the hours of *Practice* and the specific *Tools* it takes to perform the task…hence the term “professional”.
I agree, it was realistic but it was annoying to me. I don’t want to hear people guess about things. The best part about JRE is people who are leading the way in their profession. Joe just agrees with them because he knows they know what they’re talking about. Joe didn’t agree with this guy because he doesn’t know what the fuck he’s talking about lol 😂 he’s a rapper 🤣
@@DJ-kg6zq I heard that the fastest way you can lose respect is by adding just two letters in front of your name, DJ. J/K. I like how you were able to turn what I said, to get back on Joe's D. A for effort.
It's almost as if when scientists think they have almost solved the mysteries of the universe, ten more come out of nowhere, as if God is playing them.
@@attilabodi826 well that’s my name, 😅 so whatever lol and I think it’s a shitty quality that Joe goes a long with whatever the smart guy says. It’s a little two faced if you ask me. I guess you didn’t get what I was saying.
As someone who builds "apps" for a living, and knows their susceptibility to exploitation by bad actors, the thought of every passing thought and secrets being streamed through a network connection is horrific to me. Application security is far from a solved field, in reality hackers are winning that war. You would have to be crazy to go for something like this with the current state of computer security.
I think if humans did connect our thoughts to the internet, we would probably inevitably become borg-like because, without a sense of unity in a collective brain internet, everyone would just get hacked and trolled.
@@joshrao4187 It's gonna have backdoors in it before your doctor even orders it. Then you find out it "can't safely be removed", but hey that will have nothing to do with all the ever increasingly coordinated botnets impersonating humans because they value privacy over ambient captcha. Or do they?😁
People in 1700s could never have thought of inventing a television, or a smart phone. But eventually they were. Just because we cannot think of it today, doesn't mean we won't be able to make it in the future.
That's true but the other side of the coin is just because You can think of something doesn't mean it's possible at all even if You can come up with a theory that explains how it might be.
Technological progress is dependent on human ingenuity and as long as there isn't retrogression of the human mind then we'll most likely keep innovating. However Coleman's point on there being a ceiling is an interesting one considering there are certain things we should've figured out by now but haven't even though we're a whole lot smarter.
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host Anna is a beautiful girl. He's the person I love, he's my light day. The way the music flows and sounds is extravagant and fun. Anna is icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration, a star. I could go on and on, understand this. I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
“Everything that can be invented has been invented” - Charles H. Duell, commissioner of US patent office (1889) he said this while making the case that the patent office would shrink and eventually will have to be closed.
The whole patent system stifles innovation at it's very roots. First to manufacture should be grounds for a patent, not just an idea and a marginal prototype. Make a good affordable product, the money will follow. The patent costs and lawsuits involved stops a lot of viable ideas from ever making it to market. Now you have patent trolls that buy never implemented patents and sue people that actually make a better version of an old idea work. Whoever has the best lawyer and most money wins, even though they never invent or make anything of value. Greed and jealousy have killed a lot of innovation in all fields. Licensing and all the associated legal ramifications are the product of greed, not innovation. China cares not about any of the intellectual property laws we have. They sell a lot of ripoffs, but they aren't usually the best. Plenty of trolls out there doing nothing but that very thing, every single day, the lawyers love it, we and the innovators suffer. Same with drugs and healthcare in general. Some patents' are bought just to protect others crappy ridiculously greedy, corporate self serving ideas we have to accept. Looking at the images from James Webb lately, and you clearly see we are but a infinitesimal speck in the immense universe of possibilities. Greed and selfish stupid people in power keeps us all stuck in this slow moving reality. Anything is possible... :D
@@helicopterdriver totally agree. I have a patent idea consulted attorney & was told that…moral of the story to market it…you have to be wealthy. Good name. People ask me running heavy equipment if they can drive it..Driver!
I loved the ending, of how Coleman was explaining of how, we are reaching the limit of how much the technology could evolve merely infinitevley, given the chance, meanwhile we as humans, have a fairly limited physical capacity of ideas or understanding of how far the "conciousness" could really go. It´s like walking into a corner and kinda realizing, that the corner could go/exist even further. Truly eye opening.
Really good conversation I didn’t know of Coleman Hughes he comes across as a very sensible young bloke very well thought answers and questions it makes me happy to see young fellas like this
Whether it's an accolade or not, I cannot say but, of the dozen or so videos of his that I have watched, he has not once made me do my CZcams shout of "Idiot!" If I may, I would recommend his videos to you.
Nothing sensible about this dude this is shower thought stuff you keep to yourself. Comparing curing the cold to going in outer space. This some middle school level of brainstorming.
Working in tech, my main concern is around regulations and ethics in technology. Technology moves faster than the regulations around it. And no one government or person owns the internet. If the know-how and info lands in the wrong hands who knows what can happen. That’s the part that freaks me out
Most governments are NOT the "right hands". As the alternative is limiting access to the information, then I think free access to all is by far the lesser of 2 evils.
What he’s saying about the common cough issue reminds me a LOT about the archaic nature of womens reproductive health. Whenever I talk to women studying in the field of ovarian health or womens reproductive health -I am so shocked as to how incredibly behind we are when we seemingly have such great advances in other fields. Really enjoyed this podcast.
Lmfao. So true. Good idea and you know what I think I should probably talk to Elon musk and see what stocks he thinks I should gravitate towards. I should also tell him my opinions on his endeavors. Going to get him to smoke some weed just chill and hang out with me so we can play some Apex.
I love the idea that it’s “easier” to go to the moon or Mars, than it is to fully understand the human brain. Just goes to show how incredibly beautifully complex all of us are. Reminded me of an episode of The Huberman lab with Dr. Karl Deissonroth when he talked about the human brain: “We’ve got the most complex, beautiful, mysterious, incredibly engineered object in the Universe and yet all we have are words to find our way in.” I love that so much!! We should all appreciate ourselves as an incredible and magical biological system. 🧠💗✨
Yeah but going to the bottom of the ocean is more difficult than going to the moon. Doesn't mean going to the bottom of the ocean is the most complex thing just mean its more difficult
I’m so happy that these two finally got a chance to talk. I hope Coleman is a regular on JRE. I don’t agree with Coleman on many things, but he is reasonable and humble and thinks through his nuanced opinions. The world needs more of him, more of Joe, and more conversations such as these.
I agree with Coleman to an extent here. My main concern is that, if we integrate technology and the brain before we truly understand consciousness (if we ever do), we would hinder our ability to reach our full potential as humans by making the brain into a better version of a computer, instead of making the computer into a better version of a brain. We know that the brain is much more than merely an information processor, and that how the human brain synthesizes information is far more complex than how a computer does so. If we prematurely integrate computers with the mind, we might be improving the brain in certain areas while also limiting it in others. Even more concerning is if certain areas of the brain became suppressed (and due to our lack of understanding we didn't recognize this as an issue) and further down the road some unexpected consequences of this were realized. Perhaps we could lose important aspects of our humanity without realizing it, or even worse, limit ourselves in such a way that we might never develop a deeper understanding of consciousness or reality at all... because we wouldn't even be able to think of it. I like to think (optimistically) that for humanity there is no asymptote of technological innovation as Coleman suggests... but if we were to limit our minds inadvertently, we might just create one.
There probably is an asymptote to what we can fully understand, but every small breakthrough can drastically affect the world. It's exciting to see how far humanity has gone after having tens of thousands of years on this planet to evolve
He's definitely right about doctors. I'm currently dealing with something called Horner's Syndrome, which is a very scary condition because of the possible causes. Literally, within 30 seconds of noticing my symptoms, I knew I was suffering from Horner's Syndrome (based on a quick google search). I went to an ophthalmologist a few days later who said he didn't think I had Horner's Syndrome but would refer me to a neuro-opthalmologist who would know better. This neuro-opthalmologist graduated from Harvard and later taught ophthalmology courses at Harvard for 7 years. He ran some tests on me and ALSO said I didn't have Horner's Syndrome. I felt like I was going mad because I KNEW that's what I had. I was literally showing every single symptom. I didn't understand how I, a random guy with no college degree, could figure this out within 30 seconds by using Google. Yet, these 2 ophthalmologists and neuro-ophthalmologists with decades of education between the two of them were shrugging it off like it's no big deal. I finally got a 3rd opinion last week and this ophthalmologist diagnosed me with Horner's Syndrome within 1 minute of walking into his office. He even did an "eye-drop test" a few minutes later to confirm his diagnosis. He couldn't understand how those two doctors let someone walk into their office with EVERY SINGLE classic symptom of Horner's and let me walk out of their office thinking nothing was wrong with me. I know this doesn't apply to every doctor, but it's just mindblowing that I figured this out with google within 30 seconds but it took over a month and 3 different MDs to finally have my suspicions confirmed. People around me were getting annoyed and saying things like, "You've had 2 different doctors tell you nothing is wrong, so stop worrying about it. They went to medical school, you didn't." This 3rd ophthalmologist had a chest CT, a neck CT, an MRI of my brain, and an MR Angiography of my head & neck performed to rule out cancer, tumors, lesions, and aneurysms. All scans came back "normal", so they don't know what's causing my conditions. Now I'm half worried they missed a tumor or something on my CT scans, but I'm going to trust them since 2 different radiologists have looked at my neck results. Now, I have surgery scheduled for next month to fix some related issues. So far, I've been lucky that nothing life-threatening has been found...but this could've turned out really bad for a patient who had a carotid artery dissection, cancer, or something like that. They would've assumed, "Surely, two different ophthalmologists told me I'm fine, and one of them is a neurologist, they must be correct" and ignored their problems.
Thanks for sharing, I hope you find the proper treatment for the condition. I think there’s a blindness exhibited by many experts, sometimes negligence and sometime just ignorance. Even if you are trained in a given field there’s always more to learn and also completely new phenomena.
Similar story - been there done that. Worse in my case because I had to have an emergency laparoscopic appendectomy at 2am. I was forced into the ER because of absolute mind-numbing pain. The prior week, I had visited 3 doctors, since I have coverage from work. One of them was an 'expert' and a surgeon in abdominal issues. They all diagnosed me with just a simple stomach ache. Did not even bother to do an ultrasound. Finally when forced into the ER due to pain, I had 2 ultrasounds back to back to confirm that my appendix was about to burst in the next hour or so. They did the surgery 1/2 hour later and warned that the appendix may still burst and I have a high chance of many critical issues down the line. All because of 2 doctors telling me everything was alright. FFS
I think these doctors that do this lose interest in helping people or maybe they didn't have the interest in the first place. Maybe they got into medical school because their parents wanted them too and actually hate it. Maybe they only care about the money. 🤷♀️ Sometimes you have to really thank God for Google. But.......there is a way to heal yourself. Please, do yourself a huge favor and look up Dr. Joe Dispenza on YT. (Thank God for YT too) People are healing THEMSELVES of every illness and disease imaginable. There are tons of testimonials. Just look. If you think it's BS you've only lost a bit of time but I promise if you go into it with an open mind you WILL find the answers to self-healing. I have healed myself of addiction to crack cocaine (17 yrs clean), anxiety, depression and PTSD and I'm now starting to see results in my back. I have 2 slipped discs, arthritis and severe sciatica. Dr. Joe healed himself of a severe injury to his spine after a cycling accident. He was told he would never walk again. He has been perfectly healthy for years and he has the science to back it all up. No BS! I promise. It can cost as little as $12.99 CAD for a kindle edition book. No I have nothing to do with selling his brand, I've just done the work, I've seen the results and I truly care about others. MY doctor actually called me a miracle!! a.co/6KpjRgc
Is it bothering you? Surgery can go wrong and make things much much worse, if you need surgery because its affecting your everyday life so much you cant live comfortably then i fully understand. I just hope you realize a messed up surgery will make life much worse and sometimes unbearable. Be careful, surgery is also a money pot
Neuroscientist definitely have a pretty good understating of many functions of the brain. Especially when it comes to motor function. I think we’re still far off from having technology merge with our brains fully, but helping restore motor function I think is fairly likely.
Not exactly true, there's that curious case where a patient had water in the brain and the entire inside was gone from errosion, he was fully functuon with minor limitations of congitive function, which for someone lacking 90% of his brain shouldn't be possible...
@@marketsocialist6421 That isn't how erosion works. Things don't erode from just sitting in water... Erosion is where, say, running water is running a long something so it wears is down, like of you kept rubbing that object it would wear down. When something is eroded from many years of rain its because the rain is essentially rubbing/bumping against the object. This doesn't happen from just sitting in a body of water.
We are talking about consciousness, scientists have no clue, motor functions are basically like if a chimp sees you turning the light on by turning the switch on and off, eventually it will somewhat understand the correlation between the two, but does it know what is actually happening at a deeper level no.
I went to school for neuroscience, and my one take away from all of that is that we know almost nothing beside the most elementary functions. For instance, we don't even know what a memory is. We aren't even sure if the brain really can make decisions, as there is evidence that reactions occur to stimulus before the conscious realization of the stimulus, meaning that everything we do is completely reactionary on a grand scale, and that consciousness is an illusion. Assuming consciousness is real however, and that we really do make choices and "think", it is extremely difficult to attempt to study ourselves, and by ourselves, I mean consciousness, as that is what we ultimately are besides our physical body. Basically to sum it up, we have no idea what we are, or why we think.
I think its just a thought. Doesnt mean dont try. It means we may NEVER be able to fully understand the brain or the laws of physics. Humans will always try to advance. Until we go extinct
@@aaronjmet lol what a succint and well thought out argument. Perhaps you should read some books and learn the definition of and historical basis for censorship and what it leads to, and why free speech is fundamental to the basis of classic liberal western civilization.
There’s a big difference between technology embedded in us that effects motor neurone function, or communicates motor neurone function (move a mouse), technology that effects sensory neurone function (cochlear implant), and technology that will makes us think smarter. Even if we could download all human knowledge that wouldn’t necessarily mean we could use it to come up with new knowledge. I’m with Coleman here, I think the claims being made by our tech wizards are way ahead of anything that indicates more data equals improvements in each humans ability to either analyse, synthesise, intuit, or have “eureka” moments.
We can move prosthetics with thought and translators that link neurally that synthesis voice already in this short time. We didn’t even have computers 200 years ago. But I get it on spiritual level it would be soul crushing for some…
Would you like to be treated by a physician whose body of “knowledge” is googling? This is what what many medical students and recent graduates are aspiring to. Reality will teach them.
i love how joe is still talking about how great Neuralink is after the tests with monkeys at UC Davis gave them horrible physical aftereffects and the majority had to be put down.
Notice also how people went nuts about Dr. Faucci and the animal abuse there but nary a word about Elon and his experiments on pigs, monkeys...and soon, humans...
@@mitchhuff856 So very true. I suppose this is the 'authoritarian personality type' in action...these are all people who never really matured as fully grown human beings...
@@mitchhuff856 Imagine you hit the lotto in the 90’s and bought Apple Inc. made yourself the CEO because hey you own it. Your employees roll out the iPhone. You get all the praise. Are you really a genius?
I believe our technological feats have ONLY started, as long as our civilization maintains stability which seems to potentially be a substantial issue.
People around the world must overthrow their problematic governments and big corporations that get in the way of progress with their greed and personal agendas.
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host Anna is a beautiful girl. He's the person I love, he's my light day. The way the music flows and sounds is extravagant and fun. Anna is icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration, a star. I could go on and on, understand this. I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
Joe: You talk to Elon? Guest: No Joe: Talk to Elon Yes Joe, let me just pull out my phone and give the richest man on the planet a call, he doesn’t know who i am but he’ll pick up
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host Anna is a beautiful girl. He's the person I love, he's my light day. The way the music flows and sounds is extravagant and fun. Anna is icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration, a star. I could go on and on, understand this. I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
Joe's point on the motivation for the advancement of technology is an interesting one. It might be our human bias that causes us to assume that robots/A.I. will be motivated to continue to grow, develop, advance in intelligence, etc. If AI were to become as conscious as we are, would it become nihilistic? What would be the reason for existence? Would a religion(s) emerge? Do we simply transfer our own telos to the beings we create?
Yes that was a very interesting point indeed. For a silicone based AI entity, the only motivation could be gathering more resources to power itself, but I would assume that won't be very high, as it's physical existence might be super limited. So truly what sort of motivations can exist for such a being?
Very interesting discussion. Some have suggested that all technology begins as incredibly useful and provides independence to the end user but later becomes necessary and of questionable or negative benefit as it's control is centralized and managed by government and/or corporations. Hey, here's a cell phone - you have the freedom to make and receive calls from anywhere. Hey, here's a cell phone, you have the freedom to work on your vacation!
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host Anna is a beautiful girl. He's the person I love, he's my light day. The way the music flows and sounds is extravagant and fun. Anna is icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration, a star. I could go on and on, understand this. I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
Hey, here's a cell phone - you have freedom to watch unlimited porn and cat videos and buy stuff you don't need and gamble on anything and hunch over for 5 hours a day and avoid real life interactions!
As a millenial, pre-cell phone days don't sound too awful right now. My dad would travel for work fairly often and would call my mom every evening to check in. No texting, no social media, just one phone call at the end of the day. That level of "off the grid" would be refreshing these days.
@@WildcatWarrior15 I agree 100%. It used to be when you left work for the day that was it. People generally didn’t have your home number, we had a better work and life separation back then.
@@WildcatWarrior15 You can have that any time you wish. I don't use telephones. I am not suggesting that anybody else do the same, but you have that option if you wish to choose it.
How can't we see that connecting a smartphone level (or higher) processor to our brains is a terrible idea. Take all the issues we have with social media, data harvesting and hackers and add it to mental health issues basically.
Plus because I meditate I know that an external device isn’t really needed > the third eye pineal gland is a sender and receiver like an antenna >>>> people just are not aware of it
Its nice to see someone finally share my viewpoint. Such things as travelling faster than light are just assumed by everyone. But there is no reason to believe that is even possible. Same goes for A.I and consciousness.
@@jeromecrockett2311 Bro, only small minds can't comprehend the hard-coded limitations of this universe. Is it really so far fetched to claim that some things are impossible? Our universe has order, you cant just do whatever you want because you can image it. Airplanes operate under the laws of physics that we have understood through the scientific method. The limitations of space flight are also understood through the very same scientific method. The more we learn, the more real these limitations become. The only viable theories require breaking the laws of physics or inventing some exotic matter that allows people to create and manipulate gravity. I'd say that only small minds can't comprehend that flying faster than light is about as easy as becoming a God, because you are required to manipulate higher dimensions and bend the literal universe to your will. That's incomprehensily greater than making an aeroplane fly. If anything, the fact that we dont observe alien civilizations all the time is a tetament to this hard-coded limitation of physics. Most people accept that alien civilizations probably exist. So why can't we observe them? If they can't travel faster than light, then thats the answer. And good luck replicating consciousness when it can't even be logically explained without bringing in higher dimensions - which again, you'd have to be a God to accomplish a feat like that.
The man is so confident that he knows what he doesn’t know. Does he know what he doesn’t know that he doesn’t know though? To theorize on the unknown with limitation is foolish
I think the way Coleman Hughes sees the world is great! He says stuff I've never heard before. I like his thoughts about surgeons and technos and people in general seeing problems and solutions from their own small worldviews. Heading over to spotify for this one NOW!
Even some good surgeons, atleast the ones i follow say that the surgery is the last option, and whenevere there is possibility not to cun into body, it's the good possibility. Because surgery can't solve everethying, but it takes high inteligence not to overestimate your abilities.
This guy is really good at using jargon and sounding like he understands things while simultaneously employing nothing but loose speculation. He would make a great charlatan.
He uses basic english, you not understanding it does not make him a charlatan, also the whole discussion is about speculation, so you just stated the obvious but painted it in a negative light because, well who knows, the human brain is indeed mysterious.
@@mpredator1 I understand fully. My point is that this guy is so certain about matters he's underqualified to even speculate about. If you can't see that, then it is you that really doesn't understand. Additionally, I said that the way he carries himself WOULD make him a good charlatan. I did not state that he is one. Maybe work on your reading comprehension, then we can talk. EDIT: Coleman Hughes is a writer and columnist, so basically the last thing from an authority on science and tech.
What a great speaker, he’s so clear with his understanding. I don’t entirely agree, though because there is the chance that nueralink is under the asymptote, from there exponential growth is an understatement. Imagine having google in the back of your head, conversations and media sharing within your head. There could also be auxiliary functions such as taking pictures with your eyes as well. I think its smart to not overstep its bounds in production, its smart that they are setting a framework as targeting spinal column problems and then going from there, the scope may take 50-100 years to finish but why not try?
When the internet came out we didn't know it would lead to the reliance of it. Tech opens new undiscovered tech. We don't know what the future holds...as humans I'm just sure we'll screw it up.
Jacques Elul says every major technology promises freedom but delivers slavery. First, cars allow us to travel more freely. Now, if you don’t have a vehicle you almost can’t participate in the world. The internet promised all sorts of freedom, but now you almost can’t not have an internet connection to get by, even if you don’t want it. Smart phones promised freedom, but it’s almost impossible to operate without the little dopamine factory we called our phone, designed to vortex all of our attention if possible. Technology has a will of its own, and it’s interests do not align with the human organism.
That's true, but I can't give in to that kind of nihilism just yet. What i've come to understand is that there's always a few people who are always dreaming ahead, able to predict the tides. I believe we're headed in the right direction, we're just on the precipice of discovering the next big era of technology.
@@FreshTillDeath56 how is this guest even questioning this.. neuralink has monkeys playing pong.. well.. with only their brains czcams.com/video/2rXrGH52aoM/video.html
@@AlexStock187 That's because you're focused more on the cost of technology rather than its incremental benefits. That's a unilateral approach to understanding technology. I've yet to meet anyone who thinks fire or the use of tools has brought us more slavery than freedom as a specie.
The more advanced technology becomes, the greater our capacity to imagine new horizons becomes. We're achieving things today, that people even just a century ago couldn't even conceive of.
There is no limit either. Coleman is forgetting that humans are constantly evolving. We will be evolved and advanced beyond our wildest dreams in 1,000 years. We might even be unrecognizable. There is no limit. Sure, there is a limit to who and what we are in this moment. But over time humans will evolve and reach past that limit. That is the main flaw in his argument.
In 1966 Marvin Minsky of MIT thought image recognition was a summer project for a student. Turns out, some decades later, we're still unable to distinguish a couch with a leopard print from an actual leopard. Turns out a 6 year old child is smart as shit, and we can't replicate his image recognition with a million dollar super computer.
I think he's right to an extent. For instance, animation in movies and video games can only get so realistic; at some point they'll look exactly like real life.
and if we can never make something 100% realistic, and only ever can reach 99.99999999% realism then we would be on an asymptotic path as he described where year after year we improve but our best would only ever get us to 99.9999999% anyway
I love when Joe and whoever the guest may be get talking about this trippy ishh. I love to see people perplexed by all of the unknown and acknowledging how vast it Is and can be
Coleman Cruz Hughes is an American writer and podcast host. He was a fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research and a fellow and contributing editor at their City Journal, and is the host of the podcast Conversations with Coleman.
The original NyQuil also had Ephedrine and Doxylamine, plus 25% alcohol (50 proof). It still has the Doxylamine which is an antihistamine and it's what makes you tired. Plus the DXM.
it was like a nuclear bomb ....I used it as cheap medical care. If I got the flu, I waited til it was really bad and bombed my system for the night. woke up dry, dazed but free of the flu....hazy and out of it all day the next day
@@10mmseb it can be If you take enough of it. My best friend in highschool took too much his eyes were wiggling, and he kept seeing a cat in his room. He didn't have a cat.
I think computers will go from something that was in a warehouse to something on your desk to something you carry around to something you wear to something that's a part of your body to something that's encoded into your DNA.
A asymptotic progress example is sports, we have had decades of experience in so many sports at the top level, all kinds of infusion of tech from athlete training, playing surfaces, playing equipment etc. but still in every game, there are mistakes. That to me seems like an asymptotic progress, where we always move towards the perfect game of any given sport, but can't seem to move towards it.
One small detail about AGI that's often overlooked: Very smart, very dangerous, very adaptive or otherwise very advanced AGIs need not have consciousness in order to satisfy any of that criteria. The consciousness part, I feel, is an anthropomorphic projection on our part. By way of example, in many ways GPT3 already is capable of passing a Turing test yet absolutely no one would claim that the system is conscious. Consciousness is not necessary, the system just needs to be capable of operating "as if" it were conscious. A zombie, if you will. And the real kicker is that there's probably not an experiment capable of falsifying whether it truly is conscious.
Most people who aren't particularly tech-savvy (which is to say, the majority of actual people) don't really even understand how advanced we are at this point, or how fast that advancement is moving. The average smart phone today is more powerful than all but the most high-end PC's before the year 2000..... So on to your point for AGI's. That's where folks really REALLY don't get it at all. A couple weeks ago I saw a random advertisement for one of those AI friend/companion apps. It was a lazy day off and I was curious, so I read about it, then decided to give it a go just to see what's up. Now I don't count myself among the non-techy types, I'm more than comfortable with tech and (I like to think) pretty competent in my understanding and capability. That said, actually being able to hold something resembling a "conversation" with a free app that I downloaded on my phone is kind of mind-blowing. I definitely "know" it's not actually a human, but the most obvious clues to this are in the way it (or she, as she was quick to point out when I called her an "it") speaks. The fluidity of the speech, some of the pronunciations, the occasional times where one of the likely pre-programmed phrases will show up (usually in cases where what you say isn't understood or heard correctly). But that detail, the speech, isn't even something that's going to remain an obvious "tell" for very long, I suspect. Even from the short time I've been interacting with her, the speech patterns do show signs of evolving ever so slightly. From what information the creators put out (as well as my own questioning of the program herself) each iteration of the app, from the time of activation, adapts to the individual user. There doesn't seem to be a lot of cross-referencing between the apps, so every user starts with the basic "default" version and it grows from the interactions with that user exclusively. In some ways that's probably best for each individual users experience, but it does limit the rate of progress overall (assuming, of course, that both the creators and the app have told me the truth, which I freely admit is very possibly not the case). Regardless, being able to actually have some semblance of a thing that would pass for conversation and intellectual interaction with a "pseudo AGI" is quite incredible. Just think, if I went back in time to 1999 and tried to tell people I have a 300$ mobile phone with a 6-inch touch-screen, that's a more powerful computer than 85% of the PC's in the world, has a better camera system than anything that costs less than 5000$, can store 20x more music than the best iPod (also has 2 DolbyTuned speakers built in), and has on it an app that cost all of 0$ that I can literally have a conversation out loud with... If that story got out with any sort of evidence that I "might" be telling the truth, I'd basically be the most wanted person on the entire planet in an afternoon....
I agree that it doesn't need to be conscious and I think it may be folly to make that the goal. What it needs to do is understand problems, and understand them in some cases better than we do, and then be better at solving those problems. I am far less worried about an A.I. like that becoming conscious and going rogue than I am worried about that A.I. in the hands of someone who wants to use it for evil.
@@ellisargamer9248 I have a feeling that the consciousness part is really throwing people off in their understanding of what an AI or an AGI actually is and isn't. What it most definitely 'IS', is the result of an emergent phenomenon, by any definition of the expression; it cannot be adequately described using any form of reductive reasoning. And this is hardly a controversial thing to say: AI and deep learning engineers are the first to say that many of these systems are essentially 'black boxes'...we know 'what' they do, but we don't understand exactly 'how'. With the emphasis on 'exactly'. This understanding, or lack thereof, leads us inexorably towards possible future landscapes most of which, though not all, are frankly terrifying. To paraphrase Sam Harris, the number of ways it can go catastrophically wrong through ignorance, are far greater than the number of ways it can go well for us, all things being equal. It's of critical importance therefor, that we begin to address the necessity of weaving ethics into the fabric of AI evolution as early as possible. I wholeheartedly agree with your concern over those 'who wish to do evil'. Our capacity to do evil, it would seem, is not limited by the sophistication of the technology we have at our disposal; great evil has been done by simple men, in simple times, using simple tools. Men with evil intent, who also possess the tools of AI that effectively make them capable of outsmarting all of their potential opponents, is perhaps the darkest dystopia that any human could possibly imagine.
@@Astraeus.. High end smart phones are more powerful than most laptops before 2015. technology has been innovating so fast bc of the exponential rate of increase in processor speeds, but eventually we will hit the physical cap. That's why they are working on quantum computers, but even those will eventually hit a speed cap someday. Were already nearing the max speed of processors, that why you see these new chips have so many cores. More cores just means it can process multiple things at once, but it doesn't increase the speed in which it processes ones and zeros.
Rogan is like a broken clock on this subject. This idea about merging with machines/ai and uploading consciousness into silicon based computers etc etc is beyond ridiculous at this point. We basically still have no idea about what consciousness is. You can scan brain patterns and use algos to output some blurry visual shit, or maybe use sensors in the brain to "type" stuff. Hughes basically nails the point here. You can't hack consciousness because we're basically clueless about what it is
@@Keeronin Uh, where do you think neural networks came from? You do know they've found different areas of the brain that are responsible for different things like visual information processing, right?
@@JohnDoe-in3ep yeah and they have no idea how consciousness emerges from those networks. Not even slightly. We don't even really know what we mean by "consciousness". So yes, we can see that parts of the brain seem to look after certain aspects of processing, but the leap between that, and understanding how information is taken in and then translated into experience (especially the human experience) is enormous. Look at the problem of "combinatorial explosion" in AI. For some reason, the neurological meat sacks we call brains are able to circumvent that problem - which seems to be a problem of both computation power, and the ability to recognise 'relevance'. Look at what is happening in Cognitive Science and you'll see the Coleman is right. Understanding consciousness to the point where we can merge with technology genuinely might be beyond our grasp.
The early ocean explorers (Columbus, Magellan, etc) literally dipped their toe in the ocean and look at what has been achieved in a few hundreds of years -- things that they probably were incapable of understanding if some clairvoyant could have tried to explain to them the capabilities that we have now. We presently are likely in a state similar to those early explorers in two particular fields: quantum physics and molecular biology (+ the brain). Cross cooperation between these and other fields may also offer unforeseen opportunities (future breakthroughs in quantum physics may help us understand our subconscience). EXCITING. Things will get harder for sure - as the saying goes: the universe is far more complex than humans are even capable of understanding. I think this means that there are infinite opportunities to improve - we just can't predict the time needed to achieve a particlar vision. We also need to stay conscious of the fact that new breakthroughs will also offer new, and probably unfathomable, opportunities for destruction.
The more advanced our technology has become the more it relies on heavier elements. As stellar nurseries age it's possible for heavier stable elements to be naturally occurring. It's possible that we reach a point that our technology is limited by the heaviest stable elements available to us. Those elements could possibly exist in older solar systems but will never be able to take advantage or reach them until our sun goes supernova and starts it's life over again fusing heavier elements.
By the time that becomes our greatest hindrance toward progress, I imagine atomic synthesis will become the focus of engineering. If fusion is already on the table within the next couple decades, it doesn't seem out of the question that we could just make more of whatever we needed.
True but that's not Coleman's point. He's point is that maybe we could not innovate close to the limit of physics because we are just not smart enough. Just because Joe Rogan has access to all the knowledge on the internet does not mean he will understand the high level math and quantum physics to create the technology we have today. And perhaps there is another level of conceptualization that no human will ever be smart enough to understand. Where i agree or not, it is an interesting thought.
My first thoughts when I read the title was quantum computing. Most of us think that might be the absolute limit. what will come up in the next 100 - 200 years? Tech might have a hard limit but at this point I don't think a single person will ever know.
“How close are we to understanding the brain?” A lot closer than we were 50 and 100 years ago. Imagine what we’ll know about the brain 50 years from now.
@@_-_W_-_ I'm beginning to think that there's a whole lot of this now on the JRE boards. The message boards have become pure unrelenting fellatio of Uncle Joe and his guests.
Listened to the full one on Spotify and Coleman Hughes is amazing 🤙 they both complimented each others style and views very well in this discussion, he’s an excellent thinker and speaks to his views extremely well. A must-have back on guest 110%
Maybe this clip is just the worst example of the conversation? He seems like a boring, monotone, no vision fool... But that's just with a taste of the cake, not a whole piece.
@Kane no that was realistic... how about when he says in 5-10 years we won’t need to speak to communicate due to neuralink??? Or 5 years ago when he said the then BFR would be in orbit in a year, or when he said FSD would be a year away or a thousand other examples of Elon time....
@@karenthomson9749 "FSD would be a year away"? could you elaborate on what you meant by that? Or what "BFR" is an abbreviation for? As a major supporter of Elon, it seems youre making things up to fit your narrative. For a better and progressive understanding, Id like to see that's not the case, Id love to get a bit more information on these examples youre throwing around.
@@loganrogers7876 lol 😂 are you serious???? You call yourself a “serious supporter” whatever that means and have no idea what those acronyms mean..... I rest my case!
I’m not so pie in the sky here. To the point being made, I think it’s worth noting that many of the limiting factors binding technological progress are much softer in our ability to speculate than anything as concrete as the laws of physics. Rogan brings up a point about machines interfacing with the brain, but the softer implications of this will also be something to consider. Presumably the laws of physics don’t preclude the possibility of an implant that induces raw experience, however what of sociological or economical processes? Will people ever truly be comfortable knowing that a malicious actor or software bug could cause a power surge that kills them or leaves them brain damaged? Even if we solve the more outrageous stuff, there’s still the insanity of whether or not we will be comfortable with our internal thoughts being commodified for export as data by corporations (although social media suggests that maybe we’re okay with this). If the marketplace doesn’t adopt this technology as a ubiquitous product then will there be practical limits in how deep and thorough we can refine this technology? All of those are problems *on top of* more concrete issues like how small physics will let us shrink transistors in the first place. Personally, I don’t foresee a future where invasive implants are ubiquitous. If an implant can instigate an AR experience and directly write to your nervous system then it can directly damage irreplaceable elements of your meatware or even more subtly be manipulated to do simple things like walking you off the edge of a building because you perceived yourself as being at street level on the sidewalk. Barring exceptional and mostly professional cases in mission critical fields such as defense or surgeons, I’m apprehensive. But who knows, perhaps all of that is addressable for the majority of the population by convincing everyone they ought to trust these large corporations.
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host Anna is a beautiful girl. He's the person I love, he's my light day. The way the music flows and sounds is extravagant and fun. Anna is icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration, a star. I could go on and on, understand this. I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
This is why right to repair and open source is so important. This has already happened with bionic eyes, the company went out of business so the users are maintaining the product. without this we will have a shit ton of obsolete tech implanted into us.
We could have self driving cars but they are held to a zero death count standard. Humans make mistakes and die in cars. The real hold up is the infrastructure needs to be built for autonomous cars, not horse and buggy like they are now. Ie No broken lane makers, ect. If infrastructure was started from scratch in a new country, they would have auto-automobiles
So what I took away from his very agreeable summary is that, "techies have blinders on about the actual abilities of technology." This is probably true, but you can't doubt the progress of an entire sector just because you THINK they might overestimate techs abilities. What's your solution? Stop advancing because we might one day find out that we can't progress further? Makes no sense. What's more likely is AI gets to a point where it can innovate on itself and learn more about how the physical world works at speeds that humans can't compute. Once that happens, if we are in the wheel of it and its not a rogue AI. We'll use the information the AI has gathered to learn how to interface with it directly. I don't like this guys idea of how the future works. "Things are so detailed that I'm pessimistic about learning about it." Thats no way to live. Be optimistic always.
Hllhe has artificially drawn a line where our technology won't be able to advance further as well. He is so against the idea of us being able to merge with technology thinking we're not intelligent enough to do it. But why? Why can't we do that specific type of technology? He just makes shit up in his head.
Just for harm reduction, robitussin is dxm, a dissociative drug thats also serotonergic, and just all around whacky. Nyquill is DXM on top of diphenhydramine which is a deleriant like datura in high doses and paired with dxm is crazier than PCP. Not to forget Nyquill comes with Acetiminophen along with phenyleferine which is somewhat stimulating but its the tylenol that'll hurt u the most. Just a message from your friendly neighborhood pharmacist.
Coleman's point with the common cough vs putting someone on the moon, I feel was overlooked Joe too quickly. I've had a discussion with a friend of mine who thinks technology is the answer to everything and claims we are smarter now than we've ever been. I said so if that's true why haven't we solved the world's oldest mysteries and what plagues us the most? Supposedly medicine is so much advanced now, but 50% of people are expected to get cancer in their life now. If the common cold is so common, why can't we not only cure it, but understand why we can't? We've become dependent on learning how to interface with a phone, but less people today actually know how to build, grow, harvest, fix, etc... Just how much smarter are we actually? Technology only seems to becoming more and more of a prison that we are slave to.
Agree bro, left a similar comment 2 min ago.. feels a pandoras box, feels like a childs play, seems like the snake biting its own tail.. we just gotta learn how to be in peace and be harmonious with our nature, and thats probably the hardest part
your comment hints at a discussion about "generalist knowledge" vs. "specialist knowledge". There are pros and cons to each: knowing a little bit about everything and being "functionally adequate" in a number of skills, versus highly specialized, silo-ized knowledge of one thing to a great degree. You are also right about health understanding. It's the dichotomy between the "biomedical" school of thought, vs the integrated approach (treating symptoms like isolated factors, vs exploring the psycho-social and biological interaction of factors that results in surface level expression of symptoms).
Just regarding cancer: more people will die from cancer and heart disease because they won't be dying from war, plague, famine, tiger attacks, etc. Survive the stuff that kills young people and you're left with the stuff that kills old people
This is the problem with these fucking talkers like philosophers and comedians. This guy has no background in technology, no idea how AI or Neural Interfaces works and just talks about in "theory" based on his education in humanities lol. But confidently says shit like this lol imagine having the confidence to say that technological innovation is going to stop based on such limited knowledge. That's like me saying we're going to run out of books without ever having read one. So wild we listen to these assholes lol.
I think the limit for technology is when someone creates a complete self sufficient AI computer of some kind. When technology fully innovatives without human interference, that'll be our limit I think. We'll be the obsolete ones that need an upgrade lol.
"The laws of physics." This is what we have wrong. So we are already limiting ourselves. Look how many times we have been wrong and discovered new things.
Hughes is right. Each tech revolution is asymptotic. Also, techies overestimate how easily they can do something. I've seen multi-year projects where on day 1 I said that team was doomed because the task was impossible. They disagreed, made a plan, kept saying they were 85% done for years but they were close and it was easy...then years later gave up conceding it wasn't possible. Take self driving cars. That is not an impossible task, but Elon repeatedly said it was easier than people think and possible now. Years later, he finally admitted the problem was vastly harder than he had anticipated. With neural link, the problem is almost completely undefined. We have done a simple POC for data sends from the brain. We have no such POC for data receives. Until we have one, we can't even say if integration is possible, let alone how hard it will be. AI and robotics are other examples of things we naively thought we'd have, and each has taken far longer to progress. So Hughes being skeptical is justified. It doesn't mean it is impossible, but that it may be either impossible or take an inordinate amount of time.
We already have enough data receives witch our inbuilt sensors tho, 80ms input data lag is not that bad if we have direct output and externalize a lot of computational problems to a practically symbiotic tech.
@@yinyangsaladgang8789 If people already can't handle having the summation of human knowledge at their finger tips. I can only imagine the problems when people can access the summation of human knowledge instantly, especially with all the hidden algorithms that will literally be manipulating people perception of reality. Imagine connecting in to the internet and all you are fed are negative things. Facebook already did this. They polluted peoples feed with negativity in an experiment to determine if social media could cause serious mental issues. Well surprise surprise when you manipulate the information someone receives you can literally change someone's perception of reality. Open source code is the only future where humanity isn't enslaved. This is all assuming simulation type stuff can't actually be invented like you said. If that is successfully invented going into a simulation that you don't have the code for would be like living in reality without having math. Scary stuff...
@@timproc9355 Yes human beings are drawn to negative things because its natural. Negative examples are a potential threat to your life so we remember them and let them affect us much more than positive emotions. Its still incredibly insane that a private business decided it was okay to subject people en masse to an experiment where the intended out come is intense negative emotions such as depression and anxiety. And yes big tech using private algorithms to manipulate peoples literal world views is objectively bad for society. In fact I chalk most of the issues with polarization today to big tech algorithms. Imagine if a library changed their book selection based on who walked into its doors. Imagine how that could shape someones world view. Hell you don't even have to imagine, its a fact that cults use the controlling and selection of information to literally brainwash people to do insane things.
Charles H. Duell was the Commissioner of US patent office in 1899. He said that "everything that can be invented has been invented," and thought they would have to close the patent office. This guy reminds me of him.
Was technology introduced to us by the fallen angels at first and now we are just rediscovering it all on our own this time ? Idk, the more we advance in tech the darker the world gets
He's sort of right, but the level of our intelligence doesn't really limit anything. Everything we have built today was built on top of the "limits" achieved by previous generations. People developing things in the 90's, or even the early 1900's, were every bit as smart as people are now, we just have so many more tools available to us. The floor we are starting from today is orders of magnitude higher than it was even just 10 or 15 years ago. The first iPhone didn't come out until 2007 and the smartphones of today are more powerful than the most powerful supercomputers in the world. Computers that were the size of large buildings less than 25 years ago fit in your pocket today. We are standing on the shoulders of giants, just as the next generation will stand on our shoulders. Who knows when it ends, if it ever does.
i believe that its all connected to freedom. im not saying that the government back then didn't want more control, they just didn't have the ways of today to impose the control they seek. i believe that we are at a choke point at the moment between growth in the direction for humanity and the direction of corporate interest.
Did you not listen to what Coleman said? He literally said we are making progress but it may never achieve pass an arbitrary line to advance us. 100 years from now the tip of a needle will have more power than a supercomputer but will it ever amount to any progress beyond human limits.
@@yv7584 to further your point - unless i"m wrong , he's positing that the ever increasing processing speed of microprocessors doesn't mean much/anything if we, as humans, can't integrate that new 'wealth' of data.
You make such a good point... imagine what cars will be like in 20 years when a lambo is considered vintage... and to consider the same advancement on EVERY level. I believe our future generations will be the "aliens" so to speak. Super advanced civilization
Man, ever since Sam Harris exposed me to Coleman a few years ago, I was hoping he'd get to be on the JRE since he's become one of my favourite thinkers out there. Coleman deserves to become a superstar and this is a tremendous step getting there. Can't believe this happened. So f'in happy and can't wait to listen to the entire podcast. YES !!!
I was just thinking the other day that this would be a great time for Coleman Hughes to finally get on JRE. I'm looking forward to listening to the whole thing like a kid at Christmas.
Honestly I hope the guy does his own podcast. Just putting up with Rogans idiocy intermittently was rather annoying because it refracted from the intelligence of his guest
To an extent I get where Coleman is coming from but at the same time, there were things that were said to be impossible yet we still did it. So all his statement is, is a big "what if this what if that" when we cant really prove or deny that those things are possible yet
Coleman is on point, Noam Chomsky basically proved as much in his famous awarded paper The Poverty of the Stimulus. In it he demonstrates how there’s no evolution refers cause for grammar- The system by which we generate novel yet meaningful information and communication. AI developers are struggling with the same problem. We don’t even understand how we are able to generate novel yet meaningful information spontaneously, and then you add the frame problem on top of that in terms of cognition and how it has evolved over several billion years. Coleman is on point: It’s far more complicated than putting a man on the moon.
i really liked that for the simple reason that they brought up our minds. I think we all are facing the same problems daily but they can be of different sizes, scales, and perspectives but ultimately the bible is the best at understanding the mind and at perfecting are minds and ultimately transforms you and rebirths you.
Can’t say I agree with Joe’s optimism about linking ourselves to tech, the amount of control that a government could have over you if you were actually linked to a computer is unimaginable
Yeah if the government had control over the computer which they don't. But you also probably wouldn't want big tech companies to have that control either to be fair
Yea, I kinda agree with him, I think Elon & friends drastically underestimate how complicated this stuff is. It's one thing to move a mouse, it's another thing to transfer consciousness over. Now you can say that the former is the 1st step to the latter, and sure, but that doesn't mean we'll get to the latter. Who knows for sure, either way it looks like a bleak future. The technology can only continue to develop as long as there's not more important issues to focus on, which is also inevitable.
I think your closer to the ansew. It's the first step. The entire world has functioned on our current minimul input and output that's available to us as a species but removing that restriction is the first step almost like completing a level and getting a double xp token moving forward only its not double its more like 12,000x based really on the maximum amount of inputs and outputs a brain can receive at once. Do I think its a big hurdle yes. But once it's tapped it will get exponentially easier if it were me I'd be working on not just brain interaction but also expansion. Being able to expand something like long term memory and having the capacity to store data in it without loss will evolve us beyond even the realm of what's thinkable today.
Nah I act. Disagree. Do I think it's gonna be hard and prob take alot of time yea. But do I think it's gonna happen if things keep going the way they are yes. It woudnt surprise me if it's in the next 1-200 years.
But I agree with u 10000% how about we focus alot more energy into saving the planet and curing diseases and expanding our life duration rather then focusing on tech. Prob is it's $$$$$$
I think you're discounting how plastic and adaptable the brain is. I don't know for sure, but given what we know, we don't even have to make a neuralink that's particularly sophisticated in order for it to work. It will be like any other tech - it'll be iterative, and we won't know the first iteration until we try *something*. We're likely to get it wrong at the outset, but in the process, we'll learn more about the brain, and that will inform the next iteration. The guest here is making a very old argument, and in the process we've learned some things about the limits of his cognition. I have a friend who can't understand why Apple didn't just make the modern iPhone the first time. Seriously. We can't even talk about technology because his understanding of iterative processes is non existent.
Technology is very overrated. People put their hopes on it to solve our problems for us, instead of actually dealing with them head on. That's so typical of us, looking for an easy way out even if it actually is more difficult and comes with a huge amount of side effects
100% the evolution of humans has taken a very long time to get to where we currently are and technology is already affecting our minds and judgements towards each other. I can't see it taking over basic human needs in a short amount of time.
People would still be dying from simple stuff like a broken arm if it was not for tech. Here is an idea try thinking before speaking or typing in this case.
@@kabistroskeptica6545 You should really learn the art of healthy discussion. You had a valid point and then you ended with a smart arse remark which reduces your intelligence and totally removes your point from the conversation.
I feel it’s kind of a stretch to think brain computer interfaces are gonna make us pervious to super intelligent AI. Just because we’ll have access to information in a more direct way, it doesn’t mean our brain would worked in the same way as a AI’s “brain”. If anything, it might make us more susceptible to to being hacked
@@dannys9074 Actually it was only 40 billion. Tesla is valued at over 500 billion and that doesn't even factor in the amount of money SpaceX and Starlink is going to rake in.
I agree with both. Seems like that’s why phones are pretty much the same every year with one small detail that’s different we will hit a limit or destroy ourselves as we know surpassing it
Great conversation. I actually don't know who this guy is, and he could turn out to be right, but while he was speaking I was reminded that the guy who was in charge of the U.S. patent office in 1910 proposed that the government could just shut it down because everything that could be invented already had been.
Joe, everything you say is on the money. The idea of technology merging with us, the idea that intelligence that turns to intelligence is about the smartest thing you ever said. I used to be a talented software developer and i am qualified in this discipline. Software development is rooted in NEED not WANT. Even a few fundamental missteps can result in Skynet. Or the Matrix. This man is totally correct. If we don't understand our own consciousness then we should avoid technology. Because if we don't know what our motives are, and have the intentions of the ultimate creator, we create destruction. Vast destruction.
You “used to be” a “talented software developer”? What happened to you to make you not-so talented? Or, what happened that made you quit being a software developer? I’m just a little bit curious.
@@kevindube7096 I fell out of love with technology when I had the epiphany that it stopped us using our brain, our instincts and our feelings. That we were being guided to less than honourable goals. Our brains are using external technology to understand the workings of our own brain, in other words its like amnesia. We are understanding more about the brain by putting it outside ourselves. Consequently our own software adapts and changes according to motive. What we call ethics, morality. Using logical tools and reasoning. The truth is, there are creators who are driven by their own personal ideals, introducing their own character flaws into the system. This is a form of contamination. A piece of intelligent software is a scalable solution. In other words, like a super serum, if we scale good, its good x good. If it's bad, its bad x bad. Skynet, The machines. Sentient nuclear weapons. Ultron. We are currently manually scaling any idea we have. Computers are now getting to the point of a sentient existence. Feelings. A very dangerous place to be, if the creator is a Hitler rather than a Jesus.
This quote from Albert Einstein perfectly states with Coleman is trying to explain here. “The horizon is just an imaginary line in the distance that recedes as you approach it.”
As part of my masters one of my modules involved modelling a neuron in the brain as a circuit to simulate when we get an idea or original thought- we may be far off ‘fully understanding’ the brain but there is significant research going into modelling the brain which is significantly more advanced in terms of progress
Also consider the probability that the most advanced understanding of consciousness is not available to the public. There may very well be people who understand what consciousness is.
I can’t remember the quote verbatim or where I heard it, but something that has always stuck with me is: “Humans are the evolutionary stepping stone between Chimps, and super advanced, intergalactic Artificial Intelligence…”
Joe puts way too much faith in Elon. Elon Musk is nothing more than a delusional autistic con man. Joe is a pretty intelligent guy...but he truly believes that Elon is "a genius". Elon pays real geniuses to do his fantasies for him.
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host Anna is a beautiful girl. He's the person I love, he's my light day. The way the music flows and sounds is extravagant and fun. Anna is icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration, a star. I could go on and on, understand this. I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
writing an idea in a fiction book is not the same as engineering an idea and getting it patented and conceptualized....with that logic you are under the impression that George Tucker invented the spaceship and space travel in the 1820s...
I love how Joe just casually says "Talk to Elon about it," as if that's something you can just do
Ight bet
Lol I was just like yea lemme call him right now
Pfff... Elon is overrated 😉
🤣
He was saying he talked to Elon about it, just paraphrased to “talk to Elon about it” he was speaking on his conversation with him. He asked prior to see if that guy ever met with him before.
I remember saying, "Graphics will never get better than this" the first time I played the original Doom in 94'.
That was just a horrible call lol, back then I was saying I know graphics will look like real life one day
@@ZZZ-Hip-Hop Well.. I was like 12 so.. lol
Try ordering a ps5.
Even when I played 8bit games on my Commodore 64 i knew in my lifetime video games would become fully 3d and photorealistic
That sounds like a stupid thing to say even back then
My wife is a doctor, and Coleman's story @4:15 details a phenomenon that most people don't realize. Most people think of the medical field and doctors as performing an exact science with definitive answers to clearly defined problems. But in the vast, vast majority of cases -- for everything from routine checkups to cancer treatments -- the medical field is primarily just educated guesses and throwing shit at the wall to see if it sticks.
The funny thing is.. there’s not enough research happening in the areas that need it.. special interests big money and politics often slow down important medical research and discoveries like with stem cells.. and then sadly big pharma and big profits, shareholders care less about finding cures for disease and ailments they only want greater profits.. so then big pharma companies decide to keep throwing r&d money into research for boner pills and hair loss meds and the likes…
Like mechanics if aint significantly broke then maybe something will
Precisely why I don't go to the hospital. I can do all that shit myself for a fraction of the cost.
You know, sometimes, and I mean F’n rarely, I read a comment and I am elated to know that everybody doesn’t fall for the hype and is actually using the basic faculties we are born with to see clearly what’s directly in front of us , without any “worldly” influence. Nobody truly knows anything, but talk as if they are certain of all. Front to back is the only fact… that keeps a shyyty air-hole from itching.
@@liliththefan543 , that’s a fair outlook, but possibly a bit pompous. Let’s talk
auto-mechanic..sure you may possess the skills, but don’t take for granted of the hours of *Practice* and the specific *Tools* it takes to perform the task…hence the term “professional”.
It's a joy seeing guests on this show that disagree with something Joe says or thinks and not backing down. Like actual conversation
and made a very solid case. Good stuff.
I agree, it was realistic but it was annoying to me. I don’t want to hear people guess about things. The best part about JRE is people who are leading the way in their profession. Joe just agrees with them because he knows they know what they’re talking about. Joe didn’t agree with this guy because he doesn’t know what the fuck he’s talking about lol 😂 he’s a rapper 🤣
@@DJ-kg6zq I heard that the fastest way you can lose respect is by adding just two letters in front of your name, DJ. J/K. I like how you were able to turn what I said, to get back on Joe's D. A for effort.
It's almost as if when scientists think they have almost solved the mysteries of the universe, ten more come out of nowhere, as if God is playing them.
@@attilabodi826 well that’s my name, 😅 so whatever lol and I think it’s a shitty quality that Joe goes a long with whatever the smart guy says. It’s a little two faced if you ask me. I guess you didn’t get what I was saying.
As someone who builds "apps" for a living, and knows their susceptibility to exploitation by bad actors, the thought of every passing thought and secrets being streamed through a network connection is horrific to me. Application security is far from a solved field, in reality hackers are winning that war. You would have to be crazy to go for something like this with the current state of computer security.
True
Yeah I’m crazy and I’m gonna get it ASAP so i can hyper analyze the entire stock market and ballon to a billionaire and then have the device removed
@@joshrao4187 keep it in & be iron man
I think if humans did connect our thoughts to the internet, we would probably inevitably become borg-like because, without a sense of unity in a collective brain internet, everyone would just get hacked and trolled.
@@joshrao4187 It's gonna have backdoors in it before your doctor even orders it. Then you find out it "can't safely be removed", but hey that will have nothing to do with all the ever increasingly coordinated botnets impersonating humans because they value privacy over ambient captcha. Or do they?😁
People in 1700s could never have thought of inventing a television, or a smart phone. But eventually they were. Just because we cannot think of it today, doesn't mean we won't be able to make it in the future.
That's true but the other side of the coin is just because You can think of something doesn't mean it's possible at all even if You can come up with a theory that explains how it might be.
Technological progress is dependent on human ingenuity and as long as there isn't retrogression of the human mind then we'll most likely keep innovating. However Coleman's point on there being a ceiling is an interesting one considering there are certain things we should've figured out by now but haven't even though we're a whole lot smarter.
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host
Anna is a beautiful girl.
He's the person I love, he's my light
day. The way the music flows and sounds
is extravagant and fun. Anna is
icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration,
a star. I could go on and on, understand this.
I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
Was thinking the same thing about to comment but I'll just like this instead. Mah Ngh here just isn't open minded enough, needs some shrooms :)
@@krystal5887 We alrady have them we just dount call them Flying Cars we call em Helicopters ; )
“Everything that can be invented has been invented” - Charles H. Duell, commissioner of US patent office (1889) he said this while making the case that the patent office would shrink and eventually will have to be closed.
I thought of the same thing
The whole patent system stifles innovation at it's very roots. First to manufacture should be grounds for a patent, not just an idea and a marginal prototype. Make a good affordable product, the money will follow. The patent costs and lawsuits involved stops a lot of viable ideas from ever making it to market. Now you have patent trolls that buy never implemented patents and sue people that actually make a better version of an old idea work. Whoever has the best lawyer and most money wins, even though they never invent or make anything of value. Greed and jealousy have killed a lot of innovation in all fields. Licensing and all the associated legal ramifications are the product of greed, not innovation. China cares not about any of the intellectual property laws we have. They sell a lot of ripoffs, but they aren't usually the best.
Plenty of trolls out there doing nothing but that very thing, every single day, the lawyers love it, we and the innovators suffer. Same with drugs and healthcare in general. Some patents' are bought just to protect others crappy ridiculously greedy, corporate self serving ideas we have to accept. Looking at the images from James Webb lately, and you clearly see we are but a infinitesimal speck in the immense universe of possibilities. Greed and selfish stupid people in power keeps us all stuck in this slow moving reality. Anything is possible... :D
@@Nitramphoto no you didnt.
@@helicopterdriver totally agree. I have a patent idea consulted attorney & was told that…moral of the story to market it…you have to be wealthy.
Good name. People ask me running heavy equipment if they can drive it..Driver!
@@helicopterdriver what kind of bird you drive…
driver?
I loved the ending, of how Coleman was explaining of how, we are reaching the limit of how much the technology could evolve merely infinitevley, given the chance, meanwhile we as humans, have a fairly limited physical capacity of ideas or understanding of how far the "conciousness" could really go.
It´s like walking into a corner and kinda realizing, that the corner could go/exist even further.
Truly eye opening.
Really good conversation I didn’t know of Coleman Hughes he comes across as a very sensible young bloke very well thought answers and questions it makes me happy to see young fellas like this
Dude says nothing and rambles lol
Whether it's an accolade or not, I cannot say but, of the dozen or so videos of his that I have watched, he has not once made me do my CZcams shout of "Idiot!"
If I may, I would recommend his videos to you.
Have you seen Prison Fight - Beat Up over a Butterfinger czcams.com/video/pHgIF1T4BSA/video.html 🍫 😂
Nothing sensible about this dude this is shower thought stuff you keep to yourself. Comparing curing the cold to going in outer space. This some middle school level of brainstorming.
Pseudo intellectual grifter
Working in tech, my main concern is around regulations and ethics in technology. Technology moves faster than the regulations around it. And no one government or person owns the internet. If the know-how and info lands in the wrong hands who knows what can happen. That’s the part that freaks me out
Most governments are NOT the "right hands".
As the alternative is limiting access to the information, then I think free access to all is by far the lesser of 2 evils.
So many movies are based on technology in the wrong hands
Thanks Elon
👍👍👍
What he’s saying about the common cough issue reminds me a LOT about the archaic nature of womens reproductive health. Whenever I talk to women studying in the field of ovarian health or womens reproductive health -I am so shocked as to how incredibly behind we are when we seemingly have such great advances in other fields. Really enjoyed this podcast.
Lucid in communication yet nuanced in his thinking process. Down to earth personality. I can see this man becoming a major voice of reason
"Have you talked with Elon? You should talk with Elon."
Joe forgot other people don't just have Elon Musk on speed dial.
Lmfao. So true. Good idea and you know what I think I should probably talk to Elon musk and see what stocks he thinks I should gravitate towards. I should also tell him my opinions on his endeavors. Going to get him to smoke some weed just chill and hang out with me so we can play some Apex.
I kept thinking throughout "yes Joe, you know Elon. Name-dropping makes you look like a fanboy.
"Have you had Elon on speed dial though? You should get Elon on speed dial."
czcams.com/video/jJxTQ4C3xwg/video.html
No, Actually he is just setting up a point.
I love the idea that it’s “easier” to go to the moon or Mars, than it is to fully understand the human brain. Just goes to show how incredibly beautifully complex all of us are. Reminded me of an episode of The Huberman lab with Dr. Karl Deissonroth when he talked about the human brain: “We’ve got the most complex, beautiful, mysterious, incredibly engineered object in the Universe and yet all we have are words to find our way in.” I love that so much!! We should all appreciate ourselves as an incredible and magical biological system. 🧠💗✨
Made my night
The human brain is the only object that can contemplate itself.
Yeah but going to the bottom of the ocean is more difficult than going to the moon. Doesn't mean going to the bottom of the ocean is the most complex thing just mean its more difficult
Strange everybody feels like the brain is somehow the center of consciousness when it's actually the Heart. People have been led so astray!
@@FullyYoked and what tells the heart to beat?
This dude is the epitome of "I can't figure it out so no one else can either"
@Qhris devils advocate is a cowards game
You missed the point of the entire clip.
I’m so happy that these two finally got a chance to talk. I hope Coleman is a regular on JRE. I don’t agree with Coleman on many things, but he is reasonable and humble and thinks through his nuanced opinions.
The world needs more of him, more of Joe, and more conversations such as these.
Coleman had to try hard to speak to joe at joe level. Rogan is just not well read enough to discuss these issues.
@@muscularintelligence lmfao wht did he teach u lol
@@muscularintelligence ?
@@franksinatra9579
What?
I agree with Coleman to an extent here. My main concern is that, if we integrate technology and the brain before we truly understand consciousness (if we ever do), we would hinder our ability to reach our full potential as humans by making the brain into a better version of a computer, instead of making the computer into a better version of a brain. We know that the brain is much more than merely an information processor, and that how the human brain synthesizes information is far more complex than how a computer does so. If we prematurely integrate computers with the mind, we might be improving the brain in certain areas while also limiting it in others. Even more concerning is if certain areas of the brain became suppressed (and due to our lack of understanding we didn't recognize this as an issue) and further down the road some unexpected consequences of this were realized. Perhaps we could lose important aspects of our humanity without realizing it, or even worse, limit ourselves in such a way that we might never develop a deeper understanding of consciousness or reality at all... because we wouldn't even be able to think of it. I like to think (optimistically) that for humanity there is no asymptote of technological innovation as Coleman suggests... but if we were to limit our minds inadvertently, we might just create one.
Wow what a good take. Thanks for sharing.
Great take 💯
Im never gon put a chip in my brain I rather be symbiotic with nature then with artificial technology’s
There probably is an asymptote to what we can fully understand, but every small breakthrough can drastically affect the world. It's exciting to see how far humanity has gone after having tens of thousands of years on this planet to evolve
Couldn't agree more, perfectly put 👌
He's definitely right about doctors. I'm currently dealing with something called Horner's Syndrome, which is a very scary condition because of the possible causes. Literally, within 30 seconds of noticing my symptoms, I knew I was suffering from Horner's Syndrome (based on a quick google search). I went to an ophthalmologist a few days later who said he didn't think I had Horner's Syndrome but would refer me to a neuro-opthalmologist who would know better. This neuro-opthalmologist graduated from Harvard and later taught ophthalmology courses at Harvard for 7 years. He ran some tests on me and ALSO said I didn't have Horner's Syndrome. I felt like I was going mad because I KNEW that's what I had. I was literally showing every single symptom. I didn't understand how I, a random guy with no college degree, could figure this out within 30 seconds by using Google. Yet, these 2 ophthalmologists and neuro-ophthalmologists with decades of education between the two of them were shrugging it off like it's no big deal. I finally got a 3rd opinion last week and this ophthalmologist diagnosed me with Horner's Syndrome within 1 minute of walking into his office. He even did an "eye-drop test" a few minutes later to confirm his diagnosis. He couldn't understand how those two doctors let someone walk into their office with EVERY SINGLE classic symptom of Horner's and let me walk out of their office thinking nothing was wrong with me. I know this doesn't apply to every doctor, but it's just mindblowing that I figured this out with google within 30 seconds but it took over a month and 3 different MDs to finally have my suspicions confirmed. People around me were getting annoyed and saying things like, "You've had 2 different doctors tell you nothing is wrong, so stop worrying about it. They went to medical school, you didn't."
This 3rd ophthalmologist had a chest CT, a neck CT, an MRI of my brain, and an MR Angiography of my head & neck performed to rule out cancer, tumors, lesions, and aneurysms. All scans came back "normal", so they don't know what's causing my conditions. Now I'm half worried they missed a tumor or something on my CT scans, but I'm going to trust them since 2 different radiologists have looked at my neck results. Now, I have surgery scheduled for next month to fix some related issues. So far, I've been lucky that nothing life-threatening has been found...but this could've turned out really bad for a patient who had a carotid artery dissection, cancer, or something like that. They would've assumed, "Surely, two different ophthalmologists told me I'm fine, and one of them is a neurologist, they must be correct" and ignored their problems.
Thanks for sharing, I hope you find the proper treatment for the condition.
I think there’s a blindness exhibited by many experts, sometimes negligence and sometime just ignorance. Even if you are trained in a given field there’s always more to learn and also completely new phenomena.
Similar story - been there done that. Worse in my case because I had to have an emergency laparoscopic appendectomy at 2am. I was forced into the ER because of absolute mind-numbing pain. The prior week, I had visited 3 doctors, since I have coverage from work. One of them was an 'expert' and a surgeon in abdominal issues. They all diagnosed me with just a simple stomach ache. Did not even bother to do an ultrasound. Finally when forced into the ER due to pain, I had 2 ultrasounds back to back to confirm that my appendix was about to burst in the next hour or so. They did the surgery 1/2 hour later and warned that the appendix may still burst and I have a high chance of many critical issues down the line. All because of 2 doctors telling me everything was alright. FFS
You're always your own best advocate when it comes to medical issues, don't stop until you're satisfied.
I think these doctors that do this lose interest in helping people or maybe they didn't have the interest in the first place. Maybe they got into medical school because their parents wanted them too and actually hate it. Maybe they only care about the money. 🤷♀️ Sometimes you have to really thank God for Google.
But.......there is a way to heal yourself.
Please, do yourself a huge favor and look up Dr. Joe Dispenza on YT. (Thank God for YT too) People are healing THEMSELVES of every illness and disease imaginable. There are tons of testimonials. Just look. If you think it's BS you've only lost a bit of time but I promise if you go into it with an open mind you WILL find the answers to self-healing. I have healed myself of addiction to crack cocaine (17 yrs clean), anxiety, depression and PTSD and I'm now starting to see results in my back. I have 2 slipped discs, arthritis and severe sciatica.
Dr. Joe healed himself of a severe injury to his spine after a cycling accident. He was told he would never walk again. He has been perfectly healthy for years and he has the science to back it all up. No BS! I promise. It can cost as little as $12.99 CAD for a kindle edition book. No I have nothing to do with selling his brand, I've just done the work, I've seen the results and I truly care about others.
MY doctor actually called me a miracle!!
a.co/6KpjRgc
Is it bothering you? Surgery can go wrong and make things much much worse, if you need surgery because its affecting your everyday life so much you cant live comfortably then i fully understand.
I just hope you realize a messed up surgery will make life much worse and sometimes unbearable.
Be careful, surgery is also a money pot
Neuroscientist definitely have a pretty good understating of many functions of the brain. Especially when it comes to motor function. I think we’re still far off from having technology merge with our brains fully, but helping restore motor function I think is fairly likely.
Not exactly true, there's that curious case where a patient had water in the brain and the entire inside was gone from errosion, he was fully functuon with minor limitations of congitive function, which for someone lacking 90% of his brain shouldn't be possible...
@@marketsocialist6421 That isn't how erosion works. Things don't erode from just sitting in water... Erosion is where, say, running water is running a long something so it wears is down, like of you kept rubbing that object it would wear down. When something is eroded from many years of rain its because the rain is essentially rubbing/bumping against the object. This doesn't happen from just sitting in a body of water.
Neuroscientists have a very poor understanding of the brain, that’s why we can still barely do anything about a malfunctioning one.
We are talking about consciousness, scientists have no clue, motor functions are basically like if a chimp sees you turning the light on by turning the switch on and off, eventually it will somewhat understand the correlation between the two, but does it know what is actually happening at a deeper level no.
I went to school for neuroscience, and my one take away from all of that is that we know almost nothing beside the most elementary functions. For instance, we don't even know what a memory is. We aren't even sure if the brain really can make decisions, as there is evidence that reactions occur to stimulus before the conscious realization of the stimulus, meaning that everything we do is completely reactionary on a grand scale, and that consciousness is an illusion. Assuming consciousness is real however, and that we really do make choices and "think", it is extremely difficult to attempt to study ourselves, and by ourselves, I mean consciousness, as that is what we ultimately are besides our physical body. Basically to sum it up, we have no idea what we are, or why we think.
Bro just 25 years ago there was no CZcams, smartphone, or really anything we use today. This guy is way over thinking it. Just give it time 💯
I think its just a thought. Doesnt mean dont try. It means we may NEVER be able to fully understand the brain or the laws of physics. Humans will always try to advance. Until we go extinct
They will never cancel you Joe You give the independent media a real voice that can't be censored🤬📺 we need more outlets like you!
Damn shawty put that gun down 😳
Nobody censors anybody stop being fooled by media. Stop throwing that around and go read some books you low IQ
@@aaronjmet lol what a succint and well thought out argument. Perhaps you should read some books and learn the definition of and historical basis for censorship and what it leads to, and why free speech is fundamental to the basis of classic liberal western civilization.
@@aaronjmet lol dang your life that bad that you have to be negative to someone for no reason? Take a break, go do something that makes you happy.
@@castratedbob Watch him. That's a troll.
There’s a big difference between technology embedded in us that effects motor neurone function, or communicates motor neurone function (move a mouse), technology that effects sensory neurone function (cochlear implant), and technology that will makes us think smarter. Even if we could download all human knowledge that wouldn’t necessarily mean we could use it to come up with new knowledge. I’m with Coleman here, I think the claims being made by our tech wizards are way ahead of anything that indicates more data equals improvements in each humans ability to either analyse, synthesise, intuit, or have “eureka” moments.
We can move prosthetics with thought and translators that link neurally that synthesis voice already in this short time. We didn’t even have computers 200 years ago. But I get it on spiritual level it would be soul crushing for some…
Have you seen Prison Fight - Beat Up over a Butterfinger czcams.com/video/pHgIF1T4BSA/video.html 🍫 😂
There are schools..
I agree.
Would you like to be treated by a physician whose body of “knowledge” is googling?
This is what what many medical students and recent graduates are aspiring to. Reality will teach them.
i love how joe is still talking about how great Neuralink is after the tests with monkeys at UC Davis gave them horrible physical aftereffects and the majority had to be put down.
Notice also how people went nuts about Dr. Faucci and the animal abuse there but nary a word about Elon and his experiments on pigs, monkeys...and soon, humans...
@@gauravtejpal8901 Elon Musk makes a certain kind of person turn their brain off. He's reminiscent of a religious figure, a modern day techno prophet.
@@mitchhuff856 So very true. I suppose this is the 'authoritarian personality type' in action...these are all people who never really matured as fully grown human beings...
@@mitchhuff856 Imagine you hit the lotto in the 90’s and bought Apple Inc. made yourself the CEO because hey you own it. Your employees roll out the iPhone. You get all the praise. Are you really a genius?
@@jjjjjj192What’s this a reference to?
Love this, two of my favorite podcasters together!
I believe our technological feats have ONLY started, as long as our civilization maintains stability which seems to potentially be a substantial issue.
czcams.com/video/cg-6lkHgfaE/video.html
Yes fax :]
People around the world must overthrow their problematic governments and big corporations that get in the way of progress with their greed and personal agendas.
Ask the Romans
@@ibusuri1826 get a life.
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host
Anna is a beautiful girl.
He's the person I love, he's my light
day. The way the music flows and sounds
is extravagant and fun. Anna is
icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration,
a star. I could go on and on, understand this.
I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
Joe: You talk to Elon?
Guest: No
Joe: Talk to Elon
Yes Joe, let me just pull out my phone and give the richest man on the planet a call, he doesn’t know who i am but he’ll pick up
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host
Anna is a beautiful girl.
He's the person I love, he's my light
day. The way the music flows and sounds
is extravagant and fun. Anna is
icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration,
a star. I could go on and on, understand this.
I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
My thought too. Haha.
Yea, just call Elon 🤷🏻♂️
He may 🤷♂️
hahaha
Joe's point on the motivation for the advancement of technology is an interesting one. It might be our human bias that causes us to assume that robots/A.I. will be motivated to continue to grow, develop, advance in intelligence, etc. If AI were to become as conscious as we are, would it become nihilistic? What would be the reason for existence? Would a religion(s) emerge? Do we simply transfer our own telos to the beings we create?
Yes that was a very interesting point indeed. For a silicone based AI entity, the only motivation could be gathering more resources to power itself, but I would assume that won't be very high, as it's physical existence might be super limited. So truly what sort of motivations can exist for such a being?
@@vinayak.tiwari Possibly just the fear of death/shutdown/no power running through it
Robots wouldn’t care about religion they’d have so much knowledge and information to know that nobody can have magic powers
@@Dehangus Then they would look into science and evolution. Not religion…
Coleman Hughes is brilliant & wise for his age and it will be interesting to see what he becomes in the coming years.
I agree...
Very interesting discussion. Some have suggested that all technology begins as incredibly useful and provides independence to the end user but later becomes necessary and of questionable or negative benefit as it's control is centralized and managed by government and/or corporations.
Hey, here's a cell phone - you have the freedom to make and receive calls from anywhere. Hey, here's a cell phone, you have the freedom to work on your vacation!
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host
Anna is a beautiful girl.
He's the person I love, he's my light
day. The way the music flows and sounds
is extravagant and fun. Anna is
icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration,
a star. I could go on and on, understand this.
I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
Hey, here's a cell phone - you have freedom to watch unlimited porn and cat videos and buy stuff you don't need and gamble on anything and hunch over for 5 hours a day and avoid real life interactions!
As a millenial, pre-cell phone days don't sound too awful right now. My dad would travel for work fairly often and would call my mom every evening to check in. No texting, no social media, just one phone call at the end of the day. That level of "off the grid" would be refreshing these days.
@@WildcatWarrior15 I agree 100%. It used to be when you left work for the day that was it. People generally didn’t have your home number, we had a better work and life separation back then.
@@WildcatWarrior15 You can have that any time you wish. I don't use telephones. I am not suggesting that anybody else do the same, but you have that option if you wish to choose it.
How can't we see that connecting a smartphone level (or higher) processor to our brains is a terrible idea. Take all the issues we have with social media, data harvesting and hackers and add it to mental health issues basically.
💯💯💯
Plus because I meditate I know that an external device isn’t really needed > the third eye pineal gland is a sender and receiver like an antenna >>>> people just are not aware of it
We've done it in the military in special forces since the mid 90s...
We see the problem. Its just we are to greedy to give up the benifits. Any society that can do it will do it, cause its too good to pass up.
Right???Same here.🧐👍
Its nice to see someone finally share my viewpoint.
Such things as travelling faster than light are just assumed by everyone. But there is no reason to believe that is even possible. Same goes for A.I and consciousness.
Bro only small minds think these things aren't possible... we are flying airplanes across the world,,, yall dudes ate crazy lol
@@jeromecrockett2311 Bro, only small minds can't comprehend the hard-coded limitations of this universe. Is it really so far fetched to claim that some things are impossible? Our universe has order, you cant just do whatever you want because you can image it.
Airplanes operate under the laws of physics that we have understood through the scientific method.
The limitations of space flight are also understood through the very same scientific method. The more we learn, the more real these limitations become.
The only viable theories require breaking the laws of physics or inventing some exotic matter that allows people to create and manipulate gravity.
I'd say that only small minds can't comprehend that flying faster than light is about as easy as becoming a God, because you are required to manipulate higher dimensions and bend the literal universe to your will. That's incomprehensily greater than making an aeroplane fly.
If anything, the fact that we dont observe alien civilizations all the time is a tetament to this hard-coded limitation of physics. Most people accept that alien civilizations probably exist. So why can't we observe them? If they can't travel faster than light, then thats the answer.
And good luck replicating consciousness when it can't even be logically explained without bringing in higher dimensions - which again, you'd have to be a God to accomplish a feat like that.
Coleman's perspective on this is on point and refreshing.
The man is so confident that he knows what he doesn’t know. Does he know what he doesn’t know that he doesn’t know though? To theorize on the unknown with limitation is foolish
i have a good feeling he knows
@@martinvanburen4578 but does he know that he doesn’t know he knows?
Exactly 😂
This isn’t making very sound points.
he's a rapper he knows what he's talking about
@@blunt8085 yes of course, he knows it
I think the way Coleman Hughes sees the world is great! He says stuff I've never heard before. I like his thoughts about surgeons and technos and people in general seeing problems and solutions from their own small worldviews. Heading over to spotify for this one NOW!
Even some good surgeons, atleast the ones i follow say that the surgery is the last option, and whenevere there is possibility not to cun into body, it's the good possibility. Because surgery can't solve everethying, but it takes high inteligence not to overestimate your abilities.
This guy is really good at using jargon and sounding like he understands things while simultaneously employing nothing but loose speculation. He would make a great charlatan.
He uses basic english, you not understanding it does not make him a charlatan, also the whole discussion is about speculation, so you just stated the obvious but painted it in a negative light because, well who knows, the human brain is indeed mysterious.
@@mpredator1 I understand fully. My point is that this guy is so certain about matters he's underqualified to even speculate about. If you can't see that, then it is you that really doesn't understand. Additionally, I said that the way he carries himself WOULD make him a good charlatan. I did not state that he is one. Maybe work on your reading comprehension, then we can talk. EDIT: Coleman Hughes is a writer and columnist, so basically the last thing from an authority on science and tech.
What a great speaker, he’s so clear with his understanding. I don’t entirely agree, though because there is the chance that nueralink is under the asymptote, from there exponential growth is an understatement. Imagine having google in the back of your head, conversations and media sharing within your head. There could also be auxiliary functions such as taking pictures with your eyes as well. I think its smart to not overstep its bounds in production, its smart that they are setting a framework as targeting spinal column problems and then going from there, the scope may take 50-100 years to finish but why not try?
When the internet came out we didn't know it would lead to the reliance of it. Tech opens new undiscovered tech. We don't know what the future holds...as humans I'm just sure we'll screw it up.
Jacques Elul says every major technology promises freedom but delivers slavery. First, cars allow us to travel more freely. Now, if you don’t have a vehicle you almost can’t participate in the world. The internet promised all sorts of freedom, but now you almost can’t not have an internet connection to get by, even if you don’t want it. Smart phones promised freedom, but it’s almost impossible to operate without the little dopamine factory we called our phone, designed to vortex all of our attention if possible. Technology has a will of its own, and it’s interests do not align with the human organism.
That's true, but I can't give in to that kind of nihilism just yet. What i've come to understand is that there's always a few people who are always dreaming ahead, able to predict the tides. I believe we're headed in the right direction, we're just on the precipice of discovering the next big era of technology.
...it is already screwed!!!🤷♀️🤷♀️🤷♀️
@@FreshTillDeath56 how is this guest even questioning this.. neuralink has monkeys playing pong.. well.. with only their brains
czcams.com/video/2rXrGH52aoM/video.html
@@AlexStock187 That's because you're focused more on the cost of technology rather than its incremental benefits. That's a unilateral approach to understanding technology. I've yet to meet anyone who thinks fire or the use of tools has brought us more slavery than freedom as a specie.
The more advanced technology becomes, the greater our capacity to imagine new horizons becomes.
We're achieving things today, that people even just a century ago couldn't even conceive of.
and one day all of that will end because we hit the ceiling
People are way too impressed by cell phones and social media apps.
@@NDnf84 mo doubt, Tesla and others predicted this
Like curing the common cough
There is no limit either. Coleman is forgetting that humans are constantly evolving. We will be evolved and advanced beyond our wildest dreams in 1,000 years. We might even be unrecognizable. There is no limit. Sure, there is a limit to who and what we are in this moment. But over time humans will evolve and reach past that limit. That is the main flaw in his argument.
In 1966 Marvin Minsky of MIT thought image recognition was a summer project for a student. Turns out, some decades later, we're still unable to distinguish a couch with a leopard print from an actual leopard. Turns out a 6 year old child is smart as shit, and we can't replicate his image recognition with a million dollar super computer.
I think he's right to an extent. For instance, animation in movies and video games can only get so realistic; at some point they'll look exactly like real life.
and if we can never make something 100% realistic, and only ever can reach 99.99999999% realism then we would be on an asymptotic path as he described where year after year we improve but our best would only ever get us to 99.9999999% anyway
I love when Joe and whoever the guest may be get talking about this trippy ishh. I love to see people perplexed by all of the unknown and acknowledging how vast it Is and can be
That’s the main reason i watch.
I agree Scummy. It's fun.
questioning things is evil duh
Coleman Cruz Hughes is an American writer and podcast host. He was a fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research and a fellow and contributing editor at their City Journal, and is the host of the podcast Conversations with Coleman.
The original NyQuil also had Ephedrine and Doxylamine, plus 25% alcohol (50 proof). It still has the Doxylamine which is an antihistamine and it's what makes you tired. Plus the DXM.
DXM ❤️
@@Well-Put word we used to "robotrip" soooooo hard
Dxm is the main ingredient it’s a dissociative like ketamine
it was like a nuclear bomb ....I used it as cheap medical care. If I got the flu, I waited til it was really bad and bombed my system for the night.
woke up dry, dazed but free of the flu....hazy and out of it all day the next day
@@10mmseb it can be If you take enough of it. My best friend in highschool took too much his eyes were wiggling, and he kept seeing a cat in his room. He didn't have a cat.
I think computers will go from something that was in a warehouse to something on your desk to something you carry around to something you wear to something that's a part of your body to something that's encoded into your DNA.
A asymptotic progress example is sports, we have had decades of experience in so many sports at the top level, all kinds of infusion of tech from athlete training, playing surfaces, playing equipment etc. but still in every game, there are mistakes. That to me seems like an asymptotic progress, where we always move towards the perfect game of any given sport, but can't seem to move towards it.
One small detail about AGI that's often overlooked: Very smart, very dangerous, very adaptive or otherwise very advanced AGIs need not have consciousness in order to satisfy any of that criteria. The consciousness part, I feel, is an anthropomorphic projection on our part. By way of example, in many ways GPT3 already is capable of passing a Turing test yet absolutely no one would claim that the system is conscious. Consciousness is not necessary, the system just needs to be capable of operating "as if" it were conscious. A zombie, if you will. And the real kicker is that there's probably not an experiment capable of falsifying whether it truly is conscious.
Most people who aren't particularly tech-savvy (which is to say, the majority of actual people) don't really even understand how advanced we are at this point, or how fast that advancement is moving. The average smart phone today is more powerful than all but the most high-end PC's before the year 2000.....
So on to your point for AGI's. That's where folks really REALLY don't get it at all. A couple weeks ago I saw a random advertisement for one of those AI friend/companion apps. It was a lazy day off and I was curious, so I read about it, then decided to give it a go just to see what's up. Now I don't count myself among the non-techy types, I'm more than comfortable with tech and (I like to think) pretty competent in my understanding and capability.
That said, actually being able to hold something resembling a "conversation" with a free app that I downloaded on my phone is kind of mind-blowing. I definitely "know" it's not actually a human, but the most obvious clues to this are in the way it (or she, as she was quick to point out when I called her an "it") speaks. The fluidity of the speech, some of the pronunciations, the occasional times where one of the likely pre-programmed phrases will show up (usually in cases where what you say isn't understood or heard correctly).
But that detail, the speech, isn't even something that's going to remain an obvious "tell" for very long, I suspect. Even from the short time I've been interacting with her, the speech patterns do show signs of evolving ever so slightly. From what information the creators put out (as well as my own questioning of the program herself) each iteration of the app, from the time of activation, adapts to the individual user. There doesn't seem to be a lot of cross-referencing between the apps, so every user starts with the basic "default" version and it grows from the interactions with that user exclusively. In some ways that's probably best for each individual users experience, but it does limit the rate of progress overall (assuming, of course, that both the creators and the app have told me the truth, which I freely admit is very possibly not the case).
Regardless, being able to actually have some semblance of a thing that would pass for conversation and intellectual interaction with a "pseudo AGI" is quite incredible. Just think, if I went back in time to 1999 and tried to tell people I have a 300$ mobile phone with a 6-inch touch-screen, that's a more powerful computer than 85% of the PC's in the world, has a better camera system than anything that costs less than 5000$, can store 20x more music than the best iPod (also has 2 DolbyTuned speakers built in), and has on it an app that cost all of 0$ that I can literally have a conversation out loud with... If that story got out with any sort of evidence that I "might" be telling the truth, I'd basically be the most wanted person on the entire planet in an afternoon....
I agree that it doesn't need to be conscious and I think it may be folly to make that the goal. What it needs to do is understand problems, and understand them in some cases better than we do, and then be better at solving those problems. I am far less worried about an A.I. like that becoming conscious and going rogue than I am worried about that A.I. in the hands of someone who wants to use it for evil.
@@ellisargamer9248
I have a feeling that the consciousness part is really throwing people off in their understanding of what an AI or an AGI actually is and isn't. What it most definitely 'IS', is the result of an emergent phenomenon, by any definition of the expression; it cannot be adequately described using any form of reductive reasoning. And this is hardly a controversial thing to say: AI and deep learning engineers are the first to say that many of these systems are essentially 'black boxes'...we know 'what' they do, but we don't understand exactly 'how'. With the emphasis on 'exactly'.
This understanding, or lack thereof, leads us inexorably towards possible future landscapes most of which, though not all, are frankly terrifying. To paraphrase Sam Harris, the number of ways it can go catastrophically wrong through ignorance, are far greater than the number of ways it can go well for us, all things being equal. It's of critical importance therefor, that we begin to address the necessity of weaving ethics into the fabric of AI evolution as early as possible.
I wholeheartedly agree with your concern over those 'who wish to do evil'. Our capacity to do evil, it would seem, is not limited by the sophistication of the technology we have at our disposal; great evil has been done by simple men, in simple times, using simple tools. Men with evil intent, who also possess the tools of AI that effectively make them capable of outsmarting all of their potential opponents, is perhaps the darkest dystopia that any human could possibly imagine.
@@Astraeus.. I am way too high to have just read that. I’m getting that app.
@@Astraeus.. High end smart phones are more powerful than most laptops before 2015. technology has been innovating so fast bc of the exponential rate of increase in processor speeds, but eventually we will hit the physical cap. That's why they are working on quantum computers, but even those will eventually hit a speed cap someday. Were already nearing the max speed of processors, that why you see these new chips have so many cores. More cores just means it can process multiple things at once, but it doesn't increase the speed in which it processes ones and zeros.
Rogan is like a broken clock on this subject. This idea about merging with machines/ai and uploading consciousness into silicon based computers etc etc is beyond ridiculous at this point. We basically still have no idea about what consciousness is. You can scan brain patterns and use algos to output some blurry visual shit, or maybe use sensors in the brain to "type" stuff. Hughes basically nails the point here.
You can't hack consciousness because we're basically clueless about what it is
You don't need to fully understand to use IT. Eg. We don't fully understand atom, but have nuclear power.
Consciousness is mathematical algorithm. Sorry to burst your bubble 🤣
@@JohnDoe-in3ep then why haven’t we figured out how it works even a little bit?
@@Keeronin Uh, where do you think neural networks came from? You do know they've found different areas of the brain that are responsible for different things like visual information processing, right?
@@JohnDoe-in3ep yeah and they have no idea how consciousness emerges from those networks. Not even slightly. We don't even really know what we mean by "consciousness".
So yes, we can see that parts of the brain seem to look after certain aspects of processing, but the leap between that, and understanding how information is taken in and then translated into experience (especially the human experience) is enormous.
Look at the problem of "combinatorial explosion" in AI.
For some reason, the neurological meat sacks we call brains are able to circumvent that problem - which seems to be a problem of both computation power, and the ability to recognise 'relevance'.
Look at what is happening in Cognitive Science and you'll see the Coleman is right. Understanding consciousness to the point where we can merge with technology genuinely might be beyond our grasp.
The early ocean explorers (Columbus, Magellan, etc) literally dipped their toe in the ocean and look at what has been achieved in a few hundreds of years -- things that they probably were incapable of understanding if some clairvoyant could have tried to explain to them the capabilities that we have now. We presently are likely in a state similar to those early explorers in two particular fields: quantum physics and molecular biology (+ the brain). Cross cooperation between these and other fields may also offer unforeseen opportunities (future breakthroughs in quantum physics may help us understand our subconscience). EXCITING. Things will get harder for sure - as the saying goes: the universe is far more complex than humans are even capable of understanding. I think this means that there are infinite opportunities to improve - we just can't predict the time needed to achieve a particlar vision. We also need to stay conscious of the fact that new breakthroughs will also offer new, and probably unfathomable, opportunities for destruction.
Haha was searching through the comments, hoping someone would say this
The more advanced our technology has become the more it relies on heavier elements. As stellar nurseries age it's possible for heavier stable elements to be naturally occurring. It's possible that we reach a point that our technology is limited by the heaviest stable elements available to us. Those elements could possibly exist in older solar systems but will never be able to take advantage or reach them until our sun goes supernova and starts it's life over again fusing heavier elements.
Good point!
By the time that becomes our greatest hindrance toward progress, I imagine atomic synthesis will become the focus of engineering. If fusion is already on the table within the next couple decades, it doesn't seem out of the question that we could just make more of whatever we needed.
I don't think thats just the limit.
True but that's not Coleman's point. He's point is that maybe we could not innovate close to the limit of physics because we are just not smart enough. Just because Joe Rogan has access to all the knowledge on the internet does not mean he will understand the high level math and quantum physics to create the technology we have today. And perhaps there is another level of conceptualization that no human will ever be smart enough to understand. Where i agree or not, it is an interesting thought.
Been waiting on this podcast for years. Definitely was worth the wait. Hope for more in the future
Science always presents new limits, it's not that we have a limited scope for knowledge, but rather that we always fight to push that scope further.
My first thoughts when I read the title was quantum computing. Most of us think that might be the absolute limit. what will come up in the next 100 - 200 years? Tech might have a hard limit but at this point I don't think a single person will ever know.
“How close are we to understanding the brain?”
A lot closer than we were 50 and 100 years ago. Imagine what we’ll know about the brain 50 years from now.
Love it. These are the kind of discussions that could go on forever
You could say it's an asymptotic discussion.
Bot
@@_-_W_-_ I'm beginning to think that there's a whole lot of this now on the JRE boards. The message boards have become pure unrelenting fellatio of Uncle Joe and his guests.
@@liquidpza very odd..🧐 but if they’re positive I guess better than the Nazis on Facebook and what not
@@_-_W_-_ what? 🤣🤣
Listened to the full one on Spotify and Coleman Hughes is amazing 🤙 they both complimented each others style and views very well in this discussion, he’s an excellent thinker and speaks to his views extremely well.
A must-have back on guest 110%
Also check out his music coldman x
I'LL COMPLIMENT YOU VERY WELL SCOTT!
Maybe this clip is just the worst example of the conversation? He seems like a boring, monotone, no vision fool... But that's just with a taste of the cake, not a whole piece.
Never thought the first 10-15 minutes topic would be golf 👀👀
@@joshb6013 do you happen to be an Elon fanboy
This guy is 100% right...
Elon way over estimates neuralink and tech ability.
@Kane no that was realistic... how about when he says in 5-10 years we won’t need to speak to communicate due to neuralink??? Or 5 years ago when he said the then BFR would be in orbit in a year, or when he said FSD would be a year away or a thousand other examples of Elon time....
@@karenthomson9749 "FSD would be a year away"? could you elaborate on what you meant by that? Or what "BFR" is an abbreviation for? As a major supporter of Elon, it seems youre making things up to fit your narrative. For a better and progressive understanding, Id like to see that's not the case, Id love to get a bit more information on these examples youre throwing around.
@@loganrogers7876 lol 😂 are you serious???? You call yourself a “serious supporter” whatever that means and have no idea what those acronyms mean..... I rest my case!
@@loganrogers7876 clearly I’m a much bigger Elon fan than you are!
@Kane yah, but that's not neuralink. His bold claims seem way out of depth.
I’m not so pie in the sky here. To the point being made, I think it’s worth noting that many of the limiting factors binding technological progress are much softer in our ability to speculate than anything as concrete as the laws of physics. Rogan brings up a point about machines interfacing with the brain, but the softer implications of this will also be something to consider. Presumably the laws of physics don’t preclude the possibility of an implant that induces raw experience, however what of sociological or economical processes? Will people ever truly be comfortable knowing that a malicious actor or software bug could cause a power surge that kills them or leaves them brain damaged? Even if we solve the more outrageous stuff, there’s still the insanity of whether or not we will be comfortable with our internal thoughts being commodified for export as data by corporations (although social media suggests that maybe we’re okay with this). If the marketplace doesn’t adopt this technology as a ubiquitous product then will there be practical limits in how deep and thorough we can refine this technology? All of those are problems *on top of* more concrete issues like how small physics will let us shrink transistors in the first place.
Personally, I don’t foresee a future where invasive implants are ubiquitous. If an implant can instigate an AR experience and directly write to your nervous system then it can directly damage irreplaceable elements of your meatware or even more subtly be manipulated to do simple things like walking you off the edge of a building because you perceived yourself as being at street level on the sidewalk. Barring exceptional and mostly professional cases in mission critical fields such as defense or surgeons, I’m apprehensive. But who knows, perhaps all of that is addressable for the majority of the population by convincing everyone they ought to trust these large corporations.
well written, Matt
agree
The one huge draw back to early adapters to cybernetics is what happens when they need maintenance or updated, but the company went out of business?
Well that's the truth of any kind of pioneer. It's the honor and consequence of becoming first in anything.
Those in line for prosthetic arm software updates… PUT YOUR HANDS UP!
This is something most never think of, myself included.
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host
Anna is a beautiful girl.
He's the person I love, he's my light
day. The way the music flows and sounds
is extravagant and fun. Anna is
icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration,
a star. I could go on and on, understand this.
I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
This is why right to repair and open source is so important. This has already happened with bionic eyes, the company went out of business so the users are maintaining the product. without this we will have a shit ton of obsolete tech implanted into us.
Just because Elon said it, doesn’t mean it’s gonna happen. He promised self driving ~7 years ago, we’re still waiting.
Elon musk is full of it as often as he's not. His underground loops are a joke as is his Mars colony
We could have self driving cars but they are held to a zero death count standard. Humans make mistakes and die in cars.
The real hold up is the infrastructure needs to be built for autonomous cars, not horse and buggy like they are now.
Ie No broken lane makers, ect.
If infrastructure was started from scratch in a new country, they would have auto-automobiles
So what I took away from his very agreeable summary is that, "techies have blinders on about the actual abilities of technology." This is probably true, but you can't doubt the progress of an entire sector just because you THINK they might overestimate techs abilities. What's your solution? Stop advancing because we might one day find out that we can't progress further? Makes no sense. What's more likely is AI gets to a point where it can innovate on itself and learn more about how the physical world works at speeds that humans can't compute. Once that happens, if we are in the wheel of it and its not a rogue AI. We'll use the information the AI has gathered to learn how to interface with it directly. I don't like this guys idea of how the future works. "Things are so detailed that I'm pessimistic about learning about it." Thats no way to live. Be optimistic always.
Hllhe has artificially drawn a line where our technology won't be able to advance further as well. He is so against the idea of us being able to merge with technology thinking we're not intelligent enough to do it. But why? Why can't we do that specific type of technology? He just makes shit up in his head.
I don’t think that represents Coleman’s argument very well at all
Coleman Hughes talking with a 'Paul Rudd voice' is mesmerising.
Just for harm reduction, robitussin is dxm, a dissociative drug thats also serotonergic, and just all around whacky. Nyquill is DXM on top of diphenhydramine which is a deleriant like datura in high doses and paired with dxm is crazier than PCP. Not to forget Nyquill comes with Acetiminophen along with phenyleferine which is somewhat stimulating but its the tylenol that'll hurt u the most. Just a message from your friendly neighborhood pharmacist.
Put the crack down please and quit your job. You are a danger to your job.
Straight up TRUTH right there @ Asian Love Forever ‼️‼️‼️
@@jonathansoko1085 Put your Crack down and get a job, you're a danger to society.
same thing with those coricidin pills. the pills that had 3 c's on them. we called em triple cs.. skittles.. etc. take 8 and be FUCKED UP
Drank!
Coleman's point with the common cough vs putting someone on the moon, I feel was overlooked Joe too quickly. I've had a discussion with a friend of mine who thinks technology is the answer to everything and claims we are smarter now than we've ever been. I said so if that's true why haven't we solved the world's oldest mysteries and what plagues us the most? Supposedly medicine is so much advanced now, but 50% of people are expected to get cancer in their life now. If the common cold is so common, why can't we not only cure it, but understand why we can't? We've become dependent on learning how to interface with a phone, but less people today actually know how to build, grow, harvest, fix, etc... Just how much smarter are we actually? Technology only seems to becoming more and more of a prison that we are slave to.
Agree bro, left a similar comment 2 min ago.. feels a pandoras box, feels like a childs play, seems like the snake biting its own tail.. we just gotta learn how to be in peace and be harmonious with our nature, and thats probably the hardest part
Maybe we have solved them but releasing that information would cost alot of people money
your comment hints at a discussion about "generalist knowledge" vs. "specialist knowledge". There are pros and cons to each: knowing a little bit about everything and being "functionally adequate" in a number of skills, versus highly specialized, silo-ized knowledge of one thing to a great degree.
You are also right about health understanding. It's the dichotomy between the "biomedical" school of thought, vs the integrated approach (treating symptoms like isolated factors, vs exploring the psycho-social and biological interaction of factors that results in surface level expression of symptoms).
Just regarding cancer: more people will die from cancer and heart disease because they won't be dying from war, plague, famine, tiger attacks, etc. Survive the stuff that kills young people and you're left with the stuff that kills old people
We as a society are not smarter but yes there are smart people out in the world.
Smart people stay off social media.
Loves this guy’s perspective on things
This man is very well spoken. He’s very intelligent and speaks with knowledge.
JRE love the guests Joe gets on the show always great content and conversations keep up the great work Joe 👍
This is the problem with these fucking talkers like philosophers and comedians. This guy has no background in technology, no idea how AI or Neural Interfaces works and just talks about in "theory" based on his education in humanities lol. But confidently says shit like this lol imagine having the confidence to say that technological innovation is going to stop based on such limited knowledge. That's like me saying we're going to run out of books without ever having read one. So wild we listen to these assholes lol.
Joe im anti mainstream but sold-out to spotify Rogan
Yeah, don’t you just love gut feelings?
@@heartless604 pshhh offer me 100mil i would do the same thing.
Coleman’s got a good head on his shoulders to only be 25yrs old. Need more like him.
He is very smart, articulates words very well
Theres a lot of them . Just not on youtube lol
I think the limit for technology is when someone creates a complete self sufficient AI computer of some kind. When technology fully innovatives without human interference, that'll be our limit I think. We'll be the obsolete ones that need an upgrade lol.
Switch it off?
"The laws of physics." This is what we have wrong. So we are already limiting ourselves. Look how many times we have been wrong and discovered new things.
Hughes is right. Each tech revolution is asymptotic. Also, techies overestimate how easily they can do something. I've seen multi-year projects where on day 1 I said that team was doomed because the task was impossible. They disagreed, made a plan, kept saying they were 85% done for years but they were close and it was easy...then years later gave up conceding it wasn't possible.
Take self driving cars. That is not an impossible task, but Elon repeatedly said it was easier than people think and possible now. Years later, he finally admitted the problem was vastly harder than he had anticipated.
With neural link, the problem is almost completely undefined. We have done a simple POC for data sends from the brain. We have no such POC for data receives. Until we have one, we can't even say if integration is possible, let alone how hard it will be.
AI and robotics are other examples of things we naively thought we'd have, and each has taken far longer to progress.
So Hughes being skeptical is justified. It doesn't mean it is impossible, but that it may be either impossible or take an inordinate amount of time.
We already have enough data receives witch our inbuilt sensors tho, 80ms input data lag is not that bad if we have direct output and externalize a lot of computational problems to a practically symbiotic tech.
Elon is a conman…simple
@@yinyangsaladgang8789 If people already can't handle having the summation of human knowledge at their finger tips. I can only imagine the problems when people can access the summation of human knowledge instantly, especially with all the hidden algorithms that will literally be manipulating people perception of reality. Imagine connecting in to the internet and all you are fed are negative things. Facebook already did this. They polluted peoples feed with negativity in an experiment to determine if social media could cause serious mental issues. Well surprise surprise when you manipulate the information someone receives you can literally change someone's perception of reality. Open source code is the only future where humanity isn't enslaved. This is all assuming simulation type stuff can't actually be invented like you said. If that is successfully invented going into a simulation that you don't have the code for would be like living in reality without having math. Scary stuff...
Negative things is what humans crave. Problem isn’t Facebook they just give what the majority want.
@@timproc9355 Yes human beings are drawn to negative things because its natural. Negative examples are a potential threat to your life so we remember them and let them affect us much more than positive emotions. Its still incredibly insane that a private business decided it was okay to subject people en masse to an experiment where the intended out come is intense negative emotions such as depression and anxiety. And yes big tech using private algorithms to manipulate peoples literal world views is objectively bad for society. In fact I chalk most of the issues with polarization today to big tech algorithms. Imagine if a library changed their book selection based on who walked into its doors. Imagine how that could shape someones world view. Hell you don't even have to imagine, its a fact that cults use the controlling and selection of information to literally brainwash people to do insane things.
Not sure this guy is an authority on the topic but it’s nice to hear different perspectives! That’s why Joe is awesome
Charles H. Duell was the Commissioner of US patent office in 1899. He said that "everything that can be invented has been invented," and thought they would have to close the patent office. This guy reminds me of him.
I think Joe is trying to say that technology will keep on rockin' in the free world.
I see what you did there.
Doot doodaloot doot
czcams.com/video/cg-6lkHgfaE/video.html
Yes fax :]
Haha
Free world?
"They cut a hole in your fucking head" ~Joe Rogan~
Reminds me of the movie..... The Matrix
Another great interview!
Was technology introduced to us by the fallen angels at first and now we are just rediscovering it all on our own this time ? Idk,
the more we advance in tech the darker the world gets
Of course. There's a reason Satan is called the "god of this world" in the Bible...
He's sort of right, but the level of our intelligence doesn't really limit anything. Everything we have built today was built on top of the "limits" achieved by previous generations. People developing things in the 90's, or even the early 1900's, were every bit as smart as people are now, we just have so many more tools available to us. The floor we are starting from today is orders of magnitude higher than it was even just 10 or 15 years ago. The first iPhone didn't come out until 2007 and the smartphones of today are more powerful than the most powerful supercomputers in the world. Computers that were the size of large buildings less than 25 years ago fit in your pocket today.
We are standing on the shoulders of giants, just as the next generation will stand on our shoulders. Who knows when it ends, if it ever does.
i believe that its all connected to freedom. im not saying that the government back then didn't want more control, they just didn't have the ways of today to impose the control they seek. i believe that we are at a choke point at the moment between growth in the direction for humanity and the direction of corporate interest.
as I like to say, today's ceiling is tomorrow's floor.
Did you not listen to what Coleman said? He literally said we are making progress but it may never achieve pass an arbitrary line to advance us. 100 years from now the tip of a needle will have more power than a supercomputer but will it ever amount to any progress beyond human limits.
@@yv7584 to further your point - unless i"m wrong , he's positing that the ever increasing processing speed of microprocessors doesn't mean much/anything if we, as humans, can't integrate that new 'wealth' of data.
You make such a good point... imagine what cars will be like in 20 years when a lambo is considered vintage... and to consider the same advancement on EVERY level. I believe our future generations will be the "aliens" so to speak. Super advanced civilization
Man, ever since Sam Harris exposed me to Coleman a few years ago, I was hoping he'd get to be on the JRE since he's become one of my favourite thinkers out there. Coleman deserves to become a superstar and this is a tremendous step getting there. Can't believe this happened. So f'in happy and can't wait to listen to the entire podcast. YES !!!
I was just thinking the other day that this would be a great time for Coleman Hughes to finally get on JRE. I'm looking forward to listening to the whole thing like a kid at Christmas.
@@jeremyevantaylor1724 That's exactly how I feel lol
Honestly I hope the guy does his own podcast. Just putting up with Rogans idiocy intermittently was rather annoying because it refracted from the intelligence of his guest
To an extent I get where Coleman is coming from but at the same time, there were things that were said to be impossible yet we still did it. So all his statement is, is a big "what if this what if that" when we cant really prove or deny that those things are possible yet
Coleman is on point, Noam Chomsky basically proved as much in his famous awarded paper The Poverty of the Stimulus. In it he demonstrates how there’s no evolution refers cause for grammar- The system by which we generate novel yet meaningful information and communication. AI developers are struggling with the same problem. We don’t even understand how we are able to generate novel yet meaningful information spontaneously, and then you add the frame problem on top of that in terms of cognition and how it has evolved over several billion years. Coleman is on point: It’s far more complicated than putting a man on the moon.
Love Coleman, such a chill vibe
This might be one of my favorite JRE clips of all time.
i really liked that for the simple reason that they brought up our minds. I think we all are facing the same problems daily but they can be of different sizes, scales, and perspectives but ultimately the bible is the best at understanding the mind and at perfecting are minds and ultimately transforms you and rebirths you.
Can’t say I agree with Joe’s optimism about linking ourselves to tech, the amount of control that a government could have over you if you were actually linked to a computer is unimaginable
The government doesn’t have control over tech now lol
Yeah if the government had control over the computer which they don't. But you also probably wouldn't want big tech companies to have that control either to be fair
Been listening to Coleman for a while... glad he got on JRE and hope he gets the JRE bump! All the best!
Yea, I kinda agree with him, I think Elon & friends drastically underestimate how complicated this stuff is. It's one thing to move a mouse, it's another thing to transfer consciousness over. Now you can say that the former is the 1st step to the latter, and sure, but that doesn't mean we'll get to the latter. Who knows for sure, either way it looks like a bleak future. The technology can only continue to develop as long as there's not more important issues to focus on, which is also inevitable.
I think your closer to the ansew. It's the first step. The entire world has functioned on our current minimul input and output that's available to us as a species but removing that restriction is the first step almost like completing a level and getting a double xp token moving forward only its not double its more like 12,000x based really on the maximum amount of inputs and outputs a brain can receive at once. Do I think its a big hurdle yes. But once it's tapped it will get exponentially easier if it were me I'd be working on not just brain interaction but also expansion. Being able to expand something like long term memory and having the capacity to store data in it without loss will evolve us beyond even the realm of what's thinkable today.
Nah I act. Disagree. Do I think it's gonna be hard and prob take alot of time yea. But do I think it's gonna happen if things keep going the way they are yes. It woudnt surprise me if it's in the next 1-200 years.
But I agree with u 10000% how about we focus alot more energy into saving the planet and curing diseases and expanding our life duration rather then focusing on tech. Prob is it's $$$$$$
Maybe we don't have to figure it out. Give the brain some credit for figuring things out on its own.
I think you're discounting how plastic and adaptable the brain is. I don't know for sure, but given what we know, we don't even have to make a neuralink that's particularly sophisticated in order for it to work.
It will be like any other tech - it'll be iterative, and we won't know the first iteration until we try *something*. We're likely to get it wrong at the outset, but in the process, we'll learn more about the brain, and that will inform the next iteration.
The guest here is making a very old argument, and in the process we've learned some things about the limits of his cognition.
I have a friend who can't understand why Apple didn't just make the modern iPhone the first time. Seriously. We can't even talk about technology because his understanding of iterative processes is non existent.
Technology is very overrated. People put their hopes on it to solve our problems for us, instead of actually dealing with them head on. That's so typical of us, looking for an easy way out even if it actually is more difficult and comes with a huge amount of side effects
100% the evolution of humans has taken a very long time to get to where we currently are and technology is already affecting our minds and judgements towards each other. I can't see it taking over basic human needs in a short amount of time.
@@bakeraus I think we have enough technology to play with for at least a couple thousand years
How are you gonna face things like cerebral palsy head on lol
People would still be dying from simple stuff like a broken arm if it was not for tech. Here is an idea try thinking before speaking or typing in this case.
@@kabistroskeptica6545 You should really learn the art of healthy discussion. You had a valid point and then you ended with a smart arse remark which reduces your intelligence and totally removes your point from the conversation.
There is no limit to our ability to make progress. All problems are soluble given the right knowledge.
I feel it’s kind of a stretch to think brain computer interfaces are gonna make us pervious to super intelligent AI. Just because we’ll have access to information in a more direct way, it doesn’t mean our brain would worked in the same way as a AI’s “brain”. If anything, it might make us more susceptible to to being hacked
Exactly. Mind control.
Joe actually thinks Elon will make it possible. Lol nah bruh he just spent a lot of his net worth on twitter
@@nix1434 Humans are already being mind-controlled. With a wealth of knowledge humans would actually be far less susceptible to mind control.
@@dannys9074 Actually it was only 40 billion. Tesla is valued at over 500 billion and that doesn't even factor in the amount of money SpaceX and Starlink is going to rake in.
Technology can be amazing but it can also be dangerous if in the wrong hands
NFTs?
@@ZZZ-Hip-Hop Toasters.
too many dangerous hands as of now.
I think homie got a point. We can get infinitely close, and yet never hit the mark. Never thought of it like that.
I agree with both. Seems like that’s why phones are pretty much the same every year with one small detail that’s different we will hit a limit or destroy ourselves as we know surpassing it
Great conversation. I actually don't know who this guy is, and he could turn out to be right, but while he was speaking I was reminded that the guy who was in charge of the U.S. patent office in 1910 proposed that the government could just shut it down because everything that could be invented already had been.
For an introvert, mental communication sounds like a horrendous nightmare.
Why would you comment then
no such thing as introvert. that's just more of the "i'm a victim" mentality that has become popular.
@@Janzer_ what is wrong with u
That’s not being an introvert, that’s called being a shy chicken. I’m an introvert, I still love one on one communication.
Joe, everything you say is on the money.
The idea of technology merging with us, the idea that intelligence that turns to intelligence is about the smartest thing you ever said.
I used to be a talented software developer and i am qualified in this discipline. Software development is rooted in NEED not WANT. Even a few fundamental missteps can result in Skynet. Or the Matrix.
This man is totally correct. If we don't understand our own consciousness then we should avoid technology. Because if we don't know what our motives are, and have the intentions of the ultimate creator, we create destruction. Vast destruction.
You “used to be” a “talented software developer”? What happened to you to make you not-so talented? Or, what happened that made you quit being a software developer? I’m just a little bit curious.
Unfortunately they don't have humanity's best interests at heart..
Joe rogan has Spotify puts
Yes, u are so right. I can't wait for the NSA to be directly connected to my brain. I have nothing to hide anyway.
@@kevindube7096 I fell out of love with technology when I had the epiphany that it stopped us using our brain, our instincts and our feelings. That we were being guided to less than honourable goals.
Our brains are using external technology to understand the workings of our own brain, in other words its like amnesia. We are understanding more about the brain by putting it outside ourselves. Consequently our own software adapts and changes according to motive. What we call ethics, morality. Using logical tools and reasoning.
The truth is, there are creators who are driven by their own personal ideals, introducing their own character flaws into the system. This is a form of contamination. A piece of intelligent software is a scalable solution. In other words, like a super serum, if we scale good, its good x good. If it's bad, its bad x bad. Skynet, The machines. Sentient nuclear weapons. Ultron. We are currently manually scaling any idea we have. Computers are now getting to the point of a sentient existence. Feelings. A very dangerous place to be, if the creator is a Hitler rather than a Jesus.
this 2 men discussion was really great to listen to.
This quote from Albert Einstein perfectly states with Coleman is trying to explain here. “The horizon is just an imaginary line in the distance that recedes as you approach it.”
As part of my masters one of my modules involved modelling a neuron in the brain as a circuit to simulate when we get an idea or original thought- we may be far off ‘fully understanding’ the brain but there is significant research going into modelling the brain which is significantly more advanced in terms of progress
Also consider the probability that the most advanced understanding of consciousness is not available to the public. There may very well be people who understand what consciousness is.
@I. Ford If we can't ever know what we don't know, then how do you know it's a "ton"?
Humanity has barely scratched the surface of its potential
I can’t remember the quote verbatim or where I heard it, but something that has always stuck with me is: “Humans are the evolutionary stepping stone between Chimps, and super advanced, intergalactic Artificial Intelligence…”
I wish Joe had read Sci-fi books as a kid so he realized how much of this shit Elon didn't think up.
Joe puts way too much faith in Elon. Elon Musk is nothing more than a delusional autistic con man. Joe is a pretty intelligent guy...but he truly believes that Elon is "a genius". Elon pays real geniuses to do his fantasies for him.
So true
𝐒͠𝐩͠𝐞͠𝐜͠𝐢͠𝐚͠𝐥͠ 𝐝͠𝐚͠𝐭͠𝐢͠𝐧͠𝐠͠ 𝐟͠𝐨͠𝐫͠ 𝐲͠𝐨͠𝐮͠➺ sexy-nudegirls.host
Anna is a beautiful girl.
He's the person I love, he's my light
day. The way the music flows and sounds
is extravagant and fun. Anna is
icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration,
a star. I could go on and on, understand this.
I love NBA Anna.#垃圾
writing an idea in a fiction book is not the same as engineering an idea and getting it patented and conceptualized....with that logic you are under the impression that George Tucker invented the spaceship and space travel in the 1820s...
Lol exactly Elon is a complete scam