I am providing plenty condensed abstracts and all flash’n bang headlines have links.
A single click will get you pages and pages of details. I don’t need to paste them here and waste space when a single click will get you to the original “peer-reviewed” articles.
I don’t know what else I could provide that would be more helpful to get a sense of my perspective.
Your use of the terms “mindscape” and “relationship with the environment” are not all that instructive, albeit philosophically valid.
Your MIND and all it produces. You don’t need a PhD in Philosophy to digest that.
Landscape, mindscape if you want a picture.
“relationship with the environment”
ENVIRONMENT = “the surroundings or conditions in which a person, animal, or plant, (or body part) lives or operates.”
RELATIONSHIP = “the way in which two or more concepts, objects, or people are connected, or the state of being connected.”
That’s what our biome is all about, and those foreign agents are in specific areas, and they are not in other specific areas, and only very specific germs/viruses can thrive in this or that area/environment, while others will be consumed and recycled.
The environment of my pubs is way different than the environment of my gut, or the environment within interstitial tissue & fluid, or my kidneys or bone, each area having its own environmental constraints.
Here I’m trying to make one specific point, that a misleading oversimplifications stinks, especially when we know better.
Hearing someone say that: “Our human body is composed of ~90% foreign biome,”
and leaves it at that, for me, it’s like scraping fingernails against a chalk board.
I mean it seems like half the time they won’t even point out that this ~90% equals all of ~3% of your body weight.
Nor do they point out, as you finally, if grudgingly, have,
and I thank you for that.
Now back to the ~90%. That’s old news that hasn’t aged well. Looks to be more like 50% by cell count. For a person weighting 70kg, that biome weights in at about 0.2kg:
Revised Estimates for the Number of Human and Bacteria Cells in the Body
Published: August 19, 2016
Ron Sender,
Shai Fuchs ,
Ron Milo
Revised Estimates for the Number of Human and Bacteria Cells in the Body
Abstract
Reported values in the literature on the number of cells in the body differ by orders of magnitude and are very seldom supported by any measurements or calculations. Here, we integrate the most up-to-date information on the number of human and bacterial cells in the body. We estimate the total number of bacteria in the 70 kg “reference man” to be 3.8·1013.
For human cells, we identify the dominant role of the hematopoietic lineage to the total count (≈90%) and revise past estimates to 3.0·1013 human cells. Our analysis also updates the widely-cited 10:1 ratio, showing that the number of bacteria in the body is actually of the same order as the number of human cells, and their total mass is about 0.2 kg. …
There was no oversimplification. The point was that the human biome is not all human and that would be news to most people who have never given it much thought.
To most people, bacteria are things to be dreaded and the fact is that without our symbiotic bacteria we would die. They literally keep us alive in hundreds of ways.
Perhaps the actual count may be less than 10: 1. That does not negate the fact the human body contains much more bacterial DNA than human DNA.
The grey illustration on the right is the bacterial DNA as compared to human DNA.
Oh and for the record, I do value your push back and dialogue, excuse me if I come across as short or pissy. Current events and the apathetic left and the clueless DNC which still can’t message for squat, worse they have their own country club member thing - high and might and oblivious. Rather than a fighting unit that will seek out and utilize any potential talent, because win is all they are about.
I started out the little insecure one in awe of all the big boys. But after experiencing the past half century, I’ve realize what a bunch of petty self-serving short-sight glutenous fools they are. Many outrageously smart, but it’s not how smart one is, it’s what you do with the knowledge you possess that matters.
They created today’s world, we are smarter than ever before, yet we are destroying ourselves faster than we ever have before. On all levels.
What can I say, that irritates me.
And progressive types still don’t know how to confront the idea that there is a personal god looking down from on high.
Why can’t we get some messaging together that says something? You know my suggestion:
Your god’s come from within the human heart and soul and mind, deal with it!
A woman’s life is more valuable than a fetus, deal with it!
Stuff like that, short and to the point. Why doesn’t that happen?
I’ve figured it out,
it’s because most haven’t figured it out themselves,
they are confused and have no depth of understanding or feeling towards recognizing their own interior selves and the pageant of their own life and what the Evolution of this Earth has to do with all that. Most have never heard that story told with conviction and passion, we just pass around post cards and call it good.
So we have this society spending billions and billions on sending people to Mars, or DIY flying vehicle to boggle the mind, or computer games, watching others playing computer games, or those billionaire “yachts”, lets not forget Monday Night Football and the Super Bowl and World Cup, heck NASCAR the person to burn the most fuel wins, great, . . . billions and billions and billions we have for crap like that,
all the while huge populated area around the world are watching their drinking and irrigation water supplies shrinking - with the vanishing point now in sight. But only pennies for that. Yeah, I’m pissed off. But I don’t mean to take it out on you Write! 
I think that between us we have acquired some valid knowledge and living wisdom.
You are acquiring knowledge of our conscious relationship with the external environment.
I am acquiring knowledge of how the body internally responds and consciously processes the data from our relationship with the external environment.
And here is where our bacterial segue way may be pertinent to “artificial intelligence”, and that is via the language of “quorum sensing”.
Quorum sensing in the immune system
Luca Antonioli,1 Corrado Blandizzi,1 Pál Pacher,2 Martin Guilliams,3,4 and György Haskó5,*
Abstract
Quorum sensing is the regulation of gene expression programmes in response to changes in population density. It is probably best recognized as a mechanism through which bacterial communities can synchronize behaviours, such as biofilm formation and bioluminescence. This Comment article highlights the emerging evidence suggesting that quorum sensing also contributes to the regulation of immune cell responses.
Quorum sensing was originally based on the idea that cooperation between bacterial cells of a single species would not be worthwhile unless a sufficient number of cells were present; that is, until a density threshold is reached. In bacterial quorum sensing, bacteria monitor their population density by communicating through the generation and detection of soluble extracellular signals called inducers1. As the density of quorum sensing bacterial cells increases, so does the concentration of the inducer.
Once bacterial density and therefore the concentration of the inducer reaches a certain level, this will result in the collective alterations of bacterial gene expression, which facilitates synchronized behaviours, such as biofilm formation, virulence and bioluminescence1. Thus, quorum sensing enables cells within a population to function in unison and, in doing so, to carry out behaviours as a collective entity.
It is now well appreciated that quorum sensing does not only occur in bacteria of the same species, but it extends to groups of heterogenous micro organisms that have evolved together, each one with adaptations tethered to the biology of the others, thus establishing evolutionarily stable interactions aimed at shaping and maintaining the equilibrium of the entire bacterial population inhabiting a niche1. Several features of cellular behaviour that resemble those underlying bacterial quorum sensing can be found in the immune system. For example, quorum sensing contributes to regulating the absolute size of some immune cell subsets and helps to optimize their effector functions, such as cytokine secretion. Below we highlight some key examples of quorum sensing in the immune system.
more…
Continuing with the updated state of GPT3 AI (artificial intelligence).
This may surprise you!
And a prior update that speks of things to come;
What’s the surprise? I heard a lot of “this is the next update” and “we’ll talk more about that”, then sizes of datasets. Might be interesting if you are already following this news, like what the difference is between version 3 and 4, but not so much of you’re looking for an intro.
There is not much difference between GPT 2,3, and 4, except for the number of parameters (artificial synapses). Apparently they have found the fundamental configuration of differential data processing and it is now just a matter of size…
From a technical perspective, GPT-4 will have about 100 trillion parameters — approximately 500 times the size of GPT-3. Alongside this, the input will allow more symbols (roughly counted as words), so much longer bodies of text will be consumed and generated.
For practical usage, GPT-3 enabled users to input natural language, but it still took a bit of skill to craft your prompt in a way that would give good results. GPT-4 will be much better at inferring users’ intentions.
> GPT-4 will largely use the same methods as GPT-3 so, rather than a paradigm-shift, GPT-4 will build upon what GPT-3 already does – just with far more power to make inferences.
And IMO that is what natural intelligence is about. Brains and their fundamental method of data processing is basically the same . Any limitation is only due to the size and complexity of the entire system.
Well, AI has now been able to design new robots.
What are the opportunities and risks? The result of this partnership between humans and AI have been published in Nature Machine Learning
Peer-Reviewed Publication
DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
