Will the Internet, which has absorbed the computing power of the computers of millions of users around the world, be as efficient as the human brain? Unfortunately not, according to the British newspaper The Guardian. Even if we can relatively accurately calculate the performance of such a "single" computer, an attempt to compare it with the performance of the brain is certainly doomed to failure, since the brain performs a great many actions at the same time.

In fact, humanity has long had such a "single" computer. According to one of the founders of Wired magazine, Kevin Kelly, millions of Internet-connected PCs, mobile phones, PDA and other digital devices can be considered as components of a single computer. His CPU- these are all processors of all connected devices, its HDD - hard drives and flash drives around the world, and RAM- the total memory of all computers. Every second, this computer processes a volume of data equal to all the information contained in the Library of Congress, and its operating system is the World Wide Web.

Instead of synapses of nerve cells, it uses functionally similar hyperlinks. Both are responsible for creating associations between anchor points. Each unit of measurement of the thought process, for example an idea, grows as more and more connections arise with other thoughts. Also on the net: large quantity links to a certain resource (node ​​point) mean its great importance for the Computer as a whole. Moreover, the number of hyperlinks in the World Wide Web is very close to the number of synapses in the human brain. According to Kelly's estimates, by 2040 the general planetary computer will have computing power commensurate with the collective brain power of all 7 billion people who by that time will inhabit the Earth.

And what about the human brain itself? A long-obsolete biological mechanism. Our gray matter works at the speed of the very first Pentium processor, sample 1993. In other words, our brain operates at 70 MHz. In addition, our brains operate on an analog basis, so that comparison with a digital method of data processing is out of the question. This is the main difference between synapses and hyperlinks: synapses, reacting to their environment and incoming information, skillfully change the organism, which never has two identical states. The hyperlink, on the other hand, is always the same, otherwise problems begin.

Nevertheless, we must admit that our brain is significantly superior in efficiency to any artificial system created by humans. In a completely mysterious way, all the gigantic computing power of the brain fits into our cranium, weighs a little over a kilogram, and at the same time requires only 20 watts of energy to function. Compare these figures with those 377 billion watts, which, according to approximate calculations, are consumed by a single computer. This, by the way, is as much as 5% of the world's total electricity production.

The mere fact of such a monstrous power consumption will never allow the Unified Computer to even come close to comparing with the human brain in terms of efficiency. Even in 2040, when computing power of computers becomes sky-high, their power consumption will continue to grow.

AI advocates admire supercomputers that are "smarter" than humans. For example, in 1997, the Deep Blue computer beat the world chess champion Garry Kasparov. However, don't jump to conclusions. Man learns much faster than a computer... Even a six-year-old child, after a short study, receives better knowledge and understanding of the game of chess than the most advanced supercomputer. What makes a person so effective? Let's take a look at the principles behind brain activity.

1. Lack of a single governing body. In a gigantic, complex network of neurons, there is no central control room where all decisions would be made. Moreover, the way the network works is not so much logical as associative.

1. Plastic. Nerve cells remain unchanged throughout life, but the connections between them are constantly changing, and the networks themselves are rearranging. To store new information or skill, we don't need new neurons - we just need to create new connections.

1. Reliability. A person can lose many cells (due to injury or with age), but this will not damage the system as a whole. The point is that the brain is constantly programming and reprogramming itself, creating new connections and rebuilding old ones.

1. One task at a time. We can qualitatively think about only one thought at a time. When there are many thoughts, they "wander" in the head, mix; such "thinking" will not help to effectively solve any problem.

1. The brain either receives information or processes it. A person either receives information from the senses and responds instantly with the help of reflexes, or processes the data and puts them in long-term memory. In other words, the reflex and archiving brains compete for the amount of random access memory; they cannot each turn on at full power at the same time.

1. The brain is the ability to think, even about things that do not exist(for example, about the past and about the future). He is slow, needs concentration, processes information sequentially, thinking one thought at a time, gets tired easily. He is lazy - if you do not make a conscious effort, he will not turn on, leaving decision-making to the reflex brain (which is often wrong).

And here is what Garry Kasparov replied to his loss to the computer:

« Artificial intelligence advocates hoped to see a computer that thinks and plays chess like a human, with human creativity and intuition. However, they saw only a machine capable of calculating 200 million possible moves per second and winning only thanks to "brute force", that is, the ability to grind huge amounts of numerical data».

The first computer was created in 1942. Then no one expected that in 75 years computers will become an integral part of almost every home, and their computing power will be tens of thousands of times higher. Because of this, many fear that over time, cars will displace people. Is it so? Let's discuss the topic - the computer and the person: who is stronger and where this will all lead.

The computer and the human brain

When the brain and the computer are opposed, computational capabilities, the ability to multitask and analyze are compared. This is what is implied in the question of who is stronger.

The first machines could hardly compare with the modern calculator, and complex calculations were out of the question. Gradually, the "hardware" improved and they started talking about the fact that the computer will soon beat a person in chess.

Without a smile, this assumption was rarely met. The maximum that a machine of that time could have was to beat a beginner who does not calculate further than one move.

However, since 1997, computers have had no equal in combinatorics. IBM's Deep Blue program, which calculated up to 200 million positions per second, beat Garry Kasparov with a score of 2 wins, 3 draws and 1 loss.

Also, the computer is invincible in scrabble (word game), checkers, reverse, backgammon. A machine can collect a Rubik's cube faster than a human, spending no more than 20 moves and 1.047 seconds on it. For comparison, the best human result is 4.904 seconds.

Does the computer mean superior to the human brain? No. It is still far from its capabilities, but the gap is gradually decreasing. So in the course of the study, scientists from the National University of Athens concluded.

They were able to measure the computational power of the brain using magnetic resonance imaging. The purpose of the experiment was to quantify the number of individual brain processes while performing simple tasks.

The subjects were shown a green or red cube on the screen. When the first appeared, it was necessary to point at it with the finger of the left hand, and on the second, with the right. It turned out that when performing this action in the brain, fifty parts of the brain that are responsible for individual tasks were simultaneously actively working.

Interestingly, in the next test, people were asked to recognize the displayed items and rank them in a specific category. The experiment showed less brain activity than the previous one. Fifty individual tasks is far from the maximum result, but it far exceeds the capabilities of modern computers.

Therefore, we can say with confidence: the potential of the human brain is much higher than that of a computer. At least for now.

Computer and man: who serves whom

Even though we are still smarter, the fact remains: over time, machines will surpass humans in all spheres of activity. This applies not only to monotonous operations, but also to creativity, art, logic.

In a hundred years, and maybe even earlier, computers will be able to do any job, and much faster and better. And with development neural networks programs will take bread even from their creators - programmers. It turns out that the computer will be able to create its own kind.

This raises a reasonable question: what will be left to people? Hiring employees will become meaningless, because the machine will do everything better and faster. She does not sleep, does not eat, does not get tired, does not complain about the low salary.

Humanity can only desire. Whatever we want, computers will do it. So the machines serve the creator? Yes, but only under ideal circumstances. In practice, it may turn out differently.

In the household sphere, it is already clear that tablets and smartphones practically do not help people to solve problems in any way. They are mainly used for entertainment and leisure, which does not teach anything new. What is the development in this? Only zombie and degradation.

On the example of production, there is also a tendency to turn a person into an appendage of a computer. Machines by themselves do not create the added value that every enterprise strives for. Therefore, employers are forced to hire people. but computer systems increase the pace of work, and the person must adapt to it. In essence, this is enslavement.

Will there be a machine uprising? The film "Terminator" at the time of its release was perceived as a purely fantastic film. However, due to rapid development IT-technologies today consider this picture to be almost prophetic. Are there any grounds for such fears?

No. This will not happen, since the desire for power is a purely instinctive manifestation, inherent only in living organisms. In making decisions, the machine is guided by logic and a given algorithm, which in no way will lead it to the idea of ​​exterminating humanity, because it is meaningless.

The only "instinct" of a computer is to solve problems given by humans. A robot will never harm a person if you do not lay in it the necessary program... But even in this case, it is not the car that kills, but the one who ordered her to do it. Agree: the gun does not pull the trigger on its own.

Is there a danger of complete victory? Imagine that we put computers at the service of humanity and completely get rid of the need to work.

"What's bad about it?" - you ask. This poses a threat to civilization. Gradually people will degenerate. The machines, as before, will support us, but the degradation will intensify with each generation.

If you do not need to work, then there is no need to learn something new and develop. What's the point, because the machine makes everything more efficient. It turns out that our complete victory is our defeat.

How to be? There are two ways of solving - to stop progress, which will lead to the same result, or to become a single whole with computers. It sounds fantastic and intimidating, but this is the only way out.

It is worth noting that this does not mean at all that the person will look like the characters in the movie "Lucy". Modifications can be both stationary and remote.

In theory, we can implant transmitters and receivers of signals into the human brain, which will be processed on super-powerful servers. Thus, people will be able to communicate without making a sound, download any information directly into their minds.

No one will be smarter or more stupid - the computer levels everyone. Development will go by leaps and bounds and is unlikely to ever stop. Such a system will allow several simultaneously controlled bodies in the form of robots or androids to be connected to the brain.

Yes, most likely, such a prospect scares many, but let's look at one example. Today we talk on the phone, watch TV and videos, read books. But, what if we remove intermediaries: smartphones, monitors, various storage media - and we receive and transmit data directly, including visual images? What will change? Will we stop being human from this?

Everything is relative. For ancient people, we are superbeings that fly like birds and have access to almost any known information. The same fear arises in us when thinking about the future development of mankind.

On the this moment a computer is not stronger than a person, but it will certainly become one. However, this is not important, the main thing is how to react to it. Slow down progress or put smart cars at the service? Or maybe a computer is a part of a future person?

These are difficult questions, as they affect many aspects of life: philosophy, religion, morality. So far, these are only fantasies, but, who knows, flying was also once an impossible dream. Do you think a person with a mechanized prosthesis is a cyborg?

The twenty-first century is the age of information technology. Five-year-olds are already playing developmental games with might and main. Who would have thought that children will think an order of magnitude higher than their parents with regards to the computer, but this is so. Computer in life modern man is an integral part of it. If you think about how unique this invention is, then you involuntarily begin to understand how unique the person himself is, since he invented it and uses it in almost everything. Progress in information technology like a rhino - it accelerated slowly, and now it is almost impossible to stop it. Component manufacturers are forced to create better products in a competitive environment. In this article, I want to make a comparison between humans and computers, what is in common between us and the electronic creations of the human mind.

Once again, going out into the street, I imagined myself as a part of a big city. Remembered interesting conversation with a stranger on the train, where he so often mentioned to me that I am part of the system, and all my movements for the most part fit into the framework of generally accepted rules and norms. I am like the very electron that, in an organized column of self-like people, moves in a given direction along the wires. It is somewhat unpleasant to feel predictable and dependent, surrendering to the free flow of life, relying only on desires and instincts. But we are different from machines in that we can act consciously.

The human brain - the most powerful computer, which also, receiving nutrition, solves a certain kind of problem. Take vision, for example. There is no such clear video in the world, how clear and soft reality flows into our eyes. There is no camera that can process the same number of pixels as the human brain. Have you seen a two hundred and sixty megapixel camcorder on sale ?! ... but you look into it every day. The pupil, through small muscles, narrows and expands in order to focus the image, it all depends on where we intend to look, how close or how far. The lens performs the same operation when shooting with a photo or video camera. The image is perceived by a microscopic matrix, like the retina of the eye. The camcorder's processor processes each pixel and stacks the bits in a specific order, which is set by the recording and playback software. At the same time, on the display we see a reflection of the reality that this camera is able to see and reproduce. There are many different models, they all differ in recording quality, color depth and so on, but if you compare them with our vision, you understand how limited they are. Limited by the shooting resolution, the foresight of the zoom, the number of recording tints, and much more. For example, there are standards for the number of shades in an image, from black and white to multimillion. Whatever this image is, the reality is viewed by us much softer and the brain does not have to finish drawing the missing pieces of the puzzle into the overall picture. Hence, tired eyes, and headaches with prolonged contact with the monitor.

Sound. Having a bunch of different parameters, it refers to the vibrations of molecules in different environments... Today it has been studied in all its glory. Music, radio broadcasts, cellular- are based, one way or another, on the same vibrations of molecules. Frequency is one of the main characteristics of sound. A person is able to perceive sounds with a frequency of 20 to 20,000 hertz (the number of vibrations per second), but at the same time, he does not feel comfortable if he hears a song from the speaker with a sampling rate of even 22,050 hertz. This suggests that in reality - the human ear is much more subtle than physics tells about it. Sound file, recorded in any format, with any frequency, any bit rate, is a limited part of the real sound. It is like looking out a small window without seeing the rest of the world; how to breathe through a gas mask without smelling; how to touch something through gloves, almost without touching the object ...

The computer as a whole consists of various electrical assemblies. Power - The power supply converts electricity into a form that is convenient for the system to perceive. In humans, it is oxygen and other chemical elements obtained by gas exchange in the lungs and by digestion processes in the digestive system. Random access memory stores current information, works as long as voltage is applied to it, has an extremely limited amount, relative to physical memory. A person solves current small tasks, which he instantly forgets, this is stored in memory for a very short period of time, this is temporary (fast) memory. Physical memory on a computer in the form hard disk or flash memory has a considerable amount. At the same time, the use of more ergonomic formats saves space. A person has the same physical memory, only information is stored as a result of a chemical reaction and still looks more like flash memory. After all, if the charge on the flash drive completely dries up, the information on it will be lost, and in our case, if we do not give any information recharge, periodically not remembering it, it is simply erased. The processor on the computer is responsible for the math; it is constantly calculating. The information to it is adjusted by the operative memory and the results are also taken by it, like a secretary. People differ in intelligence quotient (IQ), which can be compared to the frequency of a processor on a computer.

Thus, modern computers are far from perfect, but we use their capabilities almost one hundred percent. The human brain is perfect and we hardly use it. A new generation is born and grows in a new information field, it develops much faster. Maybe someday we will come to the conclusion that one word will replace the book.

We love to fantasize and childishly naively want to believe that the mind, created artificially, will become for us not just an assistant in everyday affairs, but a friend, companion and equal partner. We dream that the artificial intelligence will be able to communicate, create, write songs, develop independently, fall in love and joke.

Video: an excerpt from the film "Bicentennial Man" based on the story of Isaac Asimov

But let's be realistic: on currently what we call artificial intelligence are computer programs designed to simulate the processes of human thought. Actually, this is the name of the science that studies the problems of recreating intelligent actions and reasoning using artificial devices and computing systems. The problem is that we do not understand all the mechanisms of human intelligence, therefore, we cannot create an identical human mind. Moreover, it seems that we do not really strive to understand at least something about our mind. Until now, there are disputes in science: how real is consciousness. It is in the study of our mind (with the help of our own mind) that science reaches a dead end. Science, as a field of activity striving for objectivity, does not know from which side to approach the subjective phenomenon of human consciousness (subjective in the sense that it consists of subjective sensations, feelings and perception).

Basic questions about consciousness:
What place does a person think?
How does he think about this place?

This problem has been dealt with since the 80s of the last century John Searle, the famous American philosopher, professor at the University of California, a leading world specialist in the philosophy of artificial intelligence. He is also a man with an indescribable sense of humor. Spend 15 pleasant minutes with John Searle and his mind:

It was Searle who raised the issue of the so-called "strong and weak artificial intelligence."

Weak artificial intelligence are computer programs that are expected to solve a narrow range of predetermined problems.

Strong artificial intelligence- these are programs that will be able to think, make decisions, be aware of themselves and the environment; at the same time, they will not necessarily be a model of the human mind. Whether a strong artificial intelligence will develop the ability to empathize remains unknown even in theory.

In the middle of the 20th century, when the first computers were created and the theory of algorithms was born, the question of artificial intelligence was first raised in the scientific community.

1950

In 1950, Alan Turing, an English mathematician with a difficult fate, publishes an article entitled "Can a machine think?"... In the article, he poses the question: how different is artificial thinking from human? To answer this question, he invents an empirical test, which later became known as the Turing test.

Standard interpretation of the Turing test:
A person interacts with one computer and one person. Based on the answers to the questions, he must determine who he is talking to: a person or a computer program. Task computer program- to mislead a person, forcing him to make the wrong choice.

It is assumed that this test will help determine the moment when a machine is equal in terms of intelligence to a person.

2014

In 2014, this happened: the bot program won the Turing test. The program, created by Russian developers, pretended to be a thirteen-year-old teenager from Odessa under the pseudonym Eugene Goostman. During a series of tests at the British University of Reading, Eugene was able to convince 30% of the judges that he was human.

Does this mean that humanity has already achieved artificial intelligence? No. The developers themselves say that the Turing test is by no means a litmus test that can say: "That's it, the machines have grown wiser, and you, miserable people, can rest." This only testifies to the development of mathematical algorithms and the ability of programs to operate with syntactic means inherent in the human language. It would not occur to you to call a smart phone a reasonable one that recognizes your speech and reacts to it with a certain sequence of actions? Chatbot Eugene is more of a weak intellect than a strong one. It is not a self-learning and self-aware system.

By the way, oh difficult fate Turing himself:
This English scientist after the Second World War was engaged in breaking the ciphers of the Nazi encryption machine "Enigma". Shortly after starting work, he was accused of homosexuality and agreed to undergo forced hormone therapy. In addition, he was denied access to classified materials and was forced to stop research. In 1954, Turing died of cyanide poisoning, according to official version- due to suicide. And last year, the great cryptographer and mathematician was posthumously pardoned by the British queen.

1997

In 1997, a super powerful computer from IBM called Deep blue wins multiple chess champion Garry Kasparov. I must say that Kasparov played with this computer a year earlier and won a landslide victory 4: 2. Over the year, IBM has almost doubled its capacity. This time Kasparov lost unexpectedly, resigning on move 45. There are opinions that when analyzing the controversial 44 move, the champion and his team could well overestimate the power of the computer, which led to a hasty surrender.

Kasparov demanded revenge at the closing ceremony of this historic game and accused IBM of foul play (oh, this is so human!), But IBM instead disbanded the Deep Blue team. But supercomputers continued their lives, and their power is now being used for molecular modeling at the Blue Brain in Switzerland.

2011

Again IBM with its own development called. This system is capable of perceiving human speech and searching using algorithms. Watson played in the American game Jeopardy! (Russian counterpart - "Own Game"), where she bypassed both her opponents.

2012

Google, the undisputed leader in the production of services of the future, in 2010 began testing vehicles equipped with a special self-driving system. The system collects information from Google Street View and reads the real situation from video cameras, a sensor on the roof, in the front of the car and a sensor on the rear wheel. The project involves 10 cars, 12 drivers and 15 engineers. To date, unmanned "Google cars" have traveled more than 500 thousand kilometers with minimal human participation.

We have listed just some of the most significant examples of artificial intelligence systems and their achievements. It so happens that even the most advanced of them are more likely to belong to a weak artificial intelligence than to a strong one. There is no need to fear the uprising of machines and continue to develop more subtle algorithms for the interaction of a computer with a person.

And in the end, we suggest watching a scientific and philosophical parable from TsentrNauchFilm, filmed in 1976. It opens with a dialogue from a conversation with Victor Mikhailovich Glushkov, the founder of computer science and cybernetics in the USSR:

Viktor Mikhailovich, will an artificial mind ever be created that will in no way be inferior to the human one? Could you answer categorically: yes or no?
- Excuse me. Yes, and yes again. This, apparently, will happen even before the beginning of the twenty-first century.