I'm not sure that the spatial metaphors of "nearness" are adequate here. What is missing is a unified theory that explains neural organization and its functional role in the survival of the organism. We have mountains and mountains of data, and we can tell from brute force alone that we are sniffing around in the right areas. We might, in fact, be quite near a general solution and not even know it, since we lack the theoretical tools to orient ourselves in the search space.
In other words, we are making substantial progress despite not really knowing what we are doing. That's rather importantly different from being "nowhere near", since the latter at least suggests that we know where we are going.
Comment reposted from OP
Mark Changizi originally shared this post:
More on being nowhere near artificial brains.
Mind & Brain | artificial intelligence | I can feel it in the air, so thick I can taste it. Can you? It’s the we’re-going-to-build-an-artificial-brain-at-any-moment feeling. It’s exuded into the