Who's fuckin with his medicine?

I have a hard time understanding why the idea of uploading your mind to a computer is more acceptable to people then implanting a probe in their skull?

I think you're dramatically overestimating the potential of what a single or even several probes on your brain could possibly accomplish. Or that such a thing would be an improvement in any way. And I think you're underestimating the cost of both the initial research and the surgery by several orders of magnitude. (Think billions or more to make such a thing work, probably 100K+ for the surgery.) Even then, it probably won't work in any particularly effective or helpful way.

I think you're dramatically overestimating the potential of what a single or even several probes on your brain could possibly accomplish. Or that such a thing would be an improvement in any way. And I think you're underestimating the cost of both the initial research and the surgery by several orders of magnitude. (Think billions or more to make such a thing work, probably 100K+ for the surgery.) Even then, it probably won't work in any particularly effective or helpful way.

I think you are underestimating the human mind. There are over 100 billion neurons in the human brain and above all else grey matter is probably the most versatile of these. With so many electrodes to communicate with I am absolutely sure the neurons could form a complex and dynamic connection with the probe. Brain gate only had 96 electrodes spread out across a very small area of the motor cortex that deals with hand movement. Imagine if we could use three or more times that many electrodes spread out across most or all of the motor cortex!

I've recently read and interesting example of how versatile grey matter actually is. Brain scans have shown that people who learn a new language after the age of 6 actually develop an entirely separate area to process that new language. I assume the the potential would be nearly unlimited since the motor cortex has a great level of connectivity to the cerebellum which houses about 60% of the neurons in our brains.

[quote name='szecs' timestamp='1328895967' post='4911728']
Who's fuckin with his medicine?

I have a hard time understanding why the idea of uploading your mind to a computer is more acceptable to people then implanting a probe in their skull?
[/quote]

Because, even if the risks were the same, one procedure is more invasive than the other.

I think you are underestimating the human mind. There are over 100 billion neurons in the human brain and above all else grey matter is probably the most versatile of these.

I'm not underestimating the human mind. I'm saying that neurons are not magical cells that will magically bind to random electrodes in the vicinity and allow you to suddenly interact with computers. That's nonsensical made up garbage.

With so many electrodes to communicate with I am absolutely sure the neurons could form a complex and dynamic connection with the probe. Brain gate only had 96 electrodes spread out across a very small area of the motor cortex that deals with hand movement.[/quote]I work for a neurology department, with a doctor specializing in motor. Maybe I'll pass your message around and see how many of the doctors agree with you that electrodes can solve any neurological communication fantasy you've got.

Electrodes do one thing: record an arbitrary, incredibly low density sampling of neuron firing at a general level. Your description doesn't even go past the surface of the motor cortex, which by the way is three dimensional. And disregarding all of that, it STILL wouldn't let you experience more immersive games (which apparently you think will happen just because there's electrodes).

A strong inductive field may only cause you to twitch but the power would unlikely be enough to damage your brain.

The reversal potential on a typical nerve is on the order or 30-40 mV, inside the central nerve system about 1/10 that. Either way (let's not be pedantic about whether it's 3 or 30), we're talking milli volts. Walking through a metal detector or close to some other heavy duty machine (maglev, MRI, huge electric motor, whatever), you can easily have several dozen to hundreds of Volts per meter. Note the absence of milli. Now the cables are only maybe a dozen centimeters or so long, so it's "only" a few volts, not hundreds of volts, but still.

What makes you believe that an electric shock 3 orders of magnitude higher than what's necessary to fire off neurons will make you "twitch" and won't cause a tonic-clonic seizure? Or... death...?

[quote name='SteveDeFacto' timestamp='1328895645' post='4911726']A strong inductive field may only cause you to twitch but the power would unlikely be enough to damage your brain.

The reversal potential on a typical nerve is on the order or 30-40 mV, inside the central nerve system about 1/10 that. Either way (let's not be pedantic about whether it's 3 or 30), we're talking milli volts. Walking through a metal detector or close to some other heavy duty machine (maglev, MRI, huge electric motor, whatever), you can easily have several dozen to hundreds of Volts per meter. Note the absence of milli. Now the cables are only maybe a dozen centimeters or so long, so it's "only" a few volts, not hundreds of volts, but still.

What makes you believe that an electric shock 3 orders of magnitude higher than what's necessary to fire off neurons will make you "twitch" and won't cause a tonic-clonic seizure? Or... death...?
[/quote]

For one thing the micro circuitry could not handle anywhere near a volt and secondly people have metal plates and bolts implanted in their skulls all the time.

I am a banana

Ignoring all of the moral, technical, medical and legal difficulties this would create... imagine what it would be like to visit a website, which as part of its load process, scans your thoughts to generate advertising tailored specifically for you. And, as you view the advertisement and start to think about it, the advertisement changes its salespitch to dynamically follow your thought processes to make it more compelling. It'd be like the most compelling and suggestively hypnotic advert you've ever seen. And, the purchasing process can be streamlined since you'd only have to mentally authorize the purchase and the software would pull your credit card data from a database or your mind. Before you know it, you're putting in an order for twenty three cases of viagra and cailis even though you're a young healthy man. Single? No problem, the company has a partnership with your local escort service. Ugh... present the technology and capitalism will find a way to exploit it to the max.

And, maybe it wouldn't even be limited to capitalism? Imagine if the political election cycles could deliver a customized campaign speech to exploit your sentiments? Or even worse, what if a authoritarian/totalitarian regime got a hold of the technology and mandated that all of its citizens got the necessary surgeries to get a direct neural connection? There wouldn't be a personal choice on whether you wanted to have a hole drilled into your head. It'd be forced on you, and if you refused, you'd be labeled as an enemy of the state. Meanwhile, the regime could routinely scan through your brain for any thoughts or tendencies which might threaten its hold on power (as a matter of national security!). If you're deemed as 'servicable', they could pipe in customized propaganda into your media sources and correct your dangerous thoughts. Otherwise, if you're irrecoverable, you'd just be carted off to a gulag, worked to death, and forgotten.

Lastly, there's the obvious military applications. There's a reason why DARPA is funding this kind of technology: If a neural interface can be made between mind and machine, then the operator of a tank, helicopter, fighter jet, etc can be remotely located and operate the vehicle as effectively as if it was an extension of their body. Having your war machines blown up won't kill your operators and you'll have less training requirements since you won't have to keep training pilots to replace the dead. The kill to death ratio would slant even further to favor the technologically advanced...and that would further lower the threshold for waging war against technologically inferior countries. Hell, you could even create an AI to learn from the actions and reactions of a human operator and then let the AI become the operator of war machines (I know it won't happen in the US military because officers are held accountable for everything that happens in their command, but whose to say that won't change or another country won't feel the same way?).

All in all, if this was possible it would be some scary shit. I say, "Just because you can doesn't mean you should.".

Ignoring all of the moral, technical, medical and legal difficulties this would create... imagine what it would be like to visit a website, which as part of its load process, scans your thoughts to generate advertising tailored specifically for you. And, as you view the advertisement and start to think about it, the advertisement changes its salespitch to dynamically follow your thought processes to make it more compelling. It'd be like the most compelling and suggestively hypnotic advert you've ever seen. And, the purchasing process can be streamlined since you'd only have to mentally authorize the purchase and the software would pull your credit card data from a database or your mind. Before you know it, you're putting in an order for twenty three cases of viagra and cailis even though you're a young healthy man. Single? No problem, the company has a partnership with your local escort service. Ugh... present the technology and capitalism will find a way to exploit it to the max.

And, maybe it wouldn't even be limited to capitalism? Imagine if the political election cycles could deliver a customized campaign speech to exploit your sentiments? Or even worse, what if a authoritarian/totalitarian regime got a hold of the technology and mandated that all of its citizens got the necessary surgeries to get a direct neural connection? There wouldn't be a personal choice on whether you wanted to have a hole drilled into your head. It'd be forced on you, and if you refused, you'd be labeled as an enemy of the state. Meanwhile, the regime could routinely scan through your brain for any thoughts or tendencies which might threaten its hold on power (as a matter of national security!). If you're deemed as 'servicable', they could pipe in customized propaganda into your media sources and correct your dangerous thoughts. Otherwise, if you're irrecoverable, you'd just be carted off to a gulag, worked to death, and forgotten.

Lastly, there's the obvious military applications. There's a reason why DARPA is funding this kind of technology: If a neural interface can be made between mind and machine, then the operator of a tank, helicopter, fighter jet, etc can be remotely located and operate the vehicle as effectively as if it was an extension of their body. Having your war machines blown up won't kill your operators and you'll have less training requirements since you won't have to keep training pilots to replace the dead. The kill to death ratio would slant even further to favor the technologically advanced...and that would further lower the threshold for waging war against technologically inferior countries. Hell, you could even create an AI to learn from the actions and reactions of a human operator and then let the AI become the operator of war machines (I know it won't happen in the US military because officers are held accountable for everything that happens in their command, but whose to say that won't change or another country won't feel the same way?).

All in all, if this was possible it would be some scary shit. I say, "Just because you can doesn't mean you should.".

What I am talking about is not only possible but at this point it is fact. However, what you are talking about is impossible with the technology I'm speaking of.