>Our most powerful computers are many orders of magnitude below human level processing.
How can this be true? Human brain consumes just so much energy, our chips are already running close to single-electron level switching, and consume comparable amounts of energy (not even talking about computer clusters/supercomputers). May be layouts/programming are not good enough, but bare computing power is there.
This post lost me at last * 1000 - number of connection should not be counted. I.e. number of units x frequency gives you FLOPS. With this correction it's just 20 gigaflops for the human brain.
Modern deep neutral network demonstrate that they do comparable decisions with relatively little power. (i.e. modern speech and image recognition running on laptops, for example).
So I say for modern computers it's all about correct programming.
Well I am not sure what to add. Rather than arguing about FLOPS we should really be looking at how well computers can meet or beat humans in some activity. On the things we are bad at computers are already out in front, but at the thing our brains are good at (vision for example) they have a long way to go.
How can this be true? Human brain consumes just so much energy, our chips are already running close to single-electron level switching, and consume comparable amounts of energy (not even talking about computer clusters/supercomputers). May be layouts/programming are not good enough, but bare computing power is there.