Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Cortical Cybernetic Implants 328

Posted by michael from the amazing-grace dept.
Floody writes "Wired is running a story with amazing cyberpunk "wow factor." Implanted visual cortex stimulation, complete with "percutaneous pedestal"; a metal jack installed directly into the skull. Where can I get a night vision enhancement module for this with HUD and distance finder?" We've posted a couple of previous stories about Dobelle and his work on bionic eyes, but this one has more details: one frame per second, $100,000. Wow.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cortical Cybernetic Implants More

Cortical Cybernetic Implants

Comments Filter:

  • Forget.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by iONiUM ( 530420 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @03:53PM (#4072061) Journal
    Where can I get a night vision enhancement module for this with HUD and distance finder?

    Forget that, where can I get an x-ray enhancement? Nothing like seeing through .. uhh .. nevermind ;-)

    • Yeah, and I would like 10 minutes on the holodeck with 7 of 9 - comic book guy.
    • Nah, the internet interface module. Pr0n sites will pop up like flies on the honey..
      • Yes, but if they're using Intenet Explorer to render the web pages, the only way to get rid of all the pop ups will be to remove your skull from your shoulders, wait a moment, then put it back on.
    • Forget that, where can I get an x-ray enhancement?
      An overrated skill, unless you are one of the few who find mammograms erotic.

      Hmmmm...maybe that's why Superman never seemed all that interested in Lois.

  • Borg? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Did anyone else think Borg when they saw the first picture on that site?

    Especially so after seeing the second one. The one with the wire coming out of the back of the skull.

    • Re:Borg? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Winged Cat ( 101773 )
      Augmented abilities like this are a form of power, and can be used for good or evil. The Borg, like most Hollywood cyborgs (with the exception of a few good guys like LaForge), tended to use it for evil, unfortunately. I suspect this stereotype won't go away until there's lots of people in the real world who use it for good.
      • We have a long way to go before we have to worry about the ethical implications of augmented abilities. What such stories stress too rarely is that none of these add-ons work nearly as well as the factory-standard equipment that most of us were born with. Never mind customization--we're still trying to get halfway-decent replacement parts.

  • FPS value is wrong. (Score:2, Informative)

    by phoenix26x ( 245359 )
    The article states that the device was set at 1 frame per second initially. The first part of page 4 states then they would "...gradually work the frame speed up...".

    The first version of this device installed in Jerry 20 years ago could acheive at least 4 FPS, so this version should be faster.

    • Re:FPS value is wrong. (Score:5, Funny)

      by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @04:17PM (#4072198)
      > The first version of this device installed in Jerry 20 years ago could acheive at least 4 FPS, so this version should be faster.

      If I put a big-azz heatsink in my brain with the fins sticking out the back of my head, can I overclock it to get better framerates?

      (Hmm, or watercooling. Overclock it and wander around with a big ice bath. :)

      Just one question left - for those of us who checked "C++++" (I'll be first in line to get the new cybernetic interface installed into my skull. " in our Geek Code [geekcode.com] .sigs, where do we sign up?

      Impractical but fun choice: Ability to see ultraviolet. Walk through a botanical garden and get a bee's-eye view.

      Practical but more useful choice: Ability to see near infrared.

      Impractical but even cooler choice: Ability to see far infrared. Know which dark alley the d00d you're trying to frag walked down... even if you're 5 minutes behind him. The coolant for the sensor might help with overclocking, too - anything to keep the frame-rate up! :)

      And finally, some good uses for serious overclocking - real-time image reprocessing! Imagine driving with night-vision active at night (and software to filter out glare of incoming high-beams), and use the same software to highlight road signs and banner-block ugly billboards with pictures of trees or background patterns by day. Interface with GPS, visit New York and hack it to put up a picture of the WTC towers overtop of whatever sawed-off 20-storey mundane blocks they try to "replace" them with.)

      • use the same software to highlight road signs and banner-block ugly billboards with pictures of trees or background patterns by day.

        But how long until billboard makers start using "road sign codes" to make their billboards stand out and grab your attention?
      • Is there any particular reason that you couldn't just have the camera sensative to whatever frequency you're interested in and then just detach it for a replacement by another?

        Yesterday, I went to the botanical garden, so I hooked up the UV camera. Today I am going to the girl's dorm, so hand me the X-ray detachment. Tomorrow, I'll be hunting for mice in the walls, so hand me the IR camera...nex month, heading to the Middle East to do some SpecOps Al Qaida hunting, hand me the full spectrum uber helmet...

        So long as you have a flexible enough program able to translate X signals to the standardized Y for the brain, I bet that you could modularize the setup and use WHATEVER camera(s) you wanted.
      • banner-block ugly billboards with pictures of trees or background patterns by day

        That's theft! You have no right to filter eyesores! :)

        Banner blocking via image recognition would be nice though. Instead of just being able to block known adspace (by GPS), you could block any ad anywhere. Suddenly all those annoying Old Navy walking billboards (t-shirts with legs), are plain cloth again. Oh the endless possibilities. :)

        --

  • I hope it comes with script-fu (Score:3, Funny)

    by jukal ( 523582 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @03:58PM (#4072107) Journal
    the vision-gadget should be enchanced so that it detects when you are going to see something you do not like. For example, all chicks should be photoshopped, if you know what i mean, all cars should be ferraris (well, for my neighbour, let's choose Lada), and all drinks should be Pepsi. :)

  • $100,000 too much, nah.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by roalt ( 534265 ) <slashdot DOT org AT roalt DOT com> on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @03:59PM (#4072112) Homepage Journal
    We've posted a couple of previous stories about Dobelle and his work on bionic eyes, but this one has more details: one frame per second, $100,000
    Do you think this $100,000 for 1 frame/second is too much? There might be quite some blind guys in the world who would like to pay this to see just one frame in their entire life...
    • one frame per second

      That was just the starting framerate. I believe it mentioned up to 24 frames per second, once they cranked it up.
    • There might be quite some blind guys in the world who would like to pay this to see just one frame in their entire life...

      Right. That is what makes this research possible - eager guinea pigs. A person blind from birth would give a lot of his resources to be able to see, even if experimental, even if only temporary. Any signal based on 400-700 nm EMF is better than none. The first cochlear implants had one electrode. They improved the patients' lives. Now they come with 16 electrodes, and allow people to communicate with speech. Retinal implants will follow in the next two decades, maybe faster if the current people working on it get a lot better fast.
  • Yes, very cool technology. The description however drove me nuts.

    "My arms are under his, trying to steady the weight. His head snaps toward mine, and I take it on the chin with the force of a solid right cross."

    Do we care about this? Can't he just say "occasionally, he has convulsions", rather than ranting on for multiple paragraphs about this mysterious device like its a sci-fi book.
    • Do we care about this? Can't he just say "occasionally, he has convulsions", rather than ranting on for multiple paragraphs about this mysterious device like its a sci-fi book.

      Actually, I think most science fiction -- especially movies, but the written stuff too -- tends to handwave and toss buzzwords around rather than explore this sort of sweaty reality. It's a good way of emphasizing that borg wanna-bees can't just stride in and get their own personal ethernet jacks installed yet.

    • I liked that touch in the article. What I didn't like is how the author kept jumping around between timeframes between pages of the article. At the end of page 1 he's holding down the convulsing Patient Alpha without an explanation of why, then you click to the next page and he's talking about the inventor when he was a kid. I kept trying to figure out what was broken with the site, because clearly I'd skipped a page or something (or so I thought).

      That sort of jumping between contexts only works when it's obvious it was intentional. Doing it at the bottom of a page as you click to the next makes it look like the link is pointing to the wrong place or something.

      But other than that, this is a cool device. It's not really workable yet, but it's good to see that progress is being made.

  • Fun fun (Score:5, Funny)

    by Gudlyf ( 544445 ) <<moc.ketsilaer> <ta> <fyldug>> on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @04:05PM (#4072146) Homepage Journal
    "Suddenly, the color drains from the patient's face. His deadened eyes roll back. Then another warping convulsion."

    Yeah, sounds like oodles of fun. Shiver...

  • in the same iridescent blue as Tally Isham's Zeiss Ikons?

    For those of you who don't get the above joke see the link below.

    http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~tonya/cyberpunk/proj ec ts/garza/cp_optic.htm
    http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/ ~tonya/cyberpunk/projec ts/garza/cp_info6.htm
    http://www.antonraubenweiss .com/gibson/gibson.html

  • MPAA (Score:2, Funny)

    by Twillerror ( 536681 )
    Will be required to send a signal to headquarters everytime copyrighted movies are seen.

  • I'm waiting for... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MarvinMouse ( 323641 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @04:12PM (#4072171) Homepage Journal
    when I can sit down at a desk with maybe just a keyboard, and plug in the sound screen and everything directly into my head.

    Sound would be amazing if they could get the entire range (including that which is naturally lost after childhood) to work. Imagine hearing music absolutely perfectly clear. Wouldn't that be awesome. :-)

    And screen would be even better. Considering I have contacts as is, so the screen isn't 100% clear, just good enough.

    Imagine if they could have the screen show up with clarity beyond that of 20/20 or even 20/10 . Movies where everything is perfectly clear. :-)

    If scientists were to actually work on ways to "jack" ourselves in. There are so many things we could do with it. Even just the sheer speed increase of data entry if we just had to think about it.

    The possiblities are endless...
    • > when I can sit down at a desk with maybe just a keyboard, and plug in the sound screen and everything directly into my head.

      As cool as it sounds to have an implant in your skull, there's a long-term risk of infection.

      The other group they were talking about - that was implanting smaller, lower-voltage electrodes directly into the cortex - sounds like a better way to jack in.

      Think of the implant in the brain, and a wireless interface between the computer and the implant. Rather than a mechanical plug, the gadget you glom "onto" your brain could be as simple as a baseball cap with a small transmitter on the back of the head. (And you could have all the wiring you wanted going from the belt-pack to the hat. The transmission of data from hat to brain would be wireless.)

      (This would also be a cool open door for TEMPEST h4x041ng - imagine walking through a crowd with a sensitive receiver and picking up stray emissions from people. You could do a "Being John Malkovich" routine, effectively tuning into a third party's wireless brain-vision transmitter and seeing the world - literally - through his eyes.)

    • imagine if they could scan your brain to be sure you haven't done anything illegal.
    • Security would be VITAL for something like this, and would require a lot more work than what we do today for internet stuff. Stuff that's pretty innocent and irrelevant today would become a big deal if your brain was networked. Imagine if you published something interesting in a journal that geeks liked to read about, so someone mentions it on slashdot and the next thing you know your brain is being inadvertantly DOSed by the slashdot effect.

      "Malkovich". Malcovich! Malkovich?
      MalKoVIcH 'Malkovich'
       Malkovich
      Malkovich.

    • Definitely... I'm completely deaf in one ear (some weird bug tailed on my measles when I was a kid and fried the connection between my ear and my brain) and you don't know how much I'd give to be able to finally hear from both ears again.

      Hearing from one ear only sucks (well, better than to be deaf obviously!) because it precludes all sorts of careers (cops, pilots, ...) due to the fact that you can't know where a sound is coming from and because it's impossible to do the 'trick' to 'focus' on what a person is saying and ignoring the background noise...

    • why keyboard? seems like that would be very advantageous, and possibly the easiest thing to interface directly

  • Awesome (Score:4, Interesting)

    by grmoc ( 57943 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @04:14PM (#4072182)

    Now the question that would be interesting...

    What happens with copyright laws when people have these (types of) implants in them?
    If you can record, verbatim, (i.e. through the use of some static ram, etc) what you see as a "perfect" digital copy, then would that be copyright infringment? Is the implant going to be considered the same as other (external) hardware?

    Its a sticky issue, imho- Will the copyright holder "rights" force us to unlearn what we have learned because they have a patent or copyright on the idea? What happens when the electronic thought ends up being the same as normal "human" thought because the devices are a part of us?

    I imagine that "our" lawmakers havn't even considered considering such a thing. The lack of foresight isn't suprising, but it is disheartening.

    -R
    • If you can record, verbatim, (i.e. through the use of some static ram, etc) what you see as a "perfect" digital copy, then would that be copyright infringment? Is the implant going to be considered the same as other (external) hardware?

      I don't anything about copyright, but I'm sure it would probably precent chicks from getting drunk around me. * sigh * There goes my sex life...

    • Re:Awesome (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Winged Cat ( 101773 )
      The law as it currently stands is that, once they enter your brain, the perceptions are your inviolable IP. Of course, that's mainly because sharing thoughts and ideas had notably less than 100% fidelity.

      Which makes for an interesting side-trip: what happens if, instead of attending world class universities and studying, one can just download and install a few files from reputable universities' Web sites in order to grok, say, physics just (or at least nearly) as well as the best physicists? But that requires hacking into the memories, which the subject of this article only begins to touch on.

      Back on topic, I would suspect that, as with the fact of file sharing today, the laws will be widely ignored in practice if they would otherwise inconvenience the user. You could have people getting wired eyes so that whatever they see can be admitted as court evidence (which some undercover cops, to my knowledge, would gladly give their right arms for...and even more gladly give up just one or two body parts that get working artificial replacements as part of the deal). Many military uses also spring to mind. And then there's the art perspective of using yourself as a camera. All this would make the IP concerns seem trivial, especially if artificial eyes entered into wide use before the IP industry thought to purchase restrictive legistlation.
      • The law is all about definitions...

        What does it mean "to enter the brain"? Might it be so defined that the implant is considered a foriegn object and thus outside the brain?

        My argument is that current copyright law would already cover these applications with the changed definition...

        Does it matter that such devices would be a great boon for society ("perfect" memory storage, better vision, etc. etc.), no!

        Look at copyright extension, patent law ...
        We're lapsing back into the "greed is good" philosophy.

        To a certain extent, yes I believe that to be true, however, it must be regulated to be productive. The current climate seems to be: If it makes a profit it MUST be good..

        All of this (copyright extension, etc) is an example of how shifted definitions can extend the effect of the law...

        ok,
    • Obviously to comply with the the DRM laws, upon detecting a water mark on copyrighted material, the implants would shut down.

      • Re:Awesome (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Russ Steffen ( 263 )

        I'm sure that would be a last resort. First, it would attempt to deduct the appropriate royalties from your bank account.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:Awesome (Score:3, Insightful)

      by rseuhs ( 322520 )
      Who needs laws when we have technology?

      I bet in the EULA you have to sign to use such a device there is a clause like:

      " * Digital Rights Management (Security). You agree that in order to protect the integrity of content and software protected by digital rights management ("Secure Content"), [insert big corp here] may provide security related updates that will be automatically downloaded into your brain. These security related updates may disable your ability to see/listen Secure Content and/or may disable portions of your brain. If we provide such a security update, we will use reasonable efforts to post notices on a web site explaining the update."

      (I like the last sentence best. I just could not make the last sentence any better than the original [bsdvault.net]. This last sentence assures me that everything is fine and nobody has to worry.)

      Now just let's hope that they never implement Product Activation on this. (Use of insecure content detected, brain shutting down...)

  • This is one area of technology... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Bogatyr ( 69476 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @04:17PM (#4072196) Homepage
    I will NOT be volunteering for beta-testing of. No, no and no. I'll wait for other people to pioneer this field. I like my brain, and until they get the "regenerate and repair of brain damage" thing down pat I'll wait. For people who need this, I'm happy it's advancing, but I want to give the tech a bit to mature to the point it's a viable elective option.

  • Wires? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Skyshadow ( 508 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @04:21PM (#4072213) Homepage
    Er, wouldn't it be easier to use wireless communications and transdermal power rather than poking holes in you're #1 infection prevention mechanism (your skin)?
    • Nevermind that...

      Don't get into a fight if you got implants like that. For starters...you can only see 12 Frames per second, so you can't block. But supposing the guy rips the cables out? Obviously you wouldn't feel any pain (no pain sensors in the brain), but imagine the blood? You'd pass out rather quickly.

    • I wonder how that interface goes through the membrane (can't remember the name) that surrounds the brain - as well as how it heals. This membrane (from what I understand) has nerve endings to feel "pain" (the brain cannot feel pain), and also acts to protect the brain from infection as well. It lies between the brain and the inner surface of the skull, so I wonder if the socket pierces this, or if only the electrode wires do (which would be better, but not much).
    • Bluetooth. So when you walk into the room with your computer everything can get automaticly synced up.

  • How beneficial? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by z0ot ( 598478 )
    I would be interested in knowing how beneficial this would be across different types of blindness. Patient Alpha grew up with sight (two words - safety goggles) and one can presume he knew how the world was supposed to 'look' prior to decoding the phosphenes.
    Would a person born blind be able to use this technology? If so, better or worse than a patient who had sight? On the one hand, a person born blind may not have any preconcieved notions about how the world is supposed to look and may be better at interpreting the phosphenes as the 'real world'. On the other hand, I wonder if the phosphenes would be interpretable at all to a visual cortex that has never learned how to see.

  • Cost (Score:3, Funny)

    by godemon ( 599146 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @04:30PM (#4072274)
    It sure costs a lot... they'll probably get advertisers to co-pay it so they can run their advertisements over your sight every 10 min :D You know that's where it's going.
  • If they can do eyes, which I would have (apprently wrongly) assumed would have been the most complicated, when will they be able to wire up people to take electronic input from the other four senses?

    And what about the other direction? Taking signals for muscle movements directly out of the brain?

    I heard at one point that there was speculation about injecting cell-sized machines into the blood stream that would find their way to the brain and interface themselves with the host's neurons, without any surgery. Obviously, there's a long way to go before anything like this, but it might actually be possible 50 years from now.

    The "Matrix Experience" would be a lot more attractive if it didn't involve someone opening your skull up and poking around inside your brain.

  • Super vision? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Wrexen ( 151642 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @04:38PM (#4072314) Homepage
    Where can I get a night vision enhancement module for this with HUD and distance finder?

    How about you just be thankful for having working eyes at all? It's something too many of us take for granted
    • Isn't that our nature?

      "I should be making more money", instead of "I'm so glad I have a job".

      "My house is too small", instead of "I'm happy to have a roof over my head".

      There is a lot that I take for granted. But I stand where I am at and reach for more. There is something to be said for taking time to appreciate all of the "blessings" that we have, but it shouldn't stop us from dreaming of more.
    • It's something too many of us take for granted

      and so we should. whatever else, working body parts are "granted" - it's those who are missing them who are screwed, not us who are "gifted"

  • You nexus huh? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by da3dAlus ( 20553 ) <dustin.grau@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @04:53PM (#4072404) Homepage Journal
    Chew: "I designed your eyes."
    Roy: "Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes."

  • Something I wonder about... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by cr0sh ( 43134 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @05:01PM (#4072453) Homepage
    I read the article all the way through. Toward the end of the article, the reporter comments on wearing a Sony Glasstron hooked up to an artificial vision system that shows a 32x32 matrix of what he is "seeing" through a camera, to get an idea of how such a system would work in the future.

    At first, he is shown a lower res image (lower than 32x32) - he then is upgraded to 32x32 and asked if he can see anything. He can see blobs of color and such - but then suddenly, he says things "resolve", and he can see things more clearly. He asked if they upped the res again, and they responded "No", that his brain was re-learning the "see" the new image.

    Now, I don't know what kind of image processing software and such they were using (for all I know it may be some simple image mosaic tiling software like is used to mask peoples faces on TV), but I wonder how "sharp" or well defined the image he saw was? Further I wonder if you did look at one of those mosaic images on a TV in the right conditions (ie, through an HMD with no outside light penetrating like the reporter wore), if the res would "pop up", and you could see who the real person was?

    Also, this effect seems real similar to what was noted a long time ago back when VR was just getting started (early 90's), in that when using a low-res HMD (320x200 or less pixels), you had to "learn" to "look past" the pixels, and the image would slowly become clearer.

    So, in the area of VR HMD research, I am wondering if resolution really matters at all, or if there is a minimum resolution you can give the eyes, and let the brain fill in the rest? If this is really the case, then wide FOV HMDs, using lower-res displays and some training (so the brain can learn to "see" in one of these things) could possibily bring VR back in the limelight.

    Anybody have any thoughts or comments on this?

    • Resolution really matters, but we (humans) are capable of resolving "sub-pixel" features by interpolation. The retinal cones are spaced at least 1-minute-of-arc apart, however we are able to accurately place a vernier line to within 1/10 of a minute of arc. This is probably done in a way that is the converse of anti-aliasing in image processing: you can create non-jagged edges by using intermediate gray scales to imply curves.

      So even with 32 x 32 pixel images, if we are allowed to scan slowly across an image, we can see sub-pixel elements as they average across pixel areas and we see finer grain changes in intensity which our brain can infer is due to sub pixel features.

      • So since the human eye has 6 to 7 million cones (i.e. megapixels), that would be like a 2500x2500 display, or 25,000 x 25,000 with the 1/10th subpixel interpolation you mentioned. But that would be a display that's concentrated in the narrow FOV of your fovea... whereas your peripheral vision is always fuzzy (because it's mostly sensitive to light and motion, not detail).

        --

    • Well based on the number of rods and cones in the human eye, our eye's "resolution" is only approximately 1000 "pixels" if you consider a single rod or cone responding to an individual part of the visual field. The brain fills in a LOT of information for us to have such a rich visual experience.

      Like the blind spot for example. Try this out, its quite neat. Grab a pencil with your right hand and cover your left eye. Hold the pencil vertically with the eraser at approximately eye level directly in front of you. Move the pencil slowly to the right but continue to look straight ahead with your right eye. Try not to look directly at the pencil, but you'll notice that the eraser will disappear about 30 deg right of center if you use your peripheral vision.

      This phenomenon occurs because your eye lacks photoreceptors in that region of your fovia, which is where the optic nerve connects to your eyeball. Our brains are VERY excellent at filling in this gap and you would have never noticed this unless you tried a test like above. Patient Alpha's brain is doing the exact same thing with the information that's being presented to it. Even though he's only receiving a 32x32 image, his brain is learning to fill in the gaps and that is why he thought they upped the resolution.
    • So, in the area of VR HMD research, I am wondering if resolution really matters at all, or if there is a minimum resolution you can give the eyes, and let the brain fill in the rest?

      There's a commonly ignored dimension here that is very important. It's time.

      So, generate a "full scene" that follows head movement and you'll have one resolution and update rate that is requried to "fill" the user perception.

      Generate a "full scene" that displays directly to the users eyes and follows eye motion and there will be another (lower) resolution and movement rate (faster?) that will be required to "fill" the user perception.

      The biggest problem with VR and video displays these days is that most "chunk" rather than always maintaining a seamless viewing experience.

      What do you think would happen if your eyes cut out for the wrong 1/4 of a second during a boxing match?
  • View porno and troll slashdot at work without moving a finger or changing the (desktop) screen.

    Except that your boss might wonder why you are sweating and panting. But, just say you are solving a tough algorithm.

  • neuromancer (Score:3, Interesting)

    by _ph1ux_ ( 216706 ) on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @05:17PM (#4072564)
    I recently bought neuromancer on Books on Tape so I could "re-read" it while I commuted. I have been listening to it every day for the past week on my 45 minute drive into work.

    one of the things I was thinking about yesterday while driving home had to do with implant such as this one:

    "seamless where the skin stopped being skin - and turned into steel" (or something)

    what are the consequences of having steel in your head/body. It would seem that its actually rather dangerous in that its much more conductive that flesh for both electricity and heat.

    I was thinking about it - If I had an implant - I would want to avoid all forms of microwave energy if that implant was steel...

    I dont know enough abo8ut it - but it would seem that if they start giving this stuff out to soldiers in the future, a good attack would be to get all those metal bits implanted into their bodies to heat up real fast - and from great distance.
  • We have already replaced hearts with artificial ones (not that the patients live long), limbs with prosthetic attachments, many people who have lost the function of one or both kidneys spend large portions of their lives hooked up to dialysis machines, and now we're making a serious attempt to replace eyes with electronics wired directly to the brain.

    At what point will we begin classifying people as "cyborgs" or "semipeople?" Will there be an associated stigma, or will we develop a PC term like Pentium-6-Enhanced Being?

  • You really don't want wires or other stuff installed in your brain yet if you can at all avoid it: it can lead to inflammation and other tissue reactions. The sockets themselves are also potential entrypoints for infections. The situation will doubtlessly improve over time, as people find better electrode materials and better implantable power sources.

    Note, incidentally, that other kinds of neural implants are being tried and used for restoring hearing and movement (with varying degrees of success).

    Still, it's hard to say what one would do when faced with complete blindness. I would probably live with an implant for treatment of Parkinsonism, chronic pain, or epillepsy, all of which can now be treated to some degree by electrical brain stimulation. I suspect that's also where the remaining problems will get worked out first.

  • Flabbergasted. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tarsi210 ( 70325 ) <nathan AT nathanpralle DOT com> on Wednesday August 14, 2002 @05:35PM (#4072666) Homepage Journal
    Dude. I mean, DUDE. I never thought I'd see this during my lifetime, never. This is farking amazing.

    I mean, sure. VR? Sound plausible. HUD? Yup. PDAs? I figured they get there eventually. 120GB HDs? Why not? The sky's the limit, folks. Free porn? Hell yes!

    I am not very often surprised by anything out there today when it concerns technology, mostly because I know (being a geek) how a lot of it works and I can judge the general plausibility of such an object. I won't be surprised to hear the 10GHz barrier was broken because I know it can and will happen, it's just a matter of time.

    I'm happy to say this is one of the things that made me sit back in my chair and go, "Whoa.....shit." Interfacing with a lot of things came to my mind but wetware has always been...well, wetware. Kinda sensitive, unknown, not-computer-friendly stuffs.

    Man is this cool.
  • because by the time this materializes and becomes practical everything will be DRM-ed anyway. Imagine these devices checking your DRM licenses before you read your books, use software, or watch TV.

    I've lost all faith.
  • Why teach them to see through their brain when you can teach them to see through their skin? If an image was projected onto a patient's chest using movable brail pixels, they would have an image of things at a distance through a familiar sensation - touch.

    Forget 32 pixel by 32 pixel resolution also. You could get at least 640x480 with "sharpness" of the braildot indicating color. The best part is the reaserchers would be able to "see" exactly what a patient was "seeing", thus making development much easier.

    Nothing would be placed inside the skin so the FDA and AMA could be told to bug off too.

    I'll bet I could do it for under $100,000 total development cost for a prototype.
  • They started him off on 1 fps (to avoid another overload I guess) but then upped it... "They gradually work the frame speed up.." (top of page 4)
  • Maybe it's because I've seen Ghost in the Shell and parts of it gave me the heebie-jeebies, but I'm really not interested in any sort of a direct interface to my brain. I don't need to get ghost hacked...
  • Anyone worried about computer virus being written for and transfered directly to the human brain? Especially so if a certain gargantuan computer software company, with its tentacles in everything and its views on security, wrests the software side of the interface away from the rest of the market.

    Tin foil hat time:
    Will they come with mandatory GPS transmitters like cell phones, too? (Got to make sure they aren't bein used for terrorism, now...)
  • This is without a doubt of the more impressive HCI developments I have seen in the last decade, and steady progress is being made.
    I note that progress is also beging made in the reverse process (generating an image by monitoring neurons firing in the visual cortex). Check out this paper:-

    Visual Decoding [berkeley.edu]

    Which details images generated directly from a cats brain.

    One point to keep in mind is that sadly this technology can only help people whom had sight at birth, but lost it after early childhood. If the patient has been blind from birth, the parts of their brain that would be normally used for vision have not developed and have been "reassigned" to other sensory tasks. (Which is why blind people tend on average to have more actue senses of hearing, smell, touch and taste - there are more neurons available to process them!) If this device was deployed on such a person, it is doubful that they could make much sense of what they could "see".
  • How about having extra eyes that you can use while the main pair is resting from computer work? Just put on your cool glasses and plug into your other eyes.

    How about having 10 eyes at the same time that show you a panoramic view of the space around you, can our brains handle that?

    How about wireless eyes? All of a sudden a frase: "I've got an eye on you" has a whole new meaning to it!

    How about using eyes with much more surface to receive more light for better magniffication?

    How about being able to actually *see* what other people see by sharing the same eye among many people?

    What about new types of entertainment where you are plugged into millions of eyes doing crazy stuff or into gigantic eyes... Computer games with Virtual Reality? You don't need a better monitor, your brain is your monitor.

    Going to Las Vegas and using your super vision during a game of Black Jack? Why not - if your frame rate is high enough and you have a video buffer built in, just record how the cards are shuffled and play back at much lower speeds to see the positions of cards in the deck.

    The possibilities are enormous.
  • I remember reading about this kind of technology years ago, back in college. I didn't think it would have advanced this far, this soon.

    There's a history of macular degeneration in my family, and my vision is currently around 20/800. I always joked about getting my eyes replaced when they got too bad, assuming my vision would hold out until my mid-50s and the technology got that far. It seems as though I might not have been joking after all :)

  • Ubergeek! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Draoi ( 99421 ) <.draiocht. .at. .mac.com.> on Thursday August 15, 2002 @09:02AM (#4076057)
    While this article is unbelievably awesome, what really shocks me is just exactly Patient Alpha can do right now *without* any visual aid. This guy is just incredible - most sighted people couldn't achieve this much.

    He lives in rural Canada, where the winters are brutal. He makes his living by selling firewood. Working alone, he splits logs with the largest chain saw currently available on the market. During the high season, he'll manhandle 12,000 pounds of wood in a day. He helped his wife deliver six of his eight children at home, without a physician or midwife. Jens dismisses the whole hospital birthing process as rapacious big business.

    Starting from scratch and without the aid of sight, Jens designed and built a solar- and wind-powered house and pulled his family off the grid. In his spare hours, he programs computers, tunes pianos, and gives the occasional concert. For a blind man to give a classical recital requires memorizing whole scores -- a process that can take nearly five years. To cover his surgery, Jens gave quite a few recitals.

    ... absolutely incredible!

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close