The way that the findings of the research are presented is a little misleading in that they do not explain that there is a hierarchy of abstraction (semantic compression) in operation and raw sensory data rates are not the same as wise ponderings. The findings of the research do not fully capture the complexity of human thought, which operates on multiple levels of abstraction. While the raw sensory data processing rate might be limited, our cognitive processes build upon this foundation to create higher-level representations and engage in deeper reasoning. The research primarily focuses on the speed of basic information transmission within the brain, which is indeed quite slow compared to other systems. However, it doesn't address the hierarchical nature of cognitive processing, where information is progressively abstracted and integrated to form complex concepts and ideas. This higher-level processing is what allows us to engage in complex reasoning, problem-solving, and decision-making, which goes far beyond simply processing raw sensory data. The authors of the research acknowledge this limitation in their work, stating that their findings do not fully explain the full range of human cognitive abilities. They emphasize that future research is needed to explore the mechanisms underlying higher-level cognitive functions and their relationship to the underlying neural architecture. It's important to note that the research is still ongoing, and our understanding of human cognition is constantly evolving. As we learn more about the brain and its workings, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the full range of human cognitive abilities, including the role of hierarchy and abstraction in shaping our thoughts and actions.
In other words the more you are obsessed with emotions, memories and other things that make complexity there are more and more layers one's thoughts that are not in the brain are neccesary to break form the mind to the brain signals to be "caught" by expensive equipment which is used only for something third person can understand, but is not something that is really going on in the first person
@@tomazflegar Discreet thoughts are an illusion, they do not exist as "things". There is only the continuous flow of consciousness, the dynamic patterns of attention and action.
10 bits per second is a joke and is absolutely wrong. There may be some outputs that appear slow because they require a huge amount of processing by other parts of the brain before they can be finalized, but 10 bits is ridiculous! Quit spewing this nonsense.
The "unbearable slowness of being" reference to Milan Kundera's The Unbearable Lightness of Being where Sabina "knew nothing more magnificent than going off into the unknown" and considering slowness as a burden "The heavier the burden, the closer our lives come to earth, the more real and truthful they become"...Is this our truth? We are destined to be slow and not connect to the "light" speed of the internet? Fascinating, I feel like Sabina wandering into the unknown and marveling at the neurotransmitter speed and how researchers came to measure this and the diversity in cognition for information processing where some people think education is banking and putting directly into the head and other believe in physical experiences that open the individual to purposefully explore and find connections less forceful than feeling a dumping ground for information. The individual becomes the origin "of" information that fits as well as participant in pushing their potential. Thanks. Interesting to reframe feeling slow or at times wanting a quicker pace for processing and removing information!
It's difficult to seriously comment on such research that's done by scientists who have a brain speed of 10 bits per second with my brain speed of 10 bits per second. Let A I. be the judge of this.
It is obvious. To make a decision you need high quality information, if you think it is easy... mmm... Also, cells are goin specialization to reduce the numbers of alternatives (mastering an area of knowledge) so you cannot do two things at the same time but, once, mastered a topic, you use almost nothing of conscious thinking. That releases great parts of energy and neuron resources for a new scenario.
You only considering the conscious thought and even varies based on how you arrange your thoughts and how much you know about it , most of the thinking are all subconscious and it isn’t something you can easily measure nor have we ever measured, an sure you have head of the idea that how brain as already decided before we become aware of it , the conscious is just there to hold it back so we don’t act recklessly
What about the person that was forced to be the target for brain/behavior studies and cued with non-verbals non-stop while the gangstalkers refuse to explain their circus?
no just no. most of our brain is keeping our body working and balanced, and that is much more efficient because its not generalized. we dont need to think about what that sensation is when we scratching our head, we know its our arm moving, whereas cleaning up takes a bit more conscious effort, and drafting a blueprint of a bridge takes a bit more. its dimensionality - there are only so many types of information our arm can send to our brain (movement, direction, touch/pressure, temp, strain, pain), so they can be communicated with tiny packets of information, whereas thinking of a name for a dog draws on significantly more experience (like the celebrity he resembles when he begs) that cant be reduced to 9 parameters. simple input output functions can be stored on microprocessors that keep drones level in the air, whereas the electricity used to generate a single LLM response is like 9 minutes of DJI flight time. its kinda exactly the same difference - we need 2/3 of our brain to operate the myraid systems in our body, but we need to think about breathing, digesting, or self regulation. thats like comparing the PC needed to run a web browser with the hardware needed to run the rest of the operating system that allows the user to use the web browser.
Uh, no. This is wrong. I love Neuroscience news but this false. You cannot equate "bits per second" to thinking speed since we dont use bits. 10 bits per second? You realize that in an old time, computers - the characters on the screen - just letter "A," for example, was 8 bits (ascii characters). So if there was no overhead just to display the letter A (and there is), at 8 bits per second that would be approx 5 letters in 4 seconds. Can you read faster than that and at the same time drink a cup of coffee, keep your heart beating and manage to breath? How fast can you think "Hello, I'd like order a donut" did that take 20 seconds? If someone says to you "hey, your pants are on fire and you're standing in gasoline" - do you pause for 12 seconds to understand what they meant? Sorry , but this is silly.
Just an assumption on everyone part. Just repeating and reciting previous things about thoughts and memories. It’s all what you want to project. Never heard a neuroscientist saying you can separate thoughts and actually look at it. How would that even be possible?
Nope...not exactly correct. I do have a medical and information systems background. Please understand, you are talking about the self-aware part of the brain having a 10 bit processing ( this is correct) The subconscious and unconscious part of the brain can procces at much higher data transfer rates. Also much of the processing could be done on the actual CPU. Example: we already have apps that can do math by simply taking a photograph. To emulate this in the brain, visual data could be read off the visual data data being sent to the occipital lobe of the brain. This visual data would be processed by the CPU imbedded in the brain. Once the CPU has solved the math problem it's displays the answer and step required to solve the problems on your occipital lobe. In fact the could all be done on a intelligent pair of glasses now. Best Wishes
Slow? As compared to what? AI? C'mon..... I'm sure Leon Muks has something planned for you - provided you can afford it. But guaranteed his solution will not include any ethics or compassion components.
The way that the findings of the research are presented is a little misleading in that they do not explain that there is a hierarchy of abstraction (semantic compression) in operation and raw sensory data rates are not the same as wise ponderings.
The findings of the research do not fully capture the complexity of human thought, which operates on multiple levels of abstraction. While the raw sensory data processing rate might be limited, our cognitive processes build upon this foundation to create higher-level representations and engage in deeper reasoning.
The research primarily focuses on the speed of basic information transmission within the brain, which is indeed quite slow compared to other systems. However, it doesn't address the hierarchical nature of cognitive processing, where information is progressively abstracted and integrated to form complex concepts and ideas. This higher-level processing is what allows us to engage in complex reasoning, problem-solving, and decision-making, which goes far beyond simply processing raw sensory data.
The authors of the research acknowledge this limitation in their work, stating that their findings do not fully explain the full range of human cognitive abilities. They emphasize that future research is needed to explore the mechanisms underlying higher-level cognitive functions and their relationship to the underlying neural architecture.
It's important to note that the research is still ongoing, and our understanding of human cognition is constantly evolving. As we learn more about the brain and its workings, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the full range of human cognitive abilities, including the role of hierarchy and abstraction in shaping our thoughts and actions.
@@DanielSMatthews 100%
In other words the more you are obsessed with emotions, memories and other things that make complexity there are more and more layers one's thoughts that are not in the brain are neccesary to break form the mind to the brain signals to be "caught" by expensive equipment which is used only for something third person can understand, but is not something that is really going on in the first person
@@tomazflegar No it is just how neural networks function and key to how associative memory works, compression is abstraction.
@DanielSMatthews and thoughts are not just neural networks. They are experienced in first person. Neural biology is just body physiology.
@@tomazflegar Discreet thoughts are an illusion, they do not exist as "things". There is only the continuous flow of consciousness, the dynamic patterns of attention and action.
10 bits per second is a joke and is absolutely wrong. There may be some outputs that appear slow because they require a huge amount of processing by other parts of the brain before they can be finalized, but 10 bits is ridiculous! Quit spewing this nonsense.
Thinking Fast and Slow. Sounds familiar.
This guy gets it
Super 🏆. Eu alcancei uma capacidade de saber quando estou sonhando ou não.
I’m curious why you interchangeably use thinking versus thoughts since they are totally separate things.
Present v past tense, I think.
I’m operating at around 2 bits per second. It takes me 10 minutes to make 2 minute noodles.
That sounds like most of us post Christmas :)
pour traiter l'information il faut des informations ! c'est peut être ça qui prend du temps !
The "unbearable slowness of being" reference to Milan Kundera's The Unbearable Lightness of Being where Sabina "knew nothing more magnificent than going off into the unknown" and considering slowness as a burden "The heavier the burden, the closer our lives come to earth, the more real and truthful they become"...Is this our truth? We are destined to be slow and not connect to the "light" speed of the internet? Fascinating, I feel like Sabina wandering into the unknown and marveling at the neurotransmitter speed and how researchers came to measure this and the diversity in cognition for information processing where some people think education is banking and putting directly into the head and other believe in physical experiences that open the individual to purposefully explore and find connections less forceful than feeling a dumping ground for information. The individual becomes the origin "of" information that fits as well as participant in pushing their potential. Thanks. Interesting to reframe feeling slow or at times wanting a quicker pace for processing and removing information!
It's difficult to seriously comment on such research that's done by scientists who have a brain speed of 10 bits per second with my brain speed of 10 bits per second. Let A I. be the judge of this.
Muy interesante. Gracias.
It is obvious. To make a decision you need high quality information, if you think it is easy... mmm...
Also, cells are goin specialization to reduce the numbers of alternatives (mastering an area of knowledge) so you cannot do two things at the same time but, once, mastered a topic, you use almost nothing of conscious thinking. That releases great parts of energy and neuron resources for a new scenario.
And yet intuition is instantaneous
You only considering the conscious thought and even varies based on how you arrange your thoughts and how much you know about it , most of the thinking are all subconscious and it isn’t something you can easily measure nor have we ever measured, an sure you have head of the idea that how brain as already decided before we become aware of it , the conscious is just there to hold it back so we don’t act recklessly
That's an interesting observation, and we do know that the conscious part is a tiny fraction of our brain's activity.
What about the person that was forced to be the target for brain/behavior studies and cued with non-verbals non-stop while the gangstalkers refuse to explain their circus?
Yes, humans are very slow in catching up with, The Eternal Now Speed of Thinking.
no just no. most of our brain is keeping our body working and balanced, and that is much more efficient because its not generalized. we dont need to think about what that sensation is when we scratching our head, we know its our arm moving, whereas cleaning up takes a bit more conscious effort, and drafting a blueprint of a bridge takes a bit more. its dimensionality - there are only so many types of information our arm can send to our brain (movement, direction, touch/pressure, temp, strain, pain), so they can be communicated with tiny packets of information, whereas thinking of a name for a dog draws on significantly more experience (like the celebrity he resembles when he begs) that cant be reduced to 9 parameters. simple input output functions can be stored on microprocessors that keep drones level in the air, whereas the electricity used to generate a single LLM response is like 9 minutes of DJI flight time. its kinda exactly the same difference - we need 2/3 of our brain to operate the myraid systems in our body, but we need to think about breathing, digesting, or self regulation. thats like comparing the PC needed to run a web browser with the hardware needed to run the rest of the operating system that allows the user to use the web browser.
Cant it be sped up? Theoretically with nanobots
That's an interesting idea. I'd love to see some research focusing on that.
This study will be proven wrong. Nothing to see here.
The unbearable slowness of being...... Sounds like how AGI might one day feel about humans.
Agreed.
It also sounds like an indie movie title.
Uh, no. This is wrong. I love Neuroscience news but this false. You cannot equate "bits per second" to thinking speed since we dont use bits. 10 bits per second? You realize that in an old time, computers - the characters on the screen - just letter "A," for example, was 8 bits (ascii characters). So if there was no overhead just to display the letter A (and there is), at 8 bits per second that would be approx 5 letters in 4 seconds. Can you read faster than that and at the same time drink a cup of coffee, keep your heart beating and manage to breath? How fast can you think "Hello, I'd like order a donut" did that take 20 seconds? If someone says to you "hey, your pants are on fire and you're standing in gasoline" - do you pause for 12 seconds to understand what they meant?
Sorry , but this is silly.
Just an assumption on everyone part. Just repeating and reciting previous things about thoughts and memories. It’s all what you want to project. Never heard a neuroscientist saying you can separate thoughts and actually look at it. How would that even be possible?
Nope...not exactly correct. I do have a medical and information systems background. Please understand, you are talking about the self-aware part of the brain having a 10 bit processing ( this is correct) The subconscious and
unconscious part of the brain can procces at much higher data transfer rates. Also much of the processing could be done on the actual CPU.
Example: we already have apps that can do math by simply taking a photograph. To emulate this in the brain, visual data could be read off the visual data data being sent to the occipital lobe of the brain. This visual data would be processed by the CPU imbedded in the brain. Once the CPU has solved the math problem it's displays the answer and step required to solve the problems on your occipital lobe. In fact the could all be done on a intelligent pair of glasses now. Best Wishes
C-graders are faster. They have only one way and no alternatives.
Sometimes réseau researchers are so stupid 😅....just try the reverse question to understand nah?
Slow? As compared to what? AI? C'mon..... I'm sure Leon Muks has something planned for you - provided you can afford it. But guaranteed his solution will not include any ethics or compassion components.
Read more about this research here: neurosciencenews.com/brain-thinking-sensory-speed-28292/
According to Elon its faster
Really? Maybe if Elon were a researcher, he could prove his hypothesis, but he's not.