185 pointsby phoenix1206 hours ago16 comments
  • causal4 hours ago
    I appreciate the open source approach over the startup's sensational claims. This is more transparent.

    That said, I think it still presents itself as if the fly is being controlled by the connectome, when (if I'm reading the source correctly) it's more accurate to say scripted behaviors have been hooked up to be triggered by the connectome.

    Put another way, you might as well have the "escape" trigger open a YouTube video of a fly flying away. That would probably be less misleading too.

    • dullcrispan hour ago
      Yeah I don’t think it’s clear if the connectome is modeling real fruit fly behavior or is just being used as an entropy generator.
    • ramraj074 hours ago
      I would argue that this is pretty disingenuous (as is most connectomics research I suppose) since its implying we have a fully wired connectome of the fly thats actually meaningful.
      • squibonpig4 hours ago
        Why isn't it and what do they have? I'm not really informed on this stuff.
        • melagonsteran hour ago
          We only know which neurons are connected, not the weights.
    • 3 hours ago
      undefined
  • DaiPlusPlus4 hours ago
    I have no exposure to connectomes - or really anything quite like this (as opposed to good ol’ fashioned perceptrons) - so forgive my following uninformed question:

    Can someone explain if this software is ethical?

    • jephs4 hours ago
      If your circle of empathy includes fruit flies, fuck no, we murdered so many of those guys to figure out how their tiny brains work.

      If you do not think of fruit flies as moral patients, sure, yeah, who cares, they're like just fruit flies you know?

    • lp4v4n2 hours ago
      How could this be anti-ethical? You're just running a very complex algorithm in your machine.
      • j16sdizan hour ago
        When one truly believes:

        0) Subjecting fruitfly life to this kind of treatment is unethical.

        1) Life is just physics in action.

        2) Physics are just algorithm (or our physical world is a simulation)

        It is not hard to understand why they think it is unethical.

        My question are

        1) is all life equal?

        2) is all suffering unethical?

        3) is this world materialistic or are there something out there?

        4) should a list of items begin with 0 or 1?

        • fluoridation7 minutes ago
          If life is physics and physics is an algorithm, it doesn't follow that an algorithm reproducing the physics of life contains life, even if we grant that it actually reproduces it completely and perfectly. That's just confusing the symbol for the thing.
    • janalsncm4 hours ago
      > Can someone explain if this software is ethical?

      Probably not. People have been coming up with ethical frameworks for thousands of years and we have yet to come to a consensus.

      So it’s very unlikely that someone can say conclusively whether this is ethical or not, because that would require us to either 1) prove a single ethical framework is correct and then apply that framework to this software or 2) prove that under all possible ethical frameworks this software is either ethical or not ethical.

      • _def4 hours ago
        Genuinely curious, is there like a simple list of competing ethical frameworks?
        • janalsncm3 hours ago
          There’s a list here, not sure if it’s the best one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative_ethics
        • jasonjayr3 hours ago
          Not to drop any spoilers (hide this comment before reading further ....)

          But "The Amazing Digital Circus" explores this concept relating to human brain scans, and how the 'simulated' brains would react under simulation.

          • SamBaman hour ago
            Similarly, the story Lena by qntm.[1]

            It describes in part how some volunteer brain scans are actually quite agreeable to work with until they work for too many hours, and then they get fussy, but it's cool, you can always reboot them. But you need to hide from them the fact that it's been decades since they were scanned and uploaded, or they'll realize how long they've been slaves for.

            1. https://qntm.org/mmacevedo

      • viccis3 hours ago
        Honestly pretty funny that you gave a (fairly useless) metaethical answer instead of responding to the actual meaning, which was clearly soliciting ethical judgments about it.
    • hellohello22 hours ago
      Yes I can, no problem. First figure out how consciousness works and tell me, then I'll be able to explain if the software is ethical or not. Its simple really.
    • 4 hours ago
      undefined
    • ramraj074 hours ago
      Why do you think it wont be?
      • twothreeone3 hours ago
        Well, one obvious question is if the simulated brain experiences pain, or more generally can it suffer? And if so, how would we tell.
        • fluoridation2 hours ago
          What does "suffering" mean? Define your boolean function, apply it to the state of the program, and you'll know if the program is currently suffering.
  • a1o4 hours ago
    > What's modeled vs. measured

    > Honesty section:

    I wouldn’t mind an human written README

    • rossy43 minutes ago
      > Honesty section:

      This one gets to me. Not only is it useless (paragraph would have the same meaning if it was removed) but wdym "honesty section," Claude? The whole readme should be honest! One of the many causes of psychological damage when reading AI-generated technical writing is the reminder that one of its tics is that declares when it's being honest or real, casting doubt on the rest.

    • dag11an hour ago
      > runs as a 1 kHz leaky-integrate-and-fire (LIF) simulation

      That hyphenated thing is always such a give. Clearly a thing discussed in the Claude conversation, made its way into the plan, then the readme. It always creates hyphenated phrases out of things it feels are core requirements.

      I'm actually over caring about Claude's obsession with the concepts of "real", "honest", and "rather than". What annoys me the most now is how every single sentence, bullet, etc that even makes its way into the products it builds are advertisements for itself. Product settings pages now read like ads, or like something written by a student begging for extra credit from the teacher. You can't unsee it!

    • vhantz4 hours ago
      > live *spiking* simulation
  • aperrien5 hours ago
    Interesting work! There's NeuroMechFly (https://github.com/NeLy-EPFL/flygym/) available, you might try using that to simulate the fly body in real time as well.
  • 4 hours ago
    undefined
  • pavel_lishin4 hours ago
    Ah, Mr. Acevedo, nice to see you.
  • lp4v4n2 hours ago
    Would we be able to have a "digital human" when we reach the level of creating this kind of brain mapping for the human brain?

    Honestly I think we're still discovering how powerful neural networks are and certainly they can do computations that sound very close to intelligence in some contexts, but I still find it hard to think that we can simplify the whole reality of an incredibly complex chemical machinery down to a bunch of matrices multiplications.

    • fookeran hour ago
      > bunch of matrices multiplications

      What these matrix multiplications are doing is approximately solving pretty high order differential equations.

      The approximation is not very analog, sure. But neither is nature.

  • qingcharles3 hours ago
    At some point in the future would it be possible to simply download a DNA sequence of an entire animal as a "ROM" and boot it into a virtual "reality"?

    What detail level of reality would we have to emulate for an egg to grow into an adult animal?

    • Leynos2 hours ago
      To give you a sense of the computation needed, a spatiotemporal physics simulation of a minimal (493 gene) bacterium's full 105 minute cellular cycle took 4-6 days of GPU hours on two A100s.

      https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009286742...

      Compare this with a c elegens nematode: ~20000 protein coding genes and 959 cells, with all the extra machinery you'll find in a eukaryotic cell.

      I'm reading this as both a question of raw simulation surface and combinatorics.

      • fookeran hour ago
        We'd need analog solutions for this simulations, and slowly these solutions will start to resemble biology in a dystopian way.
  • uniq75 hours ago
    No demo video?
  • ectoan hour ago
    Things like this are why I come to HN! Cool hack :)
  • _def4 hours ago
  • kypro4 hours ago
    Oh nice, might use this to create some art for my home.

    https://www.instagram.com/p/DMfi-9Vsl-u/

    > Infinite Pain is a computer running a deterministic neural simulation of a microscopic nematode worm’s brain (c. elegans), subjected to regular pain stimuli.

  • actionfromafar5 hours ago
    Now this is real AI.
  • myshapeprotocol3 hours ago
    [dead]
  • logicallee4 hours ago
    This is absolutely astounding. What an implementation. A connectome is like a full brain scan!

    I am asking Claude to port this to the browser and I'll host it, so you can try it without installing anything.

    Some details about the port: Claude is able to do porting tasks like this. I'll put up a link when you can try it in your browser. I was able to get it to port the complete BitNet b1.58 2-billion parameter model several versions ago (in February, so this would have been Opus 4.5) to browser, so it can do so. This will run on the browser. I'll have it make it so that on mobile you can tap the fly or turn on the camera and it sees you, and same on desktop actually. Since the connectome is only 668 neurons, this will run super fast. Actually I'll make it allow for several flies, and let you drop food. I did something like this before here[1] but using the real connectome is something very different and very amazing. I'll have it add an experimental 3D mode with threejs, I'm not sure if that is also possible or not, we'll have to see it. This size of task usually takes Claude a few hours, so check my comment in the morning for the implementation, I'll reply here once it's done and hosted.

    [1] https://stateofutopia.com/papers/1/evolving-brains-cull-long...

    • mapontosevenths2 hours ago
      It's pretty amazing stuff!

      I was very excited the first time I saw a connectome as well. Years ago I managed to get most of openworm running and connected to some Lego Mindstorms to let the worm roll around my house. I'm not even sure the connectome was finished at that time.

      Honestly, I barely had any idea what I was doing and we didn't have AI tools so I was never really sure what I wired to what. I did manage to hook... something to the ultrasound sensor and... another thing to the wheels so that when the sensor was triggered it would back up.

      What blew my mind was the realization that these weird hybrid critters were probably the first true immortals. Now that we have a full connectome, who will bother with another? Students will probably just keep instantiating copies of this one to tinker with forever.

      • logicallee40 minutes ago
        I can't imagine why people hate my comment so much (4 downvotes), when I linked an existing fruitfly project I already did, and Claude is working on what I wrote now, just as I wrote. Maybe people thought I was being sarcastic when I wrote "A connectome is like a full brain scan!" but I wrote that since maybe not everyone knows what a connectome means.
  • dekhn3 hours ago
    It's weird to write MacOS specific software in this era.
    • MBCookan hour ago
      Why? If I was writing this I would write it for my OS.

      Why would I write it for anything else?

      I assume that’s what the author did.

    • bigyabai3 hours ago
      The unstoppable "rewrite it in Swift!" vs the insurmountable "where's the Windows version?"