Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: ValeuJ@*************.navy.mil (Valeu John EMFA)
Subject: [OT] Brains (trying to bring it back around)
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 03:22:49 -0800
Gurth and Justin discussed the following:
>>>"Warning: remote host is attempting to send a KILL signal to
>>>/proc/brain. Do you want to continue (y/n)?"
>>
>>
>> Shouldn't that be /dev/brain0? That'd make it easy to umount it when you
>> don't need it for a while... Or, of course, for some people to do a mount

>> /dev/brain0 /ass -o noexec ;)

>then you have a whole new meaning to being fscked in the brain

>The brain does have multiple functions though, short term memory, RAM,
>and longer term lesser accessed archival functions that can take a while
>to access.

>Interesting question. And really, *could* you store data in the unused
>portion of the brain?

My friends and I actually did a search on this back in High school when
Johnny Mnemonic came out. I think the answer is that there really is no
"unused" part of the brain, just parts we don't normally access. It all
serves a function, weither for motor control (which seems to be havng some
probelms at the moments), memory (both sohrt and logn), background
operations (breathing, blinking, heartbeats), and so on...

Oh sure there are lobomeys, but look at how they're fragged up. Now that I
think about it, as much as I'd like a jack, I'd probably wait until the
tech's perfected.

The human body is a finely honed (bio-)machine. Mess with a part of it and
you're going to throw it out of whack. Though I'd still get a new set of
eyes. I think anything having to do with the central nervous system would
be risky. And you'd have to go through a lot of pratice...tests...
something like that, to get it right. And since we don't have computers
that can simulate a brain and what will happen if we poke this part or that
part (cool, I made his leg jump...), humans are needed.

Ok I think I've said enough.
Message no. 2
From: sf_fuller@********.com.au (Simon & Fiona)
Subject: [OT] Brains (trying to bring it back around)
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 14:09:28 +1000
----- Original Message -----
From: Valeu John EMFA <ValeuJ@*************.navy.mil>
To: 'Shadowrun Discussion' <shadowrn@*****.dumpshock.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 9:22 PM
Subject: RE: [OT] Brains (trying to bring it back around)



> My friends and I actually did a search on this back in High school when
> Johnny Mnemonic came out. I think the answer is that there really is no
> "unused" part of the brain, just parts we don't normally access.

The idea that we only use 5, 10, or 20% of our brains is a myth, easily
discounted by drilling a hole in your head and trying to hit the unused
bits. We use all of our brains, every part is used regularly and vital to
our day to day functioning as people.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.476 / Virus Database: 273 - Release Date: 24/04/03
Message no. 3
From: shiva@*********.net (Shiva Khan)
Subject: [OT] Brains (trying to bring it back around)
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 00:07:44 -0700
>
> The idea that we only use 5, 10, or 20% of our brains is a
> myth, easily discounted by drilling a hole in your head and
> trying to hit the unused bits. We use all of our brains,
> every part is used regularly and vital to our day to day
> functioning as people.

I might be wrong in this,in fact wouldn't be at all surprised if I am
wrong, but I had heard it explained some where that we use only about
10% of our brains on average. The reason I heard was because if we
useed all 100% at one it would be like booting up a AMD Anthlon XP 3000+
with out a heat sink and fan. Fried brains/fried microchips ... Can't
be any form of fun. Like I said that is what I have heard if there is
truth to it or not I do not know because it has not interested me enough
to try and find any more info on it. Oh well hopefully it gave some of
you a chuckle, but that is my ¥.02 worth.

S.K.


Memory, like fire, is radiant and immutable. While history serves only
those who seek to control it. Those who would douse the flame of memory
in order to put out the dangerous fire of truth. Beware these men! For
they are dangerous and unwise. Their false history is written in the
blood of those who might remember and of those who seek the truth.
Message no. 4
From: gte138j@****.gatech.edu (Jeff Stewart)
Subject: [OT] Brains (trying to bring it back around)
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 03:15:02 -0400 (EDT)
On Thu, 8 May 2003, Shiva Khan wrote:

> I might be wrong in this,in fact wouldn't be at all surprised if I am
> wrong, but I had heard it explained some where that we use only about
> 10% of our brains on average. The reason I heard was because if we
> useed all 100% at one it would be like booting up a AMD Anthlon XP 3000+
> with out a heat sink and fan. Fried brains/fried microchips ... Can't
> be any form of fun. Like I said that is what I have heard if there is
> truth to it or not I do not know because it has not interested me enough
> to try and find any more info on it. Oh well hopefully it gave some of
> you a chuckle, but that is my ¥.02 worth.

The thing is, we only *actively* use around 10 to 20% of our
brain at a time. To use your computer analogy, different parts of a
computer are inactive at different times. For example, at the exact
moment when I type, the processor blocks and I/O is read off of a
buffer that the keyboard uses. Another example would be the fact that
I have a soundcard which is literally doing nothing right now. It's
just sitting there. But when I need it to perform some function, it
activates, performs that function, then goes back to sleep.

So, even though we only use a small percentage of our brain at a given
time, almost the entirity of our brain is important. There is, for any
neuron in the brain, a probability that it will be used at any given
time.

Jeff Stewart |
Email: gte138j@****.gatech.edu | Post no bills
Message no. 5
From: yvanhoe@****.fr (Yves Quemener)
Subject: [OT] Brains (trying to bring it back around)
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 13:06:54 +0200
> The thing is, we only *actively* use around 10 to 20% of our
> brain at a time. To use your computer analogy, different parts of a
> computer are inactive at different times. For example, at the exact
> moment when I type, the processor blocks and I/O is read off of a
> buffer that the keyboard uses. Another example would be the fact that
> I have a soundcard which is literally doing nothing right now. It's
> just sitting there. But when I need it to perform some function, it
> activates, performs that function, then goes back to sleep.

In this case, there is still a possibility to optimize the things up by using
a part of the brain not "designed" for a given task and accomplishing this
task poorly but that will help when the specialized portion of the brain
already runs at 100%. To stay in the computer analogy, graphic chips are now
more and more like a whole processor except that they are optimized for 3d
graphics. However, if you want to speed the things up you can delegate some
treatment to the graphic card with a bit of hacking (edge detection,
chroma-key, game of life are proven examples) without using the CPU

In the brain I think this could be achieved when a musician will for example,
use his visual memory in addition to his auditive one in order to memorize a
melody. There is some scenarios where you can maybe use 30% of your brain by
a willful act when you would use only 15% of it in a normal time. Just a
personal guess (rated at $ 0.02432 the 08/05 at 1pm) not a scientific fact.

Iv
Message no. 6
From: SteveG@***********.co.za (Steve Garrard)
Subject: [OT] Brains (trying to bring it back around)
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 09:44:46 +0200
Simon & Fiona wrote:
> The idea that we only use 5, 10, or 20% of our brains is a
> myth, easily discounted by drilling a hole in your head and
> trying to hit the unused bits. We use all of our brains,
> every part is used regularly and vital to our day to day
> functioning as people.

Actually the theory is that we only use 10% of our brain POTENTIAL, which is
to say we are theoretically capable of processing much more than we do. We
use every part of our brain, just not to capacity.


Slayer

"Beware my wrath, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
- Unknown Dragon


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [OT] Brains (trying to bring it back around), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!