Scientists Grow Mini Human Brains To Power Computers (bbc.com) 31
"A small number of researchers are making real progress trying to create computers out of living cells," reports the BBC:
Among those leading the way are a group of scientists in Switzerland, who I went to meet. One day, they hope we could see data centres full of "living" servers which replicate aspects of how artificial intelligence (AI) learns — and could use a fraction of the energy of current methods.
That is the vision of Dr Fred Jordan, co-founder of the FinalSpark lab I visited. We are all used to the ideas of hardware and software in the computers we currently use. The somewhat eyebrow-raising term Dr Jordan and others in the field use to refer to what they are creating is "wetware". In simple terms, it involves creating neurons which are developed into clusters called organoids, which in turn can be attached to electrodes — at which point the process of trying to use them like mini-computers can begin...
For FinalSpark, the process begins with stem cells derived from human skin cells, which they buy from a clinic in Japan. The actual donors are anonymous... In the lab, FinalSpark's cellular biologist Dr Flora Brozzi handed me a dish containing several small white orbs. Each little sphere is essentially a tiny, lab-grown mini-brain, made out of living stem cells which have been cultured to become clusters of neurons and supporting cells — these are the "organoids"... After undergoing a process which can last several months, the organoids are ready to be attached to an electrode and then prompted to respond to simple keyboard commands... Electrical stimulations are important first steps towards the team's bigger goal of triggering learning in the biocomputer's neurons so they can eventually adapt to perform tasks...
FinalSpark are not the only scientists working in the biocomputing space. Australian firm Cortical Labs announced in 2022 that it had managed to get artificial neurons to play the early computer game Pong. In the US, researchers at Johns Hopkins University are also building "mini-brains" to study how they process information — but in the context of drug development for neurological conditions like Alzheimer's and autism.
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader fjo3 for sharing the news.
That is the vision of Dr Fred Jordan, co-founder of the FinalSpark lab I visited. We are all used to the ideas of hardware and software in the computers we currently use. The somewhat eyebrow-raising term Dr Jordan and others in the field use to refer to what they are creating is "wetware". In simple terms, it involves creating neurons which are developed into clusters called organoids, which in turn can be attached to electrodes — at which point the process of trying to use them like mini-computers can begin...
For FinalSpark, the process begins with stem cells derived from human skin cells, which they buy from a clinic in Japan. The actual donors are anonymous... In the lab, FinalSpark's cellular biologist Dr Flora Brozzi handed me a dish containing several small white orbs. Each little sphere is essentially a tiny, lab-grown mini-brain, made out of living stem cells which have been cultured to become clusters of neurons and supporting cells — these are the "organoids"... After undergoing a process which can last several months, the organoids are ready to be attached to an electrode and then prompted to respond to simple keyboard commands... Electrical stimulations are important first steps towards the team's bigger goal of triggering learning in the biocomputer's neurons so they can eventually adapt to perform tasks...
FinalSpark are not the only scientists working in the biocomputing space. Australian firm Cortical Labs announced in 2022 that it had managed to get artificial neurons to play the early computer game Pong. In the US, researchers at Johns Hopkins University are also building "mini-brains" to study how they process information — but in the context of drug development for neurological conditions like Alzheimer's and autism.
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader fjo3 for sharing the news.
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt they are that tiny.
Re: (Score:2)
We'll be fine, then. There's lots more gold than Sarah Conner clones.
More dystopia (Score:4, Insightful)
Did they take The Matrix to be a guidebook, or desirable future?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: More dystopia (Score:2)
The dollhouse is the one that used human brains for compute power
LOL (Score:4, Interesting)
"...at which point the process of trying to use them like mini-computers can begin..."
as if anyone would want that to happen.
The challenge isn't creating a neuron, it's what to do with it. This is like AI only far worse, it's not a human brain at all it's a collection of neurons of some unknown organization an operation. We have neurons already and we don't need to feed them sugar or argue over ethical treatment, plus we can rewire as we want. This is rank stupidity.
Re:LOL (Score:5, Insightful)
as if anyone would want that to happen.
Indeed. I also think it is high time to bring the "ethics" hammer down on these people. Research in order to evaluate the effects of medication on bran-tissue is somewhat problematic, but has real world applications for sick people and hence is acceptable, within limits. This research is not acceptable.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, probably. Fortunately, the tech is not there for that (long-term electrodes all do not work for this and material sciences is moving very slowly), but eventually this will clearly be used for "generation of training data" (and, obviously, mass-scale mental surveillance, because humans craving power are all completely evil crap). And then it will be "Oh, you want your food-stamps for this month so your kids do not starve? Well, have this nice, safe surgical procedure and you will get them!"
Re: (Score:2)
as if anyone would want that to happen.
Indeed. I also think it is high time to bring the "ethics" hammer down on these people. Research in order to evaluate the effects of medication on bran-tissue is somewhat problematic, but has real world applications for sick people and hence is acceptable, within limits. This research is not acceptable.
What is this "ethics" word? If it ever existed, I'm sure it must be some ancient relic of a bygone age. We're on a holy mission to drive profit through surveillance. Your "ethics," was it? Can't possibly be relevant.
Re: (Score:2)
evil (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And why in all unholy dystopia did they pick human brain cells over monkeys?Shut it down.
Are human brain cells significantly distinct from monkey brain cells? I agree that human brains are different from monkey brains, but are human brain cells really different in an important way from monkey brain cells? It seems to be how the cells are put together that is significant.
What could possibly go right? (Score:3)
The scify horror plots write themselves. The only saving grace is that itâ(TM)s difficult to imagine connecting to neural tissue with enough bandwidth to be useful.
Mutations and viruses (Score:5, Insightful)
A while back people were experimenting with storage using cells but couldn't guarantee the data wouldn't get corrupted if it got a virus or mutated. Seems too vulnerable to be viable.
I hope... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I hope... (Score:2)
This proves it, (Score:1)
Trumps mini brain could power a computer!
Re: (Score:1)
Trumps mini brain could power a computer!
I have the best mini brain. Trust me, you're going to love it. Everyone tells me that, and did you know about my uncle? He was a genius!
A bold breakthrough! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: A bold breakthrough! (Score:1)
Beer (Score:2)
brains (Score:1)
Star Trek: The Ultimate Computer (Score:1)
Right out of a horror movie. (Score:2)
Even if they used Orangutan brains, I would still think this is a horror story.
The people that funded this, the people that are in charge, and the biologists that did the work, they must all be sociopaths.
The best that can be said about them is "at least they are not out there murdering people."
Never Alike? (Score:2)
Cells are grown. Chips are manufactured to exacting details. Do we really want biological computers where each one is a bit different and thus produce different results?
At what point ... (Score:2)
... when it says "Please don't switch me off" do we decide it's sentient and not just a conditioned reflex?