>>16567311
There's not a single sentence that is even directionally true in that entire pseud soliloquy.

I am not a big fan of the analogy between ANN "neurons" and biological neurons. They function very differently and it in some way mysticizes ANNs.

Because brain neurons and ANNs work differently drawing a comparison like in the OP is a fools errand.

>>16567318
It's the same thing with "attention". It gets redditors excited like "omg it's conscious!". We don't even know what human attention is, but we can be pretty sure it isn't a dot product. We know more about how neurons work, which is enough to say they hardly resemble artificial neurons.

Yes, it's true. I was the one who posted it.

>>16567311
>brains CAN only work with 100 billion neurons
So every animal that navigates the same environments as humans has 100 billion neurons?

>>16567332
>We don't even know what human attention is
Directed focus.