Can the internet become a living brain?

Question

Here are some thoughts to consider when you answer: The internet has become a vast system driven by feedback. Each of us is like an organic cell interconnected to billions of other cells in cyberspace. In fact, Yahoo Answers itself is an example of a complex feedback system, and we’ve seen the Yahoo Answers team playing on this idea with their “brain” in Times Square. But is this enough to allow the internet as a whole to become an intelligent, higher-level organism? And how would we know if it did? Presumably neurons do not know they are the cells of a brain. How could we tell if we became the cells of a higher-level intelligence? And a bonus question for extra credit: If cyberspace does evolve into a thinking organism, how might this impact human societies in the future?

Luna: I agree that the internet does not have feelings like we do, but we need to consider this: How do we know that the internet does not have feelings? All we have are our own intuitions. The problem is that we currently have no credible theory of mind that would tell us what type of material a mind needs to composed of, nor what level of complexity is needed. How do we know that only organic neurons can be the basis of a mind? We don’t! Without a credible theory of mind, all we can do is speculate. But such speculation is important. We need to think about this stuff, and consider possibilities because like it or not, industry estimates indicate that the internet is already as complex as a human brain (in terms of overall connectivity and calculations per second). Within 20 years you desktop computer will have the complexity of a human brain. (Type “Moore’s law” into your search engine.)

Aemilia753: I don’t expect the internet to evolve in a standard Darwinian sense of evolution. I’m using the word in the broader sense of growth of complexity over time – like one might talk of the evolution of the automobile over the past 80 years. Currently most computers are merely programmed devices, but neural network technology is already taking hold. Neural nets can already learn to read handwriting and respond to human speech. Since neural nets LEARN rather than merely following a program, their behavior has more potential to be unpredictable and genuinely creative. (Do a search on “neural networks” if you want to read more about this.)

Grudge: Your point is well-taken, but consider this: An individual neuron in your brain is not very intelligent either – it just responds to electrochemical pulses by either suppressing them or passing them on – kinda like betting or passing in a game of poker. Thus the mere fact that the average internet user can barely spell anything bigger than a four-letter word does not mean that the system as a whole will share this shortcoming. All the average internet user has to do is decide to either pass along messages, or send them to the trash. Nothing much more complex is required for the elements of a self-organizing system.

Catbheard: Your individual brain cells are not self-maintained either. Their individual lives depend on the overall regulatory activities of the organism as a whole, just as individual human lives depend on various form of support from agriculture and assorted other social patterns. Also, there are no “instructions to drive the Internet.” Your behavior when accessing the internet is not driven by a program. It is driven by your own nature as an individual given the various conditions of your environment. Your activity may seem relatively random when viewed in isolation, but in reality your activity is not in isolation. At any given time you are either consciously or unconsciously behaving according to “rules” of some sort, but these rules are not something programmed. It is the COLLECTIVE behavior of everyone that gives the internet the potential to behave like an organic system.

Sorry for the spam posted by “smiling4ever222.” I wish I could delete it, but Yahoo does not give me that option. He has pasted this same crap on other questions. Hopefully if enough people click on the “report abuse” button, Yahoo will get rid of this junk. (By the way, I’m NOT offended by people who find problems with Darwinian evolution. There ARE serious unresolved issues in the theory. But smiling’s response is woefully uneducated to the point of being just plain stupid – not to mention being downright rude since it has virtually nothing to do with my question.)

A tao: You make several very good points. I’ve puzzled about the source of stimuli myself. One could suppose that the internet is like a sleeping mind – a self-generating reverie of experiences, but even a dreaming brain seems to need external stimuli to get the ball rolling. For example, it seems unlikely that I could dream of a car if I have never seen a car, and have never learned the concept of a car. And as you point out, we need to consider the social nature of our concepts, which includes questions concerning the role of language in our experience. I might have visual imagery that is in some sense “of a car”, but could this imagery mean anything to me unless I have the language-based concepts associated with cars and their role in life. Thanks for your answer. This is exactly the sort of discussion I was hoping to prompt with my question.

Answer 1

The important part is "how would we know if it did?"

Lets assume that it is (or will become a brain) responding to stimuli, what are those stimuli?
With animal brains we know intimately what senses are connected and the results of stimulating those senses, and even the mechanincs of how those stimuli are processed, but still have virtually no comprehension of the algorythms involved.

So, with the internet we can monitor and measure, we can analyse it all, but knowing the activity in someones brain does not tell us what they are thinking.

A more "us centric" and therefore more approriate? approach would be to consider it from a sociological point, what effect does rapid boundless communcication, combined with extreme peer pressure have on us as individuals and groups.

Something more... assume that the internet is (or does become) a thinking brain, is it the only one (yes surely), how does it stay sane in total isolation from any others of its kind.

Answer 2

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein saw the way to this question in 1818. Better yet, Herman Melville anticipated this question in his short story, The Bell-tower.
I think we are headed toward a human-machine meld. We have mechanical pieces inside of our bodies that allow us to live longer. We can change our appearance with metal and machine. To sacrifice living flesh with mechanical to gain a longer lifespan may be too tempting to resist. The Internet contains an organic metaphor of a web which can in turn devour us. But there is no turning back.
Are human cells no different from the cells in cyberspace? I would like to think so, but the lines are getting blurred as computers move more into the center of our lives. Hardly anything can be done in the world without them. I only connect with you electronically. Staring at a computer screen is becoming second nature, more at ease than wandering through a field where the allergens multiply and stuff noses and sting eyes.
I don't think the Internet will become an intelligent, higher-level organism as much as our brains will become a lower-level organism. Computers become more human and brains more in tune with machine. If you could live forever as a organic/machine system, why not? Perhaps we can discard our bodies entirely and live in the thinking organism of cyberspace. It would be the ultimate step to take in a world where religions find flesh vile. And yet religions would surely protest this destruction.

Answer 3

There was a movie about that a long time ago. I can't remember what it was called. Go to a video store and check it out.

Cyberspace can't be a living organism. It could demonestrate some sort of control that could take over many aspects of life. We might be under the control of a computer. It is a stretch, but possible. It would take some evil programer to set up such a situation.

Answer 4

You again have lost the point completely. The human brain is a creation of God, that nothing can reproduce. No computer, no system capacity , can equal the human brain. The human brain is a hybrid co-processing Chip that processing analog and digital at the same time, with a storage capacity, that is unlimited.
Only God can create such a thing. Do you know what faith is?
Do you know how to define church? I see you are in love with your brain. Why not connect it to the Holy Spirit and find your true self and stop all this stupid stuff, to impress others with your stupid intellect without wisdom

Answer 5

The Internet is very much like a living organism; it works very much the same, but, it is not living. It is not self-contained or self-maintained. The instructions to drive the Internet is very complex but simply put, gets its instructions from human programming and human input.

Cyberspace has already dramatically impacted human societies but without humans it could not continue. Obviously, there is so much more to say on this subject. It is an interesting question and provokes as much thought as one wants to give it. It could even be fun.

Answer 6

Well, I can see the Internet becoming a brain. But, I don't know how intelligent it will be. Judging from a lot of the questions posted here, and from what I've seen in chat rooms, this brain wouldn't know how to spell in any language, it would be rude, ask juvenile questions, have a puerile sense of humor, and would it hold only extreme opinions, and believe every conspiracy theory floating around the Internet. Maybe that's not the brain we want to unleash on the world.

Answer 7

As the system itself is not organic, it has no way to 'evolve'. You should watch 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Computers can be programmed to give certain responses (such as the super chess computer, Deep Blue; it can calculate its next best move), but until computers can come up with original ideas without a human instigating them, the machines will never truly "think" on their own.

Answer 8

Dear EO: I take the simple position that the distinction between "life" and "nonlife" is artificial and unreal. I believe Spinoza felt this way. The entire Cosmos is a Living Brain.

Likewise, the distinction between "Physical" and "Spiritual" is unreal and of our own fancies. The Universe is material, and that material is spiritual.

Jim

Answer 9

The internet is a very complex web, and since it does not have feelings or other human qualities in the brain, it cannot become a brain.

Answer 10

Living brain? No

Forum for exchange and discussion of ideas? YES

Cyber space a thinking organism...NO again...impact free exchange of idea....however, like all mediums commerce soon (already has) shows it's impact both positive and negative!

PLUS does PORN (and commerce/GREED) allow us to create a 'higher-level' organism? Ummmm...NO...!!