How many iterations of Moore's law in between simulation of a *** brain and a White man's mind?

I've been reading a lot of articles lately about super computers like
Roadrunner and Blue Gene that are on the order of magnitude of power
of simulating a neocortical column down to the molecular (neuron)
level.

This is exciting since they're starting to say that within a decade or
so we may be able to do an entire human brain. (there are thousands of
said columns to a cortex)

For obvious reasons, we'll be starting with simpler more primitive
minds to begin with. Probably a rat or maybe something as low level as
an insect first. Then moving up to a cat then maybe pig or chimp.

Pardon what may seem like racism, but for purely logical reasons, I've
come to a fairly well educated guess that the first technically human
brain that will be simulated will be that of a spook. Here are a few
reasons why:

1 - less complex. less brain mass (less neurons to simulate). more
tractable on limited hardware.

2 - less complexity also means less likely to suffer much from the
horrible sensory deprivation involved. (imagine if your existence was
all mind. you would go insane. but imagine being significantly less
intelligent. would it be so horrible then? jiggaboos are already used
to being confused. it seems to be a natural state of things for them
so i'm quite certain this wouldn't even necessarily be considered
inhumane

3 - less risk. to put it bluntly, we're not talking about simulating a
superhuman intelligence here.

no risk of skynet. worst case: we're simulating some mind that has a
strong urge to go knock up a 7/11 and maybe pop the cashier on the way
out for fun, bragging rights, and an overall lack of respect for human
life.

4 - political correctness. let's face it. things get more publicity
and public support (and consequently funding and academic/business
interest) when they are PC. things to do with animals or minorities
like coons tend to garner this type of support. kind of like a "first
black man in space" thing. except in this case, space is more like
cyberspace.

Now back to my main point. Since we'll be simulating a niggerbrain
first (though I feel I was conducting a fairly thorough simulation of
a spear chucker already as an undergrad in circuit theory class when I
used a breadbox, four wires, a couple resistors and a small amount of
current to model a different network) it's logical to wonder how long
it will be before hardware reaches the level of power and our
understanding of the brain reaches the level of sophistication
necessary to simulate a white man's brain.

I would imagine that the order of complexity of the latter is
something like two or three levels higher than that of the former.
Amdahl’s Law (a corollary of moore's law) says something about how the
overhead for multi-cpu multi-core architecture is going to lead to an
eventual flatline in performance. While I have no doubt that we'll be
able to simulate *** brains before reaching this breaking point,
will we ever reach the point when we can simulate the mind of a White
man? Looking at these super computer architectures with millions of
cpus, one wonders how much longer we really have before this flatline
occurs. It might help to take a look at the difference between a black
and white mind and what these differences equate to in the real world:

*overall mass and complexity:

as anyone can see, whites have significantly larger brains than
blacks. due to the greater mass and consequent greater degree of
complexity, they are capable of a much higher level of thought. more
powerful memories and a better more abstract approach to dealing with
thought and understanding.

*degree of folding:

however, folding is a separate issue altogether. independent of
magnitude is the internal folding structure of the brain. have you
ever looked at one? notice all the cortical columns folding and
snaking their way through each other. compared to the more smooth and
fluid and parallel layout of a ***'s brain, a white man's looks
like a twisted labyrinth of confusion. pathways are looped in and out
and around each other. it's difficult to tell without serious
inspection where one begins and the other ends. it's difficult to
explain why this lends itself to a greater complexity of thought, but
i invite you to read up on the concepts of abstractedness vs.
concretedness and the more elusive concept of associative horizon. for
a quick overview of the concept, imagine some situation where you must
think about something. it may be very simple and lend itself to
complete comprehension by even the simplest of minds. however, another
concept may have many working parts, all of which must be grasped
simultaneously in order to be fully grasped and some which are sub
components of difficult-to-define subsets of the whole ideomatic
system. when you try to make a mapping between the very structure of
this concept and say a more concrete spatial universal view that can
be looked at from different angles, you might find that it very
closely resembles the nature in which cortical columns fold repeatedly
into and around each other in the brain. in other words, the
complexity of the brain's structure lends itself to the complexity of
thoughts that can be appreciated and understood by that brain.

*shells or "layers:

as you may or may not know, our brain is composed of many layers, like
an onion. the closer you go to the center of the brain, the more
fundamental and more ancient in terms of evolution you get. all the
way at the center, we have very critical and base functions. things we
couldn't have survived with as a species even before we became
sentient. the area of the brain that control things like involuntary
bodily functions such as breathing and eating and reproduction. a
little further out we have still more sub-sub-conscious operations
such as pain nerves and regulation of different types of flow of
oxygen and blood around the body. move out further still and you are
still in the realm of instinct. things like rage and jealousy and
domination reign supreme. things all animals have but fortunately for
us white folk, things still far removed from our outermost layers.

as you continue to move outwards, you encounter areas of the brain
devoted to higher and higher level functions. once you breach beyond
the layers that govern physical and emotional instinct, you reach
thought. processing, planning, reasoning, and memory. in fact,
scientists who study the brain have even found that there is evidence
of the formation of yet another layer (still in its evolutionary
infancy) that could be considered a type of super-consciousness.
something that would be responsible for a process involving levels of
thought that are higher than our current own. theoretically a mind
could grow so complex that it would need a higher order of
consciousness to manage the "overhead" of its normal consciousness.
said super consciousness could certainly be correlated with a kind of
super-intelligence as well and is perfectly analogous to the overhead
management involved in mass arrays of parallelized super computers.
presumably there would be some flatline point for this complexity
growth as well.

where does all this factor into the difference between *** brains
and white minds? not entirely independent of brain mass, but a
different dimension of the brain nonetheless, porch monkeys appear to
have a predominance of the inner layers with slightly less emphasis on
the development of the outers. this would certainly explain their more
animalistic, instinctive behavior as compared to whites. the way they
behave is much like you would expect a badly behaved animal that had a
much larger than normal brain. imagine a bad dog that had enough
intelligence to read (barely) and write (barely) and drive and speak
(barely).

WHAT DO THESE DIFFERENCES EQUATE TO IN THE REAL WORLD?

i mentioned earlier the likely inclination on the part of the first
simulated *** mind to knock up a 7/11 and perhaps on the way out,
murder the cashier for fun. why would he wish to do this? any
sufficiently advanced intelligence should be able to grasp the majesty
of an evolved neural network. put simply, if you're smart enough,
shouldn't you value intelligence and life in general? the truth is,
that things like values and morals are very high level functions. they
may be rooted in deep and primitive aspects of our brain (according to
freud) but the outward manifestation and systematic practicing of said
principles certainly operate on a very high level. while it might be
instinctively gratifying to dominate another male and even go so far
as to kill him in an effort to display ones physical superiority, our
higher cognitive functions (those governed by the outermost layers of
our brain) would reason with us to do otherwise. most white in fact
wouldn't even rob the store in the first place. but i think you'd find
that those who do, would think twice before unecessarily harming or
much worse, murdering anyone.

language processing is also a very high level function. not the
highest of course since we've been doing it for millions of years
before we reached the level of cranial development we so enjoy today.
but nonetheless, much higher than instinct. yet we can see time and
time again ***'s failure to understand basic english. in the end
(and in the interests of political correctness) we were forced to
acknowledge a new language: eubonics. all eubonics is is a butchering
of english by primitives incapable of enunciating the sounds of
english and formulating statements using a systematic grammar or
syntax. eubonics is a pseudo-language if that. it is an
acknowledgement by the world that jungle bunnies are incapable of
grasping a true language. dumbed down and made official, they can now
continue their attempts at verbal communication without being told
they are speaking incorrectly almost every other word they hoot.

These distinctions serve an important purpose: to illustrate the vast
complexity gulf that separates *** brains from white minds. The
fact that a white mind may be two or three orders of magnitude more
complex than a *** brain is not all that matters. the modeling and
simulation of said brain will require vastly more understanding of the
brain to even dump into said simulation. let alone the challenge of
not flatlining in performance after the first *** simulation and
before the first white simulation.

This worries me as it could easily be taken to mean that though they
say we may simulate a human mind within a decade or so, we may be two
or three decades (or infinitely far) away from ever simulating a white
mind. In other words, simulation of a mind that is on or near to the
order of intelligence necessary to start helping us out with our great
questions and maybe even offering a few answers. Because that for me
is the most important aspect of the simulation of intelligence.

Simulating the brain of a spook won't show us anything we don't
already instinctively understand when we ride a subway at night or
walk through a dark alley in harlem.
.

Quantcast