Additionally, at what point does such a combination cease to be more like a human mind-computer interface and instead require re-classification as a neuromorphic or otherwise novel entity?
A human WBE could have a very high-speed link, either with conventional computers running algorithms which the WBE triggers regularly, or with other WBEs.
If these links were sufficiently fast and robust, then we would do best to analyze the cognitive capacity of the system of the WBE and the links taken together, rather than thinking of them as separate units.
At a certain point, linking a WBE to many other software tools creates an enhanced system which is very different from a human mind. Whether we call the combined system neuromorphic or just highly enhanced is a question of definitions. However, the combined system could develop to the point where it is very different than an ordinary person or team of people who can call on a powerful computer to calculate a result.
Even without extending the definition of neuromorphic, a WBE with a high-speed link to algorithms is clearly neuromorphic once significant portions of the neural simulation components are altered or removed.
If we are able to conclude that alteration or removal of part of the WBE would be desirable for the purposes of the emulation’s controllers, then we should conclude that WBE technology in a sense flows into neuromorphic technology, and is not separate from it in a fundamental way.
Today, people are able to input data into calculating machines through speech and gestures, including drawing and typing.
Additionally, machines can gather biomarker data produced by the person.
We can also issue a simple command to transmit a large block of previously prepared data.
These input mechanisms have certain potential disadvantages:
-They are somewhat inaccurate
-They are slow. (Although triggering a larger file transmission makes up for the speed deficit, under many circumstances.)
We can receive more information through sensory input than we can transmit out.
Additionally, at what point does such a combination cease to be more like a human mind-computer interface and instead require re-classification as a neuromorphic or otherwise novel entity?
A human WBE could have a very high-speed link, either with conventional computers running algorithms which the WBE triggers regularly, or with other WBEs.
If these links were sufficiently fast and robust, then we would do best to analyze the cognitive capacity of the system of the WBE and the links taken together, rather than thinking of them as separate units.
At a certain point, linking a WBE to many other software tools creates an enhanced system which is very different from a human mind. Whether we call the combined system neuromorphic or just highly enhanced is a question of definitions. However, the combined system could develop to the point where it is very different than an ordinary person or team of people who can call on a powerful computer to calculate a result.
Even without extending the definition of neuromorphic, a WBE with a high-speed link to algorithms is clearly neuromorphic once significant portions of the neural simulation components are altered or removed.
If we are able to conclude that alteration or removal of part of the WBE would be desirable for the purposes of the emulation’s controllers, then we should conclude that WBE technology in a sense flows into neuromorphic technology, and is not separate from it in a fundamental way.
Today, people are able to input data into calculating machines through speech and gestures, including drawing and typing.
Additionally, machines can gather biomarker data produced by the person. We can also issue a simple command to transmit a large block of previously prepared data.
These input mechanisms have certain potential disadvantages:
-They are somewhat inaccurate -They are slow. (Although triggering a larger file transmission makes up for the speed deficit, under many circumstances.)
We can receive more information through sensory input than we can transmit out.