It somewhat makes sense if you think of it in terms of a really complicated 1.5GB metaprogram with a huge pile of conditionals that are triggered by the programs it itself writes (proteins). The final you is made up of an incomprehensible huge number of copies of the metaprogram, running different configurations, and spitting out programs to each other which then do more stuff. Our human brains can't really conceive of a configurable metaprogram that writes programs by interacting with itself in different configurations that it itself sets up.

▲

dilawar 16 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Something similar: Kolmogorov complexity.

There is a finite size program that can generate infinite digits of pi (in infinite time). Kolmogorov's complexity of pi is finite even when the object is infinite.

It's not very surprising that it takes a few GB of a program to encode conscious 'us'. Humbling to think about it though...

▲

yetihehe 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

For a demonstration of Kolmogorov complexity, it's good to watch "A mind is born"[0] by lftkryo. It's only 256 bytes, but can generate over 2 minutes of complex music and video. Also, the name is appropriate for this topic :D

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWblpsLZ-O8

▲

stackedinserter 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah but pi digits are essentially random noise, but any human is a precisely build system. E.g. there are exactly two identical eyes with nerves going to this precise area of brain, every time.

It's more like mega-efficient archive utility that unzips a few GB into a human, I just can't fathom it.

	▲	filleduchaos 17 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		That's exactly the wrong way to think about it, and I'm surprised that so many devs think of it that way. We already have programs that works exactly like that (i.e. producing rich, complex output that would be many times the size of the input code + data if encoded raw): procedural generators. It's emergent complexity, not compression.

▲

cogogo 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It was also developed “iteratively” under extremely harsh selection criteria over a time scale that is so long it is almost impossible to reason about. An old geology textbook I had used the analogy of a geologic timeline that stretched from LA to NYC. Life appears really early (in CA somewhere IIRC) and human existence is about the width of a crack in the pavement just before you hit the Atlantic Ocean.

▲

zmgsabst 10 hours ago | parent [-]

Using a timeline from LA to NYC, since you made me curious:

- life formed 3.7B of 4.5B years ago, which is 700km towards NYC from LA; or about Colorado

- proto-humans formed 2M of 4500M years ago, which is about 1.7km “from” NYC; a distance hard to compare with the whole way

- human lifespans are about 70 of 4.5B years, which is about 6cm “from” NYC; a distance hard to compare with either 1.7km, 700km for life to form, or the whole 3966km.

	▲	cogogo 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Ha! thanks! My memory of this was way off. But I guess I liked the idea at the time if I remembered it at all decades later. Life has been evolving for a LONG time.