Rob said:
The IC point for this is that the original human creators of the neko didn't want a race that much cleverer than them - disabling failsafes built into a sentient war machine is a simple matter if you ARE that war machine and you're millions of times cleverer than the people that put it there. You'll notice that even now, Neko rule the Yamataian empire.
OOCly... Can YOU roleplay something millions of times smarter than you? Would you WANT to?
I thought not.
See above argument, which seems to, incidentally, render this argument invalid. Nekovalkyrja and other SARP races don't seem to have even a tiny portion of their theoretical potential intelligence given SARP technology, for whatever reason.
See above argument.
Pardon? I think I'm lost now...Weren't you just arguing that SARP
should have said technology because it's possible to do other insanely advanced things (quantum weapons, life synthesis, etc)? I countered by the pointing out that cognotech would be ridiculously advanced if it was proportionate to other SARP technologies, and implied it must have been held back for non-technical reasons like OOC roleplay issues. But...how does elaborating on this fact render that argument invalid? Aren't you just enforcing my side of the discussion since you're pointing out that Yamatai hates advanced neurotech (and thus would likely suppress NovaCorp's attempts to develop it)? If they won't even use such advanced tech themselves, there's no way they'd let another faction, even an ally, have it.
______
How I'm currently understanding things...
Rob: "Weapons and metagenics are very advanced, so logically cognotech must be very advanced too."
Leutre: "That is a logical fallacy. If cognotech was as advanced as other scientific fields, everyone would already be several times smarter than they are in SARP. Technologically it's possible for cognotech to be much more advanced than it currently is, so there must be some other reason hampering it's development."
Rob: "XX and YY are the reasons cognotech development is hampered. Thus your argument is invalid."
Leutre: "Huh?"
Was there some miscommunication somewhere, or is this another logical fallacy?
______
A system that, as stated, DOES NOT COMPREHEND BUT SIMPLY STORES BRAIN PATTERNS ON A REGULAR BASIS (and read that several times so you get the idea) DOES NOT REQUIRE A WHOLE LOT OF PROCESSING POWER.
...
This is a MEMORY REDUNDANCY system. Will not restate self AGAIN.
It is not "simply storing brain patterns on a regular basis." At least a third of the article (the latest one, Zakalwe approved), is about non-memory functions. It mentions the ability to simulate the brain in order to perform the extremely detailed data scans for its security system. It mentions optimization; the (re)wiring of synapses in order to improve speed and functionality. It also mentions learning enhancement, by disrupting "wrong" synaptic connections.
Since the brain is a non-linear system, there is no set pattern for memory to follow at all, since each mind is unique (that is why you get the insane, the delusional, the suicidal, etc) a dumb implant is impossible; it would have to have the intelligence and learning ability far beyond that of your average psychologist order to understand the psychodynamics that drive each user's behavior. Furthermore the mind is in a constant state of flux, thus increasing the complexity of the matter to an entirely new level of difficulty. The fact such a system analyzes and calculates neural activity at
faster than the speed of thought (based on the fact it improves thought time instead of reducing it) suggest a comprehension and processing ability exponentially more powerful and faster than any humanoid mind.
In a system that is a nanoscopic latice layered through a brain, and taking into account MODERN DAY imaging technology, this would not only be a simple task but a very quick one also. It might now catch -everything- in a passive state, but when activated to record a memory by the user, it would certainly act to be able to record and induce the same electrical patterns in the brain at a later date.
You can't really store "brain patterns" in the traditional sense, since thought is a combination of electrical, chemical, and neuromuscular synapses, coupled with the state, place, and composition of neuron cells. Yes,
cells themselves; electric charges themselves are little more than electricity. This would require a flawless 3D compositional scanner (i.e., essentially a perfect nanoscale matter-to-information replicator) needed to record and interpret what each of these cells signifies, and how they effect others.
Even if you could memories in such a way they would be outside the mind, so to speak. There would be no synaptic connections in order to connect them to other parts of the brain. Kind of redundant to have memories you can't recall, doesn't it? Thus a Sophia would have to grow huge quantities of artificial synapses to connect these memory files (fake neurons) to the rest of the brain. Each neuron cell has up to tens of thousands of connections to other cells, so a system that could record a lifetime of memories perfectly (and therefore simulate huge number of neurons needed) would require monstrous quantities of synapses. Even with nano-scale engineering, all these synapses would add up and result in a serious intrusion of the brain, possibly causing damage directly or indirectly by obstructing blood flow or decreasing space (and increasing cranial pressure).
P.S. -- Modern day imaging technology is not anywhere near the ability to read the mind. CATs and MRIs can usually detect the state of brain
mass such as bleeding or swelling, but little else. Other types can show activity via alternative methods such as measuring blood flow, oxygen flow, but are extremely low resolution (often hundreds or thousands of times worse than a neuron cell's size) and can only be used to point out which regions of the brain are "on," like the sound recognition or emotional memory centers. This is far from the precision needed to record individual electric, chemical, and neuromuscular activity.
P.P.S. -- Regardless of any personal issues, I hope you will endeavor to keep this as civil as possible. The internet already has plenty of cesspools for cap locks and mudslinging...but the SARP technology submissions forum isn't one of those places.