5 ms·

The ideas in this article are strongly reminiscent of those in Jeff Hawkins' "On Intelligence" (2004). The idea of the brain operating (at least in part) as a

The ideas in this article are strongly reminiscent of those in Jeff Hawkins' "On Intelligence" (2004). The idea of the brain operating (at least in part) as a "prediction machine" is certainly not a new one. I'm actually surprised it's taken this long for this sort of experimental confirmation and theory to become more mainstream.

cr4zy 5y ago
Prediction machines, yet critically, taking actions that pursue states which we are not quite able to predict. https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0896627315007679?token=2058D96CB1CC7E72C4A6EF354562FBA56845309F568B74E974B46BA4778BBB3CF36C659D67DEE1C2863B438CA7219108&originRegion=us-east-1&originCreation=20211117172428 https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0896627315007679?...
ethbr0 5y ago
It's been known in many communities, I think. There's been a number of articles on HN over the years on saccades / visual interpolation. See: https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/a-fighter-pilots-guide-to-surviving-on-the-roads/ https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/a-fighter-pilots-guide-to-s...
- carrolldunham 5y ago
  For thousands of years: >The mind has a basic habit, which is to create things. In fact, when the Buddha describes causality, how experiences come about, he says that the power of creation or sankhara—the mental tendency to put things together—actually comes prior to our sensory experience. It’s because the mind is active, actively putting things together, that it knows things. >The problem is that most of its actions, most of its creations, come out of ignorance, so the kind of knowledge that comes from those creations can be misleading. The second paragraph is getting off the topic - or is it?
SubiculumCode 5y ago
On any serious discussion of neuroscience, I'd advise to keep Jeff Hawkins out of it. Not only are the ideas he publishes often gross simplifications with little data to back it up (but does wonders as marketing), they were ideas pushed and developed by real working neuroscientists. Just my opinion.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- LesZedCB 5y ago
  isn't that pretty face value what Numenta's goal is though? They read research papers on neuroscience and try to distill it down to applicable engineering problems for their HTM and see what works. i can't speak much as to their original research efforts, but i personally appreciate the engineering-research side of what they are doing.
  - SubiculumCode 5y ago
    I personally don't mind what his company is doing, but I just don't think his views represent the understandings of my field all that well.
    - blueblimp 5y ago
      What resource would you recommend for getting an intro to those topics in neuroscience, that provides a better representation?
      - SubiculumCode 5y ago
        google scholar
jonmc12 5y ago
"Being You" by Anil Seth, released last month, is a great primer on predictive processing and its relationship to the science of consciousness. Its a great complement to Hawkins' latest. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08W2J9WWD https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08W2J9WWD
_0ffh 5y ago
>The idea of the brain operating (at least in part) as a "prediction machine" is certainly not a new one Yeah, you hit the nail on the head right there! The idea goes back at least as far as Hermann von Helmholtz (19th century).
Invictus0 5y ago
Thought of this as well. Have you read his newer book? I haven't decided if I should pick it up or not.
- KingFelix 5y ago
  It's alright, I didn't end up finishing it. I really like On Intelligence, wasn't pulled in to finish. Might have been state of mind at the time etc
- chalcolithic 5y ago
  Oh, he has a newer book! Thank you!
- metanonsense 5y ago
  I have read the book and I really liked the first half, which explains the "thousand brains theory of intelligence". Very inspiring and thought-provoking (at least to me as an interested amateur in this field). The second half, however, would better have been a book of its own. It's about Hawkins' ideas on AGI implications and whatnot, which is quite entertaining but devalues the first half, in a way.
Raphaellll 5y ago
It’s basically how large language models like GTP-3 work. They simply predict the next most probable word and suddenly you can prompt them to give you answers to rather intelligent tasks.

cr4zy 5y ago

Prediction machines, yet critically, taking actions that pursue states which we are not quite able to predict. https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0896627315007679?token=2058D96CB1CC7E72C4A6EF354562FBA56845309F568B74E974B46BA4778BBB3CF36C659D67DEE1C2863B438CA7219108&originRegion=us-east-1&originCreation=20211117172428 https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0896627315007679?...

ethbr0 5y ago

It's been known in many communities, I think. There's been a number of articles on HN over the years on saccades / visual interpolation. See: https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/a-fighter-pilots-guide-to-surviving-on-the-roads/ https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/a-fighter-pilots-guide-to-s...

carrolldunham 5y ago
For thousands of years: >The mind has a basic habit, which is to create things. In fact, when the Buddha describes causality, how experiences come about, he says that the power of creation or sankhara—the mental tendency to put things together—actually comes prior to our sensory experience. It’s because the mind is active, actively putting things together, that it knows things. >The problem is that most of its actions, most of its creations, come out of ignorance, so the kind of knowledge that comes from those creations can be misleading. The second paragraph is getting off the topic - or is it?

SubiculumCode 5y ago

On any serious discussion of neuroscience, I'd advise to keep Jeff Hawkins out of it. Not only are the ideas he publishes often gross simplifications with little data to back it up (but does wonders as marketing), they were ideas pushed and developed by real working neuroscientists. Just my opinion.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
LesZedCB 5y ago
isn't that pretty face value what Numenta's goal is though? They read research papers on neuroscience and try to distill it down to applicable engineering problems for their HTM and see what works. i can't speak much as to their original research efforts, but i personally appreciate the engineering-research side of what they are doing.
- SubiculumCode 5y ago
  I personally don't mind what his company is doing, but I just don't think his views represent the understandings of my field all that well.
  - blueblimp 5y ago
    What resource would you recommend for getting an intro to those topics in neuroscience, that provides a better representation?
    - SubiculumCode 5y ago
      google scholar

jonmc12 5y ago

"Being You" by Anil Seth, released last month, is a great primer on predictive processing and its relationship to the science of consciousness. Its a great complement to Hawkins' latest. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08W2J9WWD https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08W2J9WWD

_0ffh 5y ago

>The idea of the brain operating (at least in part) as a "prediction machine" is certainly not a new one Yeah, you hit the nail on the head right there! The idea goes back at least as far as Hermann von Helmholtz (19th century).

Invictus0 5y ago

Thought of this as well. Have you read his newer book? I haven't decided if I should pick it up or not.

KingFelix 5y ago
It's alright, I didn't end up finishing it. I really like On Intelligence, wasn't pulled in to finish. Might have been state of mind at the time etc
chalcolithic 5y ago
Oh, he has a newer book! Thank you!
metanonsense 5y ago
I have read the book and I really liked the first half, which explains the "thousand brains theory of intelligence". Very inspiring and thought-provoking (at least to me as an interested amateur in this field). The second half, however, would better have been a book of its own. It's about Hawkins' ideas on AGI implications and whatnot, which is quite entertaining but devalues the first half, in a way.

Raphaellll 5y ago

It’s basically how large language models like GTP-3 work. They simply predict the next most probable word and suddenly you can prompt them to give you answers to rather intelligent tasks.