In the future direct interfacing between the brain and technology seems likely. The rudimentary technology has already been demonstrated and Musk’s company is working on an implant meant to be a commercial product. My question is about how you see the interface eventually working. In particular I am curious about what the advantage of an implant is.
From the demonstrations I’ve seen things like typing, moving cursors, ect can be achieved with sensors applied to the body externally like an fmri skullcap or a neckband that reads vibrations in the vocal cords. External sensors are much safer to apply than a brain implant, they can be replaced much more easily if they malfunction, and they can be upgraded. I have read an article that said there are advantages to implants for people with medical issues like paralysis because the implant can offer feedback providing a more “normal” experience and interacting with specific nerves gives more precise control and less lag time. For medical applications like restoring lost function that makes the risk of surgery make sense. For the average person what advantages do implants offer over external sensors that make the risks of brain surgery worth it?
You’re assuming rationality. Back in the day, people rushed to be the first to have a color TV, even if there weren’t any local stations broadcasting in color. People who never leave the parkway pay for cars that can climb mountains and drive through a flood.
Realistically, I can’t think of any reason to get a skullcap unless you’re flying high speed jets or have suffered some kind of major trauma that requires it. Docotrs do micro surgery with hand held controllers.
I’d argue that reaaaaally don’t want your fuzzy thoughts controlling a jet.
Clint Eastwood movie from the 1980s. “Firefox” was a pretty good thriller where Clint had to invade Russia and steal their latest plane, one with mind reading tech iirc.
I remember that one as a very patchy movie without having any kind of real message. People died for Clint, Clint flew the plane, …
Maybe I’m old though :-) and I know the foxbat (if I remember correctly that was maybe the plane) was the URSS drummed up “superfigjter” which, surprise, wasn’t that super.
Fun little book I just read. ‘The Defector’ by Chris Hadfield. The author actually was an astronaut, so the details are great. Soviet pilot lands a Foxbat at the Tel Aviv airport hours before the Yom Kippur War breaks out…
There’s not even a reason for Google glass.
There’s zero reason for a skullcap or implant.
But I remember back in the 90s “wearable computers” were a thing, before even smartphones.
100% impractical, and needed to carry a computer in a backpack and a monitor on glasses or attached to a hat.
Controlled usually by a weird orcania like one handed keyboard/trackball that you might have to press three buttons for the right letter.
People are always going to want to try cutting edge tech, but it’s rarely practical for anything.
Where this is different, is it involves actual brain surgery.
I read one good idea for a Google glass-type device. Say you wanted to repair your lawn mower. You’d input the proper program and you’d get a heads up display showing you every step. A little red dot would appear over the first screw, and if you looked around it would locate the proper tool.
But yeah, most of the other stuff is just tech for the sake of tech.
Not zero reason. Some people with certain disabilities could benefit from such a device. (Stephen Hawking for instance, was limited to about 10 words per minute with his button interface. A brain interface on a similar patient could be closer to normal conversion speed.)
Yeah, but the implant does nothing that can’t be done without surgery
Brain surgery isn’t just something you do for shits and gigles.
Okay, but would you rather be locked in your unmoving body or get brain surgery and have motion again? Would you rather be blind and deaf or get brain surgery and have your senses back?
What?
I dont think you understand anything about this subject…
Probably any subject, but definitely not this one
Your issue, as far as I understood it, was that the brain implants are pointless, cause they do nothing we can’t already do. There’s plenty current medical technology can’t fix, but a brain implant could (one day). Such as restoring sight by bridging cameras to the visual cortex; or restoring control over their body to disabled people, either by bypassing damaged nerves anywhere in the body or connecting prosthetics to the motor cortex. Are those things worth the trouble of going through brain surgery?
You’re vastly overestimating what Musk has…
Drastically underestimating what it would take to get that stuff…
All while ignoring that what Musk is attempting to do, has essentially already been done.
Musk just wants to shrink it down a little, while claiming he invented it.
But considering he can’t even get the brain surgery done, why would you trust his product?
Like, don’t do it right after eating. But read up on his “studies”. They’re following no scientific procedure and basically trying random shit while torturing intelligent animals to death.
And this isn’t a rant against animal testing, thats a thing that sucks but we need it. But Musk is not at the point for it yet, and from what records they do keep of the experiments, it legitimately looks like they’re not trying.
They’re not even sterilizing the surgery equipment.
You have zero idea what youre defending.
Which is true of most people defending musks companies in any field.
You just believe his claims and accept them despite zero evidence or it ever working in the past.
Why are you bringing up Musk? I fail to see how Neuralink is the killing blow to the very concept of brain-computer interfaces. Your bias is showing.
It’s true that current BCIs can’t do what I outlined as their potential benefits. Hence, why they’re potential. The technology still needs to develop before those potential benefits can be realised. Personally, I look forward to that day.