I was reading this question and the answers make it clear that using humans as a power source is unreasonable. We know the original premise was that humans were used by the AI as processors, but how reasonable would that be? Surely silicon would be better? Surely keeping a human alive to use it's processing power is still hugely inefficient? Wouldn't the same issues with using us as batteries still apply to processing power, even if it was to a lesser extent?

  • Sorry, we don't take questions asking about real science, as this sit is for science-fiction, sorry. Hope you find an answer elsewhere :) – Edlothiad Apr 27 '17 at 9:46
  • 3
    Human brains are massively parallel. While each neuron is fairly slow, you have to remember that the average human brain contains 100 Billion neurons, so even if each neuron were only capable of firing once per second, they'd still achieve a speed of 100 GHz. But on average, neurons fire faster than just once per second, so that number gets even higher. Even the world's fastest super computer, which takes up quite a large room, isn't yet fast enough to be able to simulate a human brain. – DisturbedNeo Apr 27 '17 at 10:01
  • @Edlothiad - uhh, I understand the impulse to close vote, but his linked question, which is basically the same premise, is not closed. I'm curious why myself, but it may be worthwhile holding the impulse for a bit. – Radhil Apr 27 '17 at 10:22
  • 2
    @Edlothiad - I am very aware of the real-world science schtick, thank you. I'm pointing out that if this is closed, it's being unevenly applied. – Radhil Apr 27 '17 at 10:35
  • 1
    Might be worth migrating the question to Worldbuilding.se, though it might need some rewording to fit there. – Werrf Apr 27 '17 at 12:38

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.