>ME:
>Moravec assumed 10 bits per synapse, also quite reasonable at the
>time but we now know that's way too high.
>Lee Daniel Crocker <lcrocker@calweb.com>:
>What mean "we", kemo sabe? At the present state of neuroscience, I
>wouldn't be comfortable pinning that down even to within 3-4 orders
>of magnitude.
By "we" I mean those who have read the article by Dan Madison and Erin
Schuman In the January 28 1994 issue of Science, as I've been urging all to
do for the last several years. I've talked about it about 19 dozen times so I
won't do so do it again.
>In fact, I'm not sure I'd even be comfortable quantizing at /any/
>level what is surely an analog process.
Analog processes do not exist, never have never will.
John K Clark johnkc@well.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
iQCzAgUBMy8LJn03wfSpid95AQH3egTwpZxn0eTRM4vq5RZtZHKWj32mZJjslwnm
81Tc4OleZ5rzkxxaKdsr8JuztFK+ELJdmI0tkW3Jz95tKk9Z5x/oC+vWsd5fr2a5
x/WVwsVMQG5nAgo1KRi3WckK8djYzR+CO6w31dtUXQYZJTQIhiX6cDBEaWFuru/t
v5VZ5PT//lfOwnwu9+agx177GEDO0uQtnj76hKXWJdHvPvPT/3M=
=JEuZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----