6 ms·

Right now the state of the art options are either surgically implanted electrode arrays (invasive and very limited in what they can detect), electroencephalogra

Right now the state of the art options are either surgically implanted electrode arrays (invasive and very limited in what they can detect), electroencephalogram type helmets (non-invasive but only get very vague signals), or fMRI type imaging (more precise but still only gross detail, and requires an enormous complex machine). There's no obvious way forward with any of these that produces what you or I might consider a true brain machine interface. We don't have the tech AND we don't understand the brain enough. Fortunately you don't need a brain-reading device to produce something useful, just like you don't need a teraflop computer to go to the moon. I've written recently about an EEG helmet that can be used by profoundly disabled folks to navigate a UI, type, and so on, and that doesn't require a precise signal at all. So I think what you'll find is while the Musks of the world are chasing a sci-fi dream of what they think the technology ought to be, most of the utility will come out of using what it's actually capable of in a smart and compassionate way.

echelon 5y ago
> Fortunately you don't need a brain-reading device to produce something useful If we're ever to achieve any measure of "immortality", BCI is probably the only way. We could clone monoclonal, brainless humans with universal HLA haplotypes for spare parts assuming we could get past the religious/ick factor. Beyond just organ harvesting, a full body (ie head) transplant could rejuvenate the immune system and potentially reverse many of the effects of aging assuming we could get past central tolerance. (Maybe not an issue with immunosuppressants or monoclonal lines without B/T cells, but that sucks and I think it can be optimized.) This would be the best next step in increasing human lifespan dramatically. It wouldn't save you from physical accident-induced death or irreversible brain atrophy, though. Completely sci-fi conjecture: If we could build clusters of machines capable of running the same distributed work that the human brain does in real time, and if we could get enough signal out of the brain through much more advanced (and invasive) instruments, we might be able to model a subset of a person's memories and run them at real time. If instead of just copying signal, perhaps we could leave a human hooked up and "amplify" their capacity for thinking by supplementing their brain with a computer. We might be able to copy memories into the new computerized system while the person is still alive and thinking. If the way consciousness works is amenable to such a process, we might be able to perform a one way "move" operation. Essentially digitizing a person as a destructive operation, and killing the body when the process is complete. Of course we're not anywhere close to anything like this. It's all hypothetical and not at all close to the science. Cloning humans though: entirely within our capacity. We'd see incredible medical benefits in doing it, including substantial lifespan increases if we routinely replace older parts sourced from clones. People are just too religious. (Monoclonal brainless humans would lack a consciousness. They're not much different from plants in that respect. Entirely ethical to use for parts and experiments.)
- hattmall 5y ago
  Why can't we just clone individual parts? Why would we need to do a whole human and would it have to grow from baby to adult in the normal life span? Do we think any "mad scientist" types doing this, or is it just easier to use condemed prisoners?
  - IntrepidWorm 5y ago
    If you are growing single organs such as a liver, I would assume it to be more cost effective to simply grow the individual organ. If you are growing more complex structures and organ systems such as entire limbs or, for instance, a large portion of circulatory system (I have no idea how that would work surgically speaking, but we're already so far out in the weeds in this thread) I could see it making sense to grow the supporting structures in tandem.
  - IntrepidWorm 5y ago
    Regarding your second point, I would strongly caution against considering even the most egrigious offenders for forced organ harvesting. There are currently serious allegations regarding China's black market organ trade (briefly, that political prisoners, dissidents, and minority populations are quietly executed and harvested to supply China's thriving organ market). As medical advances in transplanting improve and expand the ways we can repair the human body, this will only become more of a problem in the parts of the world where government designated "undesirables" can be quietly disappeared. It is simpler, cleaner, and less prone to malfeasance and corruption to limit organ harvesting to registered consenting individuals and lab grown tissue, where a chain of custody for the tissue can be established.
- samplatt 5y ago
  If you haven't already, you need to read as much Greg Egan as you can. His short stories "Learning To Be Me" and "Closer" are as disturbing as they are wonderful, but it's the novel "Zendegi" where Egan really starts to explore the challenges of BCI and actual integration or digitization of a human mind.
- Juliate 5y ago
myth_drannon 5y ago
Which eeg helmet? Openbci?
- devindotcom 5y ago
  https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/04/cognixions-brain-monitoring-headset-enables-fluid-communication-for-people-with-severe-disabilities/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/04/cognixions-brain-monitorin...

echelon 5y ago

> Fortunately you don't need a brain-reading device to produce something useful If we're ever to achieve any measure of "immortality", BCI is probably the only way. We could clone monoclonal, brainless humans with universal HLA haplotypes for spare parts assuming we could get past the religious/ick factor. Beyond just organ harvesting, a full body (ie head) transplant could rejuvenate the immune system and potentially reverse many of the effects of aging assuming we could get past central tolerance. (Maybe not an issue with immunosuppressants or monoclonal lines without B/T cells, but that sucks and I think it can be optimized.) This would be the best next step in increasing human lifespan dramatically. It wouldn't save you from physical accident-induced death or irreversible brain atrophy, though. Completely sci-fi conjecture: If we could build clusters of machines capable of running the same distributed work that the human brain does in real time, and if we could get enough signal out of the brain through much more advanced (and invasive) instruments, we might be able to model a subset of a person's memories and run them at real time. If instead of just copying signal, perhaps we could leave a human hooked up and "amplify" their capacity for thinking by supplementing their brain with a computer. We might be able to copy memories into the new computerized system while the person is still alive and thinking. If the way consciousness works is amenable to such a process, we might be able to perform a one way "move" operation. Essentially digitizing a person as a destructive operation, and killing the body when the process is complete. Of course we're not anywhere close to anything like this. It's all hypothetical and not at all close to the science. Cloning humans though: entirely within our capacity. We'd see incredible medical benefits in doing it, including substantial lifespan increases if we routinely replace older parts sourced from clones. People are just too religious. (Monoclonal brainless humans would lack a consciousness. They're not much different from plants in that respect. Entirely ethical to use for parts and experiments.)

hattmall 5y ago
Why can't we just clone individual parts? Why would we need to do a whole human and would it have to grow from baby to adult in the normal life span? Do we think any "mad scientist" types doing this, or is it just easier to use condemed prisoners?
- IntrepidWorm 5y ago
  If you are growing single organs such as a liver, I would assume it to be more cost effective to simply grow the individual organ. If you are growing more complex structures and organ systems such as entire limbs or, for instance, a large portion of circulatory system (I have no idea how that would work surgically speaking, but we're already so far out in the weeds in this thread) I could see it making sense to grow the supporting structures in tandem.
- IntrepidWorm 5y ago
  Regarding your second point, I would strongly caution against considering even the most egrigious offenders for forced organ harvesting. There are currently serious allegations regarding China's black market organ trade (briefly, that political prisoners, dissidents, and minority populations are quietly executed and harvested to supply China's thriving organ market). As medical advances in transplanting improve and expand the ways we can repair the human body, this will only become more of a problem in the parts of the world where government designated "undesirables" can be quietly disappeared. It is simpler, cleaner, and less prone to malfeasance and corruption to limit organ harvesting to registered consenting individuals and lab grown tissue, where a chain of custody for the tissue can be established.
samplatt 5y ago
If you haven't already, you need to read as much Greg Egan as you can. His short stories "Learning To Be Me" and "Closer" are as disturbing as they are wonderful, but it's the novel "Zendegi" where Egan really starts to explore the challenges of BCI and actual integration or digitization of a human mind.
Juliate 5y ago

myth_drannon 5y ago

Which eeg helmet? Openbci?

devindotcom 5y ago
https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/04/cognixions-brain-monitoring-headset-enables-fluid-communication-for-people-with-severe-disabilities/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/04/cognixions-brain-monitorin...