Slashdot Mirror


Artificial Vision for the Blind

castanaveras writes "Canadian doctors implanted an artificial eye into a blind man - it performs well enough for him to be able to drive (admittedly in an empty parking lot)." We've done lots of previous stories about bionic eyes.

138 of 188 comments (clear)

  1. Glass Eyes by howman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now that they can replace your glass eye with one that actually lets you see, I guess my novelty glass eyes won't do so well... It would have been nice to see them go into production, the magic 8 ball eye, the screen saver eye, and the flashing 12:00 eye... I wonder how long it will be before someone works out how to advirtise directly to your brain by hacking your eyes... gives whole new meaning to feed my eyes doesn't it.

    --
    flinging poop since 1969
    1. Re:Glass Eyes by Spaceman_83 · · Score: 1

      You should try reading a part of Stephenson's Diamond Age, where such a phenomenon is actually descibed. Though the person who had his eyed 'hacked' by a taiwaneese firm eventually killed himself.

  2. canadian doctors? by Barbarian · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually it was done in Portugal to get around local regulations...

    1. Re:canadian doctors? by 00_NOP · · Score: 1

      That explains driving over there then...

    2. Re:canadian doctors? by Shotgun+Jenny · · Score: 1

      Well, at least it was a Canadian that got the implant. That's gotta be something us Canuks can be proud of!

    3. Re:canadian doctors? by Easy2RememberNick · · Score: 1

      Well, at least it was a Canadian that got the implant. That's gotta be something us Canuks can be proud of!


      Not as much as when Pam Anderson did! ;-P ...and then she got 'em out :-(

    4. Re:canadian doctors? by tsa · · Score: 1

      And without she looked soooooo much better!

      --

      -- Cheers!

  3. No Canadian Doctors by quantaman · · Score: 4, Informative

    They weren't Canadian doctors. They were doctors from the university of St. Louis doing the procedure on a Canadian man.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  4. Re:Da 6 Dollar man is real by Pi+Kapp+142 · · Score: 1

    "We have the technology."

  5. Still... by Devil's+BSD · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The nerve connections can never regrow completely, meaning the sight can never be as good as yours or mine (on second thought, I have -7 diopter lenses...). I don't even think the guy can move his eyes around. The true victory will come when when we manage to reattach nerve connections completely, because then we can repair spinal cord injuries and the like.

    Oh, and the million dollar man references are all lies: The procedure, hospitalization and equipment cost about $98,000 US..

    --
    I'm the Devil the Windows users warned you about.
    1. Re:Still... by Devil's+BSD · · Score: 1

      If you removed any of the myelin sheathing you would run the risk of exposing the whole cell to attack. Sort of like what Microsoft did when they put Internet Explorer into Windows. Then when the cell is under attack, you run the risk of fibromyalgia (i dont know if that has anything do do with nerves, i just had to day it), or even Alzheimers or Parkinsons if it hits the wrong spot and goes to the brain. Not good.

      --
      I'm the Devil the Windows users warned you about.
    2. Re:Still... by Darwin_Frog · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, I haven't checked today, but that could be 6 million Canadian dollars.

    3. Re:Still... by DoctorFrog · · Score: 1

      With any luck it won't be long before we can regrow nerve connections, maybe using stem cells. The old meme that nerve cells were so inherently different they couldn't be regrown has been shown to be false in any number of particular circumstances (heck, the nerves in your olfactory bulb regrow every few months!).

    4. Re:Still... by NanoGator · · Score: 2

      "Oh, and the million dollar man references are all lies: The procedure, hospitalization and equipment cost about $98,000 US.. "

      What are you talking about? 98 grand was about 6 million then. Didn't you watch Austin Powers?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    5. Re:Still... by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "The true victory will come when when we manage to reattach nerve connections completely, because then we can repair spinal cord injuries and the like. "

      Agreed. However, there are some hopeful alternatives. The brain has some very powerful processing capabilities. I don't remember where I read it, but recently I ran across a story where they were sending signals to the part of the brain that processes sound. Using sound, the patient was able to create a crude image of basic solid shapes. This isn't sight, but this person was able to recognize the dresser in her bedroom.

      I can imagine that they'll find inventive ways to send some sort of signal to the brain, and it'll make use of the information it's getting. Heck, we may see a VISOR like Geordi LaForge weas. Imagine sight via RF signals...

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    6. Re:Still... by Indomitus · · Score: 1

      There have been experiements with rats where they took a young rat and sent the vision signals to the hearing part of the brain and the brain of the rat compensated and it was able to see. It wasn't 100% but it worked.

      I hope we get better tech than Geordi's visor. I want mini-visors implanted in the eye or fake eyes. I don't want to worry about my eyes falling off if I fall or run into somebody.

  6. Makes me wonder by Sarin · · Score: 5, Funny

    In order to go to sleep, does the man needs to turn his artificial eye "off"?

    1. Re:Makes me wonder by howman · · Score: 1

      Stand by screen saver by M$.

      --
      flinging poop since 1969
    2. Re:Makes me wonder by samoverton · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Just because he was blind before doesn't mean that he doesn't have eyelids.

    3. Re:Makes me wonder by Tranvisor · · Score: 2

      Well the article says that right now he is still getting his brain used to the input from the camera and is only having the camera on for one hour of the day.

      So I suppose turning it on and off is not a problem. ;)

    4. Re:Makes me wonder by prentis · · Score: 1

      From the article.
      Jens and the other patients wear special sunglasses fitted with a miniature TV camera. A microcomputer and stimulator are carried on the waist on a belt or in a bag. The equipment attaches by cable to a tiny fire hydrant-like device implanted in the skull that connects to two electrodes on the surface of the part of the brain that controls sight.

      someone needs to be slaped for not reading the article.
      and someone needs to be slaped for moding the post above post insightfull.

  7. Just to get it right. by sinistre · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Jens and the other patients wear special sunglasses fitted with a miniature TV camera. The equipment attaches by cable to a tiny fire hydrant-like device implanted in the skull that connects to two electrodes on the surface of the part of the brain that controls sight.

    In other words it connects to two electrodes on the surface of the visual cortex. Which is in the back of your skull. They have NOT implanted an artificial eye.

    1. Re:Just to get it right. by mindstrm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Really.

      Well.. what would you call something that takes video input and relays it to your visual cortex?

      I'd call it an eye.

    2. Re:Just to get it right. by sinistre · · Score: 1

      I was just sayin' that it's not implanted in the eye socket and hooked up to the optic nerve. Which was the impression one were left with reading the initial post.

  8. Engineering by olman · · Score: 2

    I just love these stories. It is a marvel of biotech and engineering. Maybe engineers have trouble picking up girls. Every day, in every other way, they make bigger and bigger difference.

  9. Baseball umpires have a new option! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    These artificial eyes have lots of potential users that are currently employed as baseball umpires...

  10. The ultimate eyeball by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So if creativity was your only limitation, what would the ultimate artificial eyeball be capable of?

    I assume it would have huge amounts of optical zoom capability. Would it also have some sort of CCD showing so that you could change your eye "style" on demand?

    Maybe it could have a little hole in the middle of it setup to squirt "eye fluid" on people you don't like!

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:The ultimate eyeball by irvmx · · Score: 2, Funny

      Gee, I want some with Terahertz imaging ability... see thru walls, clothes, etc.:)

    2. Re:The ultimate eyeball by Stonehand · · Score: 1

      Programmable curve adjustment so as to be able to reduce glare and provide greater contrast. Controls suitable for passive night vision would also be handy.

      A programmable HUD overlay would also be interesting -- e.g. displaying motion vectors of significant objects, et al, or displaying ID information gained from recognizing people (e.g. contact information).

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    3. Re:The ultimate eyeball by yog · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The sky's the limit on capabilities.

      - Instant replay: probably a no-brainer (so to speak); add some memory and TIVO-type controls to the belt pack.

      - Human camera: throw away your still and video cameras. You will never need them again. Your vacations will be completely documented, as will everything else you do. Hmm; some things you might want to be able to delete, though.

      - zoom (optical and digital): as you described.

      - wireless capability: you could be a real time eyewitness reporter, or a human webcam.

      - filters: cut the brightness factor on a sunny day

      - night vision: add infrared capability. You'll see better than "sighted" people 24 hours a day. If you live alone, you'll never need lights in your home and can save on the electricity..

      - Direct PC interface: throw away your CRT/LCD screens; you can just jack straight into your computer's video output. I wonder if 3D capability is possible.

      - Remote sight: using a wireless connection, you could instantly cut over to cameras installed in your house to check on your kids, etc. You could have a remote control system to turn the camera's focus in any direction as you move your head or with a joystick. This would be handy for remote conferencing too.

      --
      it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    4. Re:The ultimate eyeball by DoctorFrog · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I wonder if 3D capability is possible.

      Heck, that should be trivial. A slightly different POV into each visual stream, kind of like the way Ma Nature did it.

      (Sigh). Unfortunately, those of us who grew up with amblyopia (or just one eye, for that matter - monopia? Cyclopia?) don't have the visual processing capability even if you fix the eye.

      I've often wondered what stereoscopic vision is like...

    5. Re:The ultimate eyeball by switchninja · · Score: 1

      dude, its all about:

      optical zoom

      digital magnification/enhancement

      flare compensation

      thermal imaging

      low-light imaging

      ultrasound vision (ala bats, for total darkness and lack of thermal)

      protective reflexive kevlar shutters

      HUD detailing gps and environmental information

      ability to take pictures of views

      internal storage for the pictures

      internal "eye dart" with some type of munition. (your choice, however if you use a bullet you hafta make a check against stress damage to the eye... er. woops. too much shadowrun for me..)

      --
      void clue();
    6. Re:The ultimate eyeball by RadioTV · · Score: 1

      Dude, it's got to be a Narco Jet&#153.

      --
      I have great faith in fools - self confidence my friends call it. - Edgar Allan Poe
    7. Re:The ultimate eyeball by Jester99 · · Score: 2

      For me, the ultimate eyeball would have the following features:

      1. Fast focussing. I want my eyes to adjust to light and dark quickly, and focus on an object near or far fast.

      2. Filters. Cut down glare during the day.

      3. Light enhancement at night. (I'd settle for green outlines like the army night-vis goggles gets)

      4. Enhanced depth-of-field. If you focus on something close to your eyes, everything far away gets blurry. I'd like to be able to see both near and far clearly at once. (That'd go along with #1 well, too)

      5. Zoom. At least 16x.

      6. Protective covering like goggles. So I could see underwater.

      7. Image enhancement to cut through fog or smoke.

      That's about it for now ;)

    8. Re:The ultimate eyeball by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      Anyone read Speaker for the Dead by Orson Scott Card? One of the characters (Odaho, I think...) had a artifical eye that also recorded every thing he ever saw, he had to download it to a computer regularly though.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
    9. Re:The ultimate eyeball by wahay · · Score: 1

      As much zoom as possible, perception of every feasible EM spectrum, processing for environment issues (too much light, too little light, obscuring effects (fog), snow blindness, etc). All of those are pretty obvious.

      Ones I haven't seen mentioned:
      1) Organic maintenance. Keep the fluid in the eye clean and balanced. None of thos nasty contaminants that plague us as we grow old.
      2) Three dimensional image manipulation. Want to read a piece of paper that is upside down and at a sharp angle to your field of view. Just double-blink on it and it looks like it's flat in front of you.
      3) Screen saver. Nice relaxing repetative imagery, from white noise to flying toasters.
      4) Ability to analyze a vibrating object to find the sound that's impacting or issuing from it. Laser microphone, anyone?
      5) Frame rate adjusability. Ability to see more detail of fast-moving objects when possible. Ability to more smoothly (less irritatingly) percieve light sources that are too slow. No more flourescent light flicker, or blur at the theater when the 24fps isn't fast enough for your 30fps eyes.
      6) Important object highlighting. Remember how they animated Dr. Katz? The 'live' objects kinda jittered. Still (distant?) objects that are significant (glass on the road, etc.) should shimmer or jitter so that they get noticed by our (motion oriented) visual centers in the brain.
      7) Rose-tinted sunglasses. Virtual repainting of scenes to improve the psychological impact. Punched up color saturation. Areas of darkness in 'noisy' unimportant zones. Blurs for cruddy details. (see also 'Beer Goggle' effect)
      7) Applet Sandbox. Once people have these cool things, there's going to be good ideas. Somebody's going to figure out how to watch a monitor by looking at the light reflected off a wall, etc. A secure code interface (NO SNOW CRASH!!!) should be included so the open source types can load code in. "Here, look at this bar-code! It'll make your eyes translate Japaneese!"

      Damn. Where can I buy a set of these?

    10. Re:The ultimate eyeball by Trinn · · Score: 1

      Well, for the fast focusing, I suggest making sure you have enough rest. I may be a freak but my focusing comes up faster than I notice as long as I am not tired. As for the filters, that's good, let's put in some programmable gamma/curve corrections too. Light enhancement is simple, just add a fourth receptor in the IR range, depth of field really can only be done with either (maybe, I don't know much about lenses) a replacement lens, or more probably, sacrificing stereoscopic vision temporarily. The zoom could be done digitally or optically, with a frame-compositor to make the digital zoom nice, the image enhancement would be doable but maybe not realtime...I don't know about today's processing power. The goggles stuff really just has to do with the biological part of your eyes...some people can do it, some can't.

    11. Re:The ultimate eyeball by lingqi · · Score: 1

      Actually, not sure if someone said this already:

      but if i was LaForge -- i would not give up the visor for his (eventually) artificial eye. i mean -- his visor allowed him to see the EM spectrum from RF-IR border all the way up to some crazy high frequency; imagine how awsome that would be? you will immediately have night-vision / see-through clothes / whatever... add that with a tele-photo / wide angle lense -- you will be kicking some serious butt in the vision dept

      excetp telephoto (these days, anyway -- without high-qual deformable lense / changeable index of refraction, etc) pokes out quite far for the telephoto-ing; so you will look terrible)

      --

      My life in the land of the rising sun.

  11. Too bad by perraymo · · Score: 1

    nokia hasn't started to implement this. With one of these
    suckers connected to your speech-centre maybe we would
    finally be free from those pesting cellphone addicted teens chattering
    in cinemas :p

  12. Maybe not canadian doctors but... by eiggen · · Score: 1

    There were no actual canadian doctors involved, only a canadian patient... But Canadians are also developping a visual implant similar to the one cited in the article... You can find more info here, or here (in french). (the last article is from 2001... wonder what is happening right now...)

  13. Artificial eyes for the blind, artificial ears... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    for the deaf. Now all we need is artificial intelligence for the stupid!

  14. Re:First Pun! by smoondog · · Score: 3, Funny

    When will we get

    Artificial Intelligence for the Stupid


    Or better yet, when will we get artificial etiquette for trolls.

    -Sean

  15. Third Eye by M3THODICAL · · Score: 1

    When Can I Get My Third Eye Installed?

    1. Re:Third Eye by doooras · · Score: 4, Funny

      if the batteries died in it, you would be third eye blind ;)

  16. Artificial eyesight by FeatureBug · · Score: 2, Funny

    I knew an eminent blind person and researcher at a university who was often called upon to comment on or even to test artificial vision equipment being developed at the university. His usual response was that nothing beats a good guide dog. This demoralised some folks at the university who were trying to develop and get funding for a guide robot for blind people. That latter project made the headlines when it was the subject of a hilarious cartoon in a BMVA Newsletter a few years ago entitled "Guide Dogs for Blind Robots" (no online copy found).

  17. Re:Da 6 Dollar man is real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I just hope the system doesn't run Windows :)

    Patient: "I can see, I can really see"

    Doctor: "What can you see?"

    Patient: "Well it's blue, am I looking at the sky?"

    Doctor: "Oh hold on, I need to reboot and install the latest drivers.."

    :)

  18. All you need... by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oh this is not really a big deal. Star Trek showed us years ago that you could make a blinde man see just by putting a hair-clip over the front of his face.

    --

    "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

    Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    1. Re:All you need... by togtog · · Score: 1

      That will never work. A hair clip... LOL.

      Everyone knows you need to paint it gold and silver to refract the photons correctly and then coat the optic nerve connections with LSD!

      What, you thought all those floating colors he saw were really there?

      Some people...

    2. Re:All you need... by SoLoatWork · · Score: 1

      Actually Star Trek showed us years ago that the "hair-clip" interfaces directly with Geordi's nervous system via little "ports" on his temples. I see this as a plausible system for, at least, sight augmentation.

  19. My Vision of the ultimate Eye Ball by kb3hag · · Score: 1

    X-ray Vision
    Re-fillable pepergas squirter
    LASER VISION
    Night Shot
    SUPER zoom

  20. Actual site... by krichf1mp · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... http://www.artificialvision.com/vision/index.html has videos (mpeg) of the procedure and what the blind man can see (edge detect heh... good idea)

  21. From someone who is legally deaf-blind by lemkebeth · · Score: 1

    I really don't think this will be too useful except for the completely blind.

    Even then there are other factors, such as learning how to see when you didn't see before.

    On a side not, they said the same thing about Coucher implants and those are marginally useful only (they are limited in what they can do).

    1. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      A handful of scientists have learned how to interpret speech by reading frequency spectragraphs. I was wondering if the deaf could not also do the same. A PalmPilot-like device could display the scrolling spectragraph, and deaf people could learn to read it.

      I agree that some people may have a hard time learning to read them, but it has been shown to be possible for at least some people. (True, they were not hearing impared, but many people are remarkable adaptable, especially if they are hightly motivated.)

    2. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by Dreamweaver · · Score: 2

      Okay, I've got to ask. How do you use a computer if you're deaf and blind? Are you just 'legally blind' where you can still see, but have to have the resolution set to ENORMOUS and use a magnifying glass?

      I don't mean to be rude or anything, but I've always wondered how deaf-blind people manage to live their lives. It seems like it would be a nigh-impossible struggle to communicate at all.

      --


      "If a man hasn't discovered something he will die for, he isn't fit to live" -- MLK, Jr.
    3. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by arkanes · · Score: 2

      I know several blind people who use screen readers. How they manage is beyond me, but they do. In fact, as I recall, the guy who runs Wolf FM (one of the most popular shoutcast streams) is blind.

    4. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by TheOrquithVagrant · · Score: 1

      Braille keyboards & "display" devices should work just as well for a blind/deaf person as they would for someone who is only blind.

      Which leads me to think... the primary sense for someone who is blind/deaf must be touch. I can't help but wonder if the silver lining to the VERY dark cloud of having no sight or hearing is that blind/deaf people end up being INCREDIBLE in bed... :)

    5. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by lemkebeth · · Score: 1

      And this is an improvement over sign language and visual cues how?

      In both cases the person needs to be able to see in order to use it so these frequency spectrographs isn't too useful.

    6. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by lemkebeth · · Score: 1

      Okay here is the deal, my vision is 20/200 and 20/300 (different in each eye) and I'm near-sighted. Now I can hear noise but, that is it as the the center in the brain that processes spoken speech is going downhill (and has been for years).

      Now, I went to Helen Keller National Center in New York (a center for the deaf-blind) and I can speak with some authority when I say that even if I was completely blind I would be able to use the computer using a Braille display (incidentally I know Braille)

      As for communication, many deaf-blind use what is known as touch (tactile) sign language which allows them toi follow sign language by touch.

      Further, the deaf-blind are a lot less helpless than people make them out to be.

    7. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      I am talking about deaf people, not blind. Sorry for not clearifying that.

      (Hmmmm. Braile sprectrograph.)

    8. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by lemkebeth · · Score: 1

      Why do moderators mod the ignorant up?

      :sigh:

      Okay, as I said what you were talking about would be of no practical use for the deaf (as opposed to the deaf-blind) and the deaf-blind use tactile sigh language (far more efficient than using your proposed Braile spectrograph.

      Please be aware that this method is simply trying to replace sign language and that isn't going to work.

    9. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      (* Okay, as I said what you were talking about would be of no practical use for the deaf *)

      Why not? The spectrograph allows them to "see" speach (and other sounds). Unlike sign language, the other side (speaker) does not have to learn it also.

      I am not understanding your criticism, it appears. Please try to re-word it.

    10. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by lemkebeth · · Score: 1

      Okay I'm not giving you any more free Kamma (Please shoot the mods for me).

      This is the last time I'm replying to this.

      Have you thought that there are other factors besides if something is feasable?

      Like say social factors?

      I really don't think the deaf will go for this that much and that by itself will doom it (even though it has practicallity problems too).

      Note to mods: Get your fscking asses in order (I mean the ignorant posts all get a point and I post info and poeple don't give a darn). Now you will excuse me while I go and find another site instead of Slashdot.

    11. Re:From someone who is legally deaf-blind by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      (* Like say social factors? *)

      No. I am a geek. It takes years for me to get social clues.

      Anyhow, some may like it, some may not. For example, being with the family one may not have to worry about that as much.

  22. NEWS FLASH by TheFalken · · Score: 1

    Applying a current across the visual cortex creates patterns.

    Ho hum.

  23. Not much new with Dobelle, but look at Eyetap by McLuhanesque · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...this is actually nothing particularly special, since all the technologies are relatively well-known (among the right circles), and mostly invented by Dr. Steve Mann of the University of Toronto. According to Steve, what the patient actually perceives is more akin to contrast resolution, rather than anything that the visually unimpaired would call "sight".

    What is perhaps more interesting, and more widely useful is the Eyetap technology itself. Essentially, Eyetap uses the camera and wearble computer to drive a small laser that mediates reality directly into the eye. For people who are not blind, but profoundly visually impaired, this technology may be a godsend.

    Beam me up, Geordi LaForge!

  24. False Hopes by Warin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think the most important part of the article was the bit about not giving false hopes to the many folks who have been blind since birth. Since they will not have developed the ability to interpret stimulii from that part of their brain, this device will do them no good.
    Properly marketed though, this device could do a lot for thos who have lost their sight from disease or accident.

    Hopefully as the technology develops and is refined, they will also look into researching ways for those blind from birth to use this technology as well.

  25. Would you replace your parts for enhanced ones? by HeyBob! · · Score: 1

    I wonder what will happen when bionic eys (ears, limbs, memory) are better than your perfectly functioning ones. Will people upgrade themselves like they do now with implants and plastic surgery? It's closer to reality with these great technological advances, but are we ready for it in our culture?

    1. Re:Would you replace your parts for enhanced ones? by theRiallatar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You better believe I'd be willing to do it if it was offered to the general public. Heck, I'd probably even be willing to sign up as a test subject in order to compare the functionality of the artificial to what a normally functioning limb/organ/etc performed like.

    2. Re:Would you replace your parts for enhanced ones? by Trinn · · Score: 1

      A culture as a whole is almost never ready for a change. In any correctly functioning culture, around 80% of the people do not even think of the future, they just think of their own lives, if even that. 20% of the people think of change and the future, and at least 15% are trying to do something about it. 5% (part of those 20%) are moving in a direction most would consider "forward" (in hindsight), but are nutcases to the rest of the world. (disclaimer:my statistics might be erring toward being too big). These 5% of the population drag the culture kicking and screaming into the future. The reason for the rest of the population is simple. The other 15% of the change-happy 20% are there to provide balance of ideas, and play devil's advocate, and the 80% who are fine-the-way-it-is are there to maintain the stability of society, without them the changes would tear any semblance of order apart in a matter of seconds. Society is a house of cards, all human organizations are. When you get your first job you realize this, often it comes as quite a shock...and then it happens again and again as you realize every place is the same. Unfortunately, human cultural studies are not taught well in high-school, and are elective in colleges. Therefore, most members of society who are among the 20% can't see the function of the other 80% or why society has to be such a house of cards. I'm not saying that things cannot be improved, simply that there is a very big picture that needs considering.

    3. Re:Would you replace your parts for enhanced ones? by Dreamweaver · · Score: 2

      I've little doubt it will happen eventually. It will probably be a while before such implants are available legally as cosmetic surgery, though.

      Even once artifical devices capable of functioning better than organic ones are available, they'll be nominally for people who really need them. Those who just Want the added functionality will either live without it or go to less inhibited countries and get it done in second-rate surgeries while hoping they avoid infection. Eventually someone will realize the revenue being lost that way and open it up further. And once the initial revulsion of society goes away (when previously handicapped people are wandering around with artificial parts and some sort of etiquitte is devised for asking, "Did you lose your arm, or is that on purpose?") they'll likely be as common as breast implants and facelifts.

      The real question is how will society change when such things are available? If we can all (or at least the rich) get bionic eyes that let us see across a broader band of the EM spectrum, what will the world look like? Sculptures made of mildly radioactive materials that glow when you turn your eyes to the right setting, lead-based paint in advertising and just general signage to make sure you can see it if you're functioning in X-ray mode. Heck, x-ray-absorbing clothing to keep peeping toms away... It'd be a heck of a thing. And that's just eyes.

      --


      "If a man hasn't discovered something he will die for, he isn't fit to live" -- MLK, Jr.
  26. My first slashdot response in ages :) by The+OPTiCIAN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I was yonger I used to wonder whether I had the choice of losing sight or hearing which would I chose. Sight is so important to us. Yet to lose hearing would be to sacrifice music, which is my main pursuit outside of work. Also, it would be less of a step down for me to lose sight than for many people. I was born with a deformed left eye. A strip down the middle of the retina is missing, and there's a separate, more complicated problem I've never bothered to learn about as well. I used to wear plastic-, then glass-eyes to mask it. The plastic ones were made oversized and have stretched the skin around the socket, and it became painful, but that just gave me the excuse I needed to give up wearing them altogethre. I feel proud to have a problem that isn't and not cover it up, and rarely think about it, and have friends and family completely forget about it.

    It's better to be born that way than to lose an eye for several reasons. Obviously, the pain and anguish of losing an eye. Also the need for people in that situation to redevelop their coordination. The only disadvantage is that if you don't develop parts of your sight while you are young - like me, you don't develop it at all. There will be a limit to which the brains of people given sight mid-life will be able to use them. Stereoscopic vision will be right out (even people with squints that come good can have problems with this, like my father), and they will never develop the coordination that somebody with childhood experience can.

    Still, developments like those in this story give you a warm feeling about the positive power of our scientific endeavours, and the benefits of progress.

    My former rowing coach is a dentist. Somehow years ago we got to talking about his work, and gross medical professions. Consensus among the squad was that optic surgerey was the right up there with the most squeemish of them, and he commented that in a way he wished he'd put his energy into that field rather than his own. When we asked why he responded that for the same amount of work you get to fix people's sight, and that that's one of the finest gifts you can give somebody.

    :)

    --


    Believe with me, my saplings.
    1. Re:My first slashdot response in ages :) by flikx · · Score: 1

      First post in ages?? You post more often than I do.

      --
      One future, two choices. Oppose them or let them destroy us.
  27. Motivation Crisis: Depression after restored sight by RyanFenton · · Score: 5, Informative


    There's been a long-recognized phenomenon discovered among people who have sight restored after long periods of blindness: Motivation Crisis

    http://psych.wisc.edu/vision/courses/recovery.html

    http://216.239.35.100/search?q=cache:ZD8gWmH2aEYC: www.wfu.edu/Academic-departments/Art/art111/files/ 12_tosee.pdf+

    Notes on this phenomenon go back to at least 1771, with the publishing of the book "L'Aveugle Qui Refiise deVoir." By 1932, there was a book "Space and Sight" that concluded that "every newly sighted adult sooner or later comes to a 'motivation crisis', and that not every patient gets through it." Fortunately for this guy though, this problem seems to be more linked to people who lost their sight early, and then regained it much later, having to radically change their lives down to the tiniest mannerisms. It might have something to do with the time limitation they are putting on him, and the scientists choice of Jans, for his positive attitude.

    Definetly an interesting topic on human psychology though. Hopefully with future inventions along this line, no one will be forceably blind long enough for such depression to occur along these lines. It makes one wonder though - will more distant technology create a new sort of "Motivation Crisis" in us if perception enchancements become widely available and used.

    Ryan Fenton

  28. Is it permanent? by atcurtis · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder how they have solved the problem of decomposition - the body's immune system is a powerful entity. Implant a silicon chip and the body will attack it and erode it. Implant it in a glass capsule and then how to make the electrical connections?

    These things have been reported several times in the past but each time, it degrades within months and typically doesn't last even 6 months in the body.

    So how "permanent" is this artificial eye? That is the question everyone wants answered. Does it require lots of external hardware to operate (as some older experiements have done). What kind of power source is required?

    --
    -- The universe began. Life started on a billion worlds...
    -- Except on one where stupidity was there first.
    1. Re:Is it permanent? by Devil's+BSD · · Score: 2

      I didnt think the body could process silicon. And putting it in glass would be easy-just put the electrodes in the glass and then you could solder or do whatever. How the heck do you think they made vacuum tubes back in the heyday of ENIAC?

      --
      I'm the Devil the Windows users warned you about.
    2. Re:Is it permanent? by atcurtis · · Score: 1


      AFAIK, Silicon is a trace-element that we do use somewhere in our body. Even SiO2 can be eroded.

      I believe early eye implants used SiO2 but they only lasted on the order of weeks.

      The point being - how to make a reliable connection between the artifical electronic and the biological grey matter... which does not degrade.

      --
      -- The universe began. Life started on a billion worlds...
      -- Except on one where stupidity was there first.
  29. A step ahead, a step back... by Corvaith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The problem with advances like these is that everyone looks at them and thinks, "Oh, great stuff! Before long, we'll be able to let all the blind people see."

    Which may happen... or may not. But in the meantime, people see it as a little less important to make sure that the world is accessible to those who are disabled, when they're convinced that a 'cure' is right around the corner.

    Cochlear implants and bionic eyes and so on and so forth... they all sound terrific. And there will be people helped by these advances. Just don't let yourselves get caught expecting too much of them. And remember, programmers and designers out there, to make sure that your projects are accessible. Text needs to be readable by a screen-reader. Audio should have available captions. All that jazz.

  30. Re:Motivation Crisis: Depression after restored si by GigsVT · · Score: 3, Funny

    I saw a documentary of a case study of this once. Apparently this kid lost his sight and hearing at a young age.

    He later became pinball champion of the world, but upon regaining his sight and hearing, he led a cult until they revolted against him, and he lost everything.

    I forget what the name of the documentary was.

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  31. This device bypasses some important areas by Illserve · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Don't get me wrong, I'm very impressed by this device, and I hope it works out.

    However, the visual cortex is not the end all-all be-all of visual information in the brain. Visual information on the way to this cortex is first passed through other areas of the brain, such as the Lateral Geniculate Nucleus, which process the information, and also allow it to interact with other brain areas.

    Based on my knowledge of the intricate, piecemeal nature of brain design, these pre-processing areas are probably involved in some fairly important low-level, reflexive aspects of vision. Bypassing them may restore the conscious aspects of vision and allow a great deal of function, but will miss out on some other aspects of vision that we are not consciously aware of.

    Repairing the optic nerve is the only way to get real vision.

    But that's step #1000, kudos to these pioneers for having the courage and ability to do step #10.

    1. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by 240 · · Score: 1

      I agree with most of what you say - however, repairing the optic nerve is not the *only* way to get real vision. Another way would be to reproduce retinal and LGN processing in silicon, and use that to drive stimulation of the primary visual cortex. Not that they do that in the study mentioned, but they should start, since a bit of preprocessing could increase the quality of the vision substantially, I suspect.

      I don't think that this approach is as good as either (a) stimulating the optic nerve, (b) stimulating the retina, or (c) repairing the optic nerve/retina, if those can be done, but presumably they can't be done in all circumstances. Also, unless someone comes up with decent trascutaneous wireless transmission and a way to power an autonomous device, it is going to have to have a chronic (permanent) interface through the skull and skin. This is going to be a long-term nightmare in terms of infection (and the results of infection to the brain are *real* nasty), and would never fly commercially for lawsuit reasons.

      --
      -------------
      ans =
      NaN
    2. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by Illserve · · Score: 2

      I should have made the point clearer.

      It's not just that the LGN does some preprocessing, it's that the visual information heading to the visual cortex also goes to other places as well. Skipping the optic pathway will ignore these other projections, leading to incomplete visual processing even if you perfectly replicate the signal the visual cortex expects to receive.

    3. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by 240 · · Score: 1

      Not very much. For practical purposes the LGN really only projects to layer IV of V1. It is from there that information spreads out through the cortex (including going back to other parts of the thalamus such as the pulvinar, and then on to other visual areas). The important thing that is being missed is not so much what the LGN is sending elsewhere, but what it is receiving (all the neuromodulatory input from the brainstem and back from cortex). Of course, all this stuff could be simulated too, but at some point it becomes not worth it.

      PS It is true that the "subcortical visual pathway" via the superior colliculus is ignored. But I really doubt that matters.

      --
      -------------
      ans =
      NaN
    4. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by Illserve · · Score: 2

      For practical purposes? Everything the brain does is for a practical purpose :). If there's a projection from A to B, it's doing something.

    5. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by 240 · · Score: 1

      That is arguable. See recent work by Paul Azzopardi and Alan Cowey:
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/quer y.fcgi?c md=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11133785&dopt=Abst ract

      In any case, lesioning V1 in that case does abolish the conscious perception of motion - all that may be left is some residual ability to say if something moved - while all the while denying you saw something.

      There is no way in hell MT receptive fields will be normal after a V1 lesion, I am sure you will agree.

      The question here is whether you need to bother with the subcortical visual pathway for a visual prosthesis - I say not.

      --
      -------------
      ans =
      NaN
    6. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by 240 · · Score: 1

      Does this apply specially to the brain rather than the body in general? In the latter case, I'd mention as a counter-example the appendix...

      Where is this mysterious place that the LGN projects to apart from V1, anyway? While I accept that it receives from a lot of places, I understood that its output is pretty much focused on layer IV of primary visual cortex.

      --
      -------------
      ans =
      NaN
    7. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by Illserve · · Score: 2

      Yes, it's quite mysterious.

      Grabbing my Tome of Bio Neuropsych 101 off the shelf, the kind of thing any freshman in a college neuroscience program has to buy, I see the following:

      some axons leave the optic tract to reach sites other than the LGN, inlcuding the superior colliculus(eye movement, but likely aspects of rapid motor eye-hand coordination as well), the diencephalon(circadian rhythms), and midbrain nucleus for the control of pupil size.

    8. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by 240 · · Score: 1

      Ah, but we were talking about projections from the LGN to cortex.

      The subcortical visual pathway was/is being discussed in response to another poster in the thread. Yes, of course it exists, its just not very important for visual perception.

      --
      -------------
      ans =
      NaN
    9. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by 240 · · Score: 1

      And by the way, you gave three examples which illustrate why there wouldn't be much point trying to reproduce the subcortical visual pathway in a visual prosthesis anyway.

      * eye movements: we're talking about an artificial retina, eye movements don't help (or will have to be done by an entirely artificial eye-movement system, such as that being developed by Chris Diorio).
      * circadian rhythms ... if you can't do without 'em, it's probably easier to just hook up a clock circuit, make it actually time-based rather than light-based.
      * pupil size, again no use if the eye isn't being used as the input device.

      --
      -------------
      ans =
      NaN
    10. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by Illserve · · Score: 2

      Eye movements are likely only a part of what those projections do. I would wager my meager annual stipend that those same projections mediate eye-hand coordination and many other ways that tie kinesthesis and our sense of surroundings together into coherent action.

      You'll never get all that with just V1 projections.

    11. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by 240 · · Score: 1

      Maybe. How about we agree to hold off building such a system until we actually know what the subcortical visual projection does? :-).

      --
      -------------
      ans =
      NaN
    12. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by Illserve · · Score: 2

      The issue isn't whether these pathways come from the LGN or some earlier part of the optic pathway. Rather it's a question of what will be missed by skipping the entire region and going straight for V1

    13. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by Illserve · · Score: 2

      We'll likely have the technology to do the artificial eye correctly (full optical pathway) before we understand that.

      By your argument, we should cease any and all prosthesis efforts for 100 years :)

    14. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by 240 · · Score: 1

      Right. And I think that if you put the *right input* into V1 (which means taking the visual scene and putting it through the right set of filters - something we could in principle do in silicon now), then you may be able to support a reasonable sense of visual perception.

      To me the most important thing that is being missed is any subcortical role in visual attention. However, it could be that this might work out anyway, because of feedback connections from V1 back to LGN. In essence, these would take over the role of the minor (joking - but it is only 10%) projection from the retina to the LGN.

      Of course, if you have the option of using the built-in hardware - retina, optic tract etc - you do it.

      --
      -------------
      ans =
      NaN
    15. Re:This device bypasses some important areas by 240 · · Score: 1

      OK, so instead lets just ignore the subcortical pathway and do it the easy way...

      --
      -------------
      ans =
      NaN
  32. AOL for your eyes. by SHEENmaster · · Score: 2, Funny

    AOL will probably market "AOL Eyes'. At only 1.5x the cost, you get "special product offers" exclusively available to AOL Eyes users. Each eye will have a seperate, full screen window inside of an mdi interface with no tasklist. It will crash whenever you turn your head too fast, and it will take your brain down with it.

    So easy to see, no wonder its #1 among the morons of the world.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
    1. Re:AOL for your eyes. by howman · · Score: 1

      And you can use the AOHell disks as cool sun glasses with the exclusive AOL/Oakley clip kit

      --
      flinging poop since 1969
  33. Serious Implications of Instant Replay... by The+Pi-Guy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Mother: "Junior, what were you doing at your girlfriend's house last night??"
    (18-year old) Junior: "Um... nothing mom!!! *turns red, obviously hiding something*"
    Mother: "Junior, plug in your eye now, let me see!!"

    --pi

    1. Re:Serious Implications of Instant Replay... by duck_prime · · Score: 1

      And you people thought public videocameras in England were bad!

      This was envisioned by Orson Card in his novel Earth where retirees stop crime by wearing (essentially) video-cam beanies.

      God, I love new gadgets!

    2. Re:Serious Implications of Instant Replay... by mrdogi · · Score: 1

      Sounds almost exactly like something from Speaker for the Dead.

    3. Re:Serious Implications of Instant Replay... by Marticus · · Score: 1

      David Brin wrote Earth, not OSC.

  34. Re:Power source by Leeji · · Score: 4, Funny

    Actually, AMD stock rose $1.50 on the news that they would provide cheap, onboard processors for visual implants.

    Patients' complaints about the heat will be drowned out by the scream of cooling fans.

    --
    It all goes downhill from first post ...
  35. Ascii Porn is now usefull again! by zulux · · Score: 3, Funny

    Regular porn is probably too small, so
    I imagine the Canadian gentleman can now print out ASCII porn for his viewing pleasure.

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

  36. Re:Motivation Crisis: Depression after restored si by dexter+riley · · Score: 1
    This reminds me of the Wim Wenders film, "Until the End of the World." In it, a scientist has developed a means of allowing blind people to see, by directly recording the electrical impulses of a seeing person's brain, then transmitting them into the blind person's brain. He does this for his wife, who has been blind for most of her life. After he starts transmitting images of their children and friends to his wife, she has such a crisis, as described in this narration from the movie:
    "Edith Eisner had been 8 years old when she lost her sight. The experience of seeing the world again was exhilirating, but it was also confusing and disorientating, and unpredictably sad. Her childhood friends aged 50 years in a minute, but the world they lived in was darker and uglier than she could have possibly imagined."
    -d.r.
  37. What are the specs on these ... by Directrix1 · · Score: 1

    I hate it how this article tells you how people can only see to a limited degree, but it doesn't go on to tell you how limited. Like what is the resolution behind these puppies? Refresh rate? Even better why don't they actually tell us about the technology behind them. How they work. That would be way more useful than the knowledge that somebody just got one. I want to know how it interfaces with the brain so I can supplement my vision damnit!
    Oh yeah and imagine a beowulf cluster of these, j/k.

    --
    Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
  38. Makes me wonder.... by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 1

    ....If eventually these artificial eyes will get so good that people with good eye sight will start having their eyes replaced.

  39. But, what about the noise? by march · · Score: 1

    God, I guess if I were blind, I'd want to get this too, but that "beep beep beep" noise it makes every time you use it would drive me nuts. I don't know how Steve Austin dealt with it!

    :-)

  40. An idea by webprogrammer · · Score: 1

    It appears that this device sees visual specectrum waves, but couldn't it work just as well with other frequencies? The hard part was hooking it up to the guy's brain, and it appears they got that to work. It shouldn't be any issue at all to substitute a more sophisticated camera. Doing so could allow them to make a spread spectrum version, that would allow the "blind" guy to see visual waves usually, and infrared during the night/fog/etc. They could even see through buildings.

    --
    Tim ODonnell (trying to be the most
  41. Exterminating the Blind Culture. by slashclone · · Score: 1

    Personally I think it's just a matter of time before electrical stimulators will replace the long cane, Braille and guide dog," Dobelle said. "It will be a gradual process. It could take the rest of the centuru

    I'm sickened by how so called normal people think visially immparead and deaf people are sop,me incapable freaks who want to turen themselves into sickrobot like creatures just so they can "enjoy" questiohnable civilisation advnaces (like polluting the world in you private car?) The Blind have a very rich and well developed culture based Braille and they are not about to reject it. BTw, according to statisics most ppl who were born blind wouldnt want the 5th sesnes artificially implanted into them.
    Stop the gencide now.

    --


    US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
    1. Re:Exterminating the Blind Culture. by lemkebeth · · Score: 1

      I have to agree.

      I myself am legally deaf-blind.

      To ber truthful, in any case these devices are only marginally helpful anyway at this stage.

      However, later may be a problem. For example I'm strongly opposed to forcing the deaf to use English for everything instead of sign language.

    2. Re:Exterminating the Blind Culture. by GutBomb · · Score: 2

      this device is for people who are interested in having it and that can afford it. no one is trying to force it on anyone. i know if i went blind i would pray for my vision to come back. this device may answer the prayers of some people that think the same way. For people who are happy with braile, let them be happy with braile. No one is trying to force this upon anyone.

    3. Re:Exterminating the Blind Culture. by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but isn't American Sign Langage different from other sign angages?

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
    4. Re:Exterminating the Blind Culture. by lemkebeth · · Score: 1

      Well yes and no.

      ASL is mostly (around 75%) based on French Sign Language (can't remember the name of the French sigh language now). It was brought over to the States many, many, years ago.

      In any event ASL (or was that another sign language in the US? can't remember) was the primary language on Martha's Vineyard at one time. Now it is a frick'n vacation area for the well-to-do.

  42. I can play pool again! by webprogrammer · · Score: 1

    After all these years since I lost my vision, I can finally play pool! Now all I have to do is get this system, that system, and one of those goggles that let old ladies wear sunglasses while they read. I'll be so popular!

    --
    Tim ODonnell (trying to be the most
  43. hmmm. by mlknowle · · Score: 2

    Give a big enough empty parking lot and a blind man can drive WITHOUT an operation!

    1. Re:hmmm. by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      Yeah, hasn't anyone seen Sneakers?

      There's a sceen where the blind character drives a van through a parking lot with direction via radio from someone out of the van. He crashes through a couple cars, but... (it's really funny)

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
  44. Not really possible by mgflax · · Score: 1

    Remember: during development, the optic nerve is part of the brain itself, and the amount of circuitry inside the brain proper which is tuned for visual processing is immense. Getting individual pixels into the brain -- the current accomplishment -- is of course a technical acheivement. But processing it like sighted people do is a challenge of similar magnitude to brain transplants. On the other hand, it might be possible for those who've lost their vision. (But those blind since birth is another story entirely.)

  45. Would you be able to interpret a new sense? by peterpi · · Score: 1
    The article states that the patient lost his sight 20 years ago, but before that, could see just fine.

    "The device doesn't work for all types of blindness. People who were blind from birth, or who lost their vision in childhood are not expected to benefit because their visual cortexes would not have developed fully, Smith said."

    Suppose this wasn't the case, and you could give sight to somebody who had never seen before. Would their brains be able to interpret the flow of new information?

    Here's the argument for...

    1. Peter Parker seems to be able to use his spider sense quite well.
    2. Jedi use their feeling of the force, a sense which most do not posses (but then again it does take years of training).

    Any thoughts?

    1. Re:Would you be able to interpret a new sense? by ColaMan · · Score: 2

      Here's the argument for...

      Peter Parker seems to be able to use his spider sense quite well.
      Jedi use their feeling of the force, a sense which most do not posses (but then again it does take years of training).


      That's a lousy argument, seeing that both spiderman and Jedi ARE NOT REAL.

      Again, I'll try to implant a small sense of reality into your head :
      Peter Parker can use is spider-sense well because he's NOT REAL
      Jedi use their feeling of force ok because they are NOT REAL

      Ok, then back to the argument.

      I'd guess that it would take the same amount of time to adapt to this system as it would for children to develop their visual cortex, so what, 10 years? Depending upon how flexible your brain is at learning strange new things.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
  46. First Words... by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 2

    His first worsds after getting the implant of his new eye turned on "I am married to YOU!?!?!"
    .

  47. Uh oh.. by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just imagine, if he goes to the theater, he'll be violating the DMCA.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  48. Re:Motivation Crisis: Depression after restored si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Who, the... ?

  49. DRM by GutBomb · · Score: 2

    I am suprised that RIAA or MPAA has not attempted to integrate Digital Rights Management software into this thing. That would plug the analog hole for sure

  50. Cool experiment by evilmrhenry · · Score: 1

    I hope they try some experiments with this. Maybe place the camera on the back of the head, or array a large number of cameras around his body. See how the body reacts to unusual input data.

  51. Kingston, ON by SEGV · · Score: 1

    I live in Kingston. I'm here now.

    I wonder if I met this guy, I've been to some blind functions (had a blind girlfriend some years ago).

    --

    --
    Marc A. Lepage
    Software Developer
  52. Second Hand Experience by LostSinner · · Score: 2, Interesting
    having lived with a blind mother all of my life, and realizing that blind people travel in packs (ha! i made a funny!), i ran this by them... the one response that i heard repeatedly, from both those who had been blind from birth and those who had lost it at some point in their lives, was that they would honestly prefer to remain blind. some said that they would appreciate partial sight (the ability to discern shapes, etc.), but that full sight would be too much for them to deal with. i argued that with proper therapy they could get used to having their sight back, but they stuck to their guns.

    on a side note (at the risk of being rated down), is anyone in the slashdot community actively and consciously creating accessible websites? at this point in artificial vision technology, no one has yet to create a widely accepted, usable solution. there are too many diseases, too many causes of blindness to deal with to see a fix-all solution come about... so the best solution is to either ensure that a site is accessible, or design an accessible alternative site. you would be surprised at the number of blind people who are online these days. my little brothers and my father are always complaining that my mother is using up their broadband bandwidth at home with her usage.

    at any rate, it's something to consider.

  53. On cortexes... by Pengunea · · Score: 1

    I'm always on the look out for news about eye replacements and chips. As a person who was born with the condition "acromatopsia" I desire to have complete vision. However as I read more about these devices it seems nearly impossible that I'll ever be able to see properly due to the fact I was born with my impairment.

    To give a bit of background on my condition, acromatopsia is a mutation of the rods and cones of the retina so images that pass properly through the pupil become garbled or don't pass through the retina at all. This is most often found as a latent gentic trait passed down from residents of a certain island (detailed in the book Island of the Blind) whose eyes have developed differently. Visual problems range due to the amount of improperly formed or non-existent rods and cones. I myself can see but I am near sighted and can only see about two arms lengths away from my face before things become too blurry to discern. I see all in greys (not the "classic" colourblindness) and am super-sensitive to light. This is why "acromatopsia" is often called "night vision" because photophobia is a common symptom and actually helps to make things visible at night.

    What concerns me most is if the cortexes of my eyes are developed enough to use these new technologies. I can see if only up close but due to the extreme photophobia and lack of colour vision my cortexes may not be suited for an upgrade. It might be like trying to connect an Apple IIe to an Athlon if you get my drift. Anyone know anything about this? As both a programmer and an artist it's really hard to work when I can't see well, can't tell colour, and have to wear creepy black shades because otherwise I'd be running around screaming "IT BURNS! IT BURNS!".

    Righty-o.

    --
    Starkle, starkle, little twink.
    1. Re:On cortexes... by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      Well, your condition isn't complete blindness, so you just want to improve your sight because it's very bad. From the article it wasn't clear how much this technology would really be better than your current condition, but I guess that it would work with your condition.

      Not that I'm in any way quilified to answer your question, this is just a guess.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
  54. Re:Canada is a homeland of cyborgs by kwik_mart · · Score: 1

    you're fucking retarded, you fucking cuntbitch. oh no, Canada's cold. Let's make fun of the retardedly obvious shit about the country! It's not funny anymore. Chew balls.

  55. Glass Eyes are not glass by Rareul · · Score: 1

    Lost an eye to cancer when I was young (retinoblastoma), but my understanding is that this solution is not for everyone:

    "The device doesn't work for all types of
    blindness. People who were blind from birth,
    or who lost their vision in childhood are not
    expected to benefit because their visual
    cortexes would not have developed fully,
    Smith said.

    But people who had vision, have intact visual
    cortexes and have memories of what a tree or
    a building look like are able to recognize
    them using the artificial eye, he said.
    "

    My current 'glass eye' cost $1K and is made of silicone.
    ?sp

  56. Re:Motivation Crisis: Depression after restored si by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    (* His high expectations of sight let him down, and in general he found the world dreary and depressing in all its imperfections. *)

    Imagine getting sight, and then seeing Linda Tripp. It could understandably drive one right back to blindness.

  57. Downside by insane8 · · Score: 1

    now he can't go out with the ugly girls anymore...

  58. Hm, where have I seen this before...? by rabiteman · · Score: 1

    The very bizarre French movie "Cité des Enfants Perdus" ("City of the Lost Children") has a large group of characters who are blind and who have their vision restored by... (drumroll)... head-mounted cameras that plug into connectors attached to the visual cortex. Well, I assume it's the visual cortex, it plugs into the head in any case and the movie doesn't go into anal-retentive detail or anything. The single lens means they only have monocular vision, and the (presumably) low quality of the whole piece of kit means that the parts of the movie shown from their points of view are tinted green and have scanlines and a lot of background noise. This lets them see well enough to fulfill their task, though: kidnapping children so that a twisted, genetically-engineered genius can steal their dreams. (I told you it was a strange movie!) In one of the most psychologically horrifying things shown in the movie, one blind guy goes insane and starts choking a blind comrade to death... after switching the wire connections so that the guy getting choked gets to watch himself as he dies. Pleasant, eh? The movie is quite good, though. Absolutely insane, but very good, plus it had this whole bionic eye idea back in 1995. >:

    --
    Oh cruel fate, to be thusly boned! Ask not for whom the bone bones; it bones for thee. -Bender

  59. Re:Not Kingston, ON by multipartmixed · · Score: 2

    Actually, the guy lives closer to Napanee, and (believe it or not) splits wood for a living.

    Man, I can see, and I don't like chain saws.. buddy must be a brave mofo.

    --

    Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  60. X-ray vision by purpledinoz · · Score: 1

    Might as well put in infrared and x-ray vision along with the bionic eyes. It'll be like every man's dream, now only if it was selective x-ray vision.........

  61. Tabby Dialogs? by duck_prime · · Score: 1

    Excellent timing, too; just moments ago, a cat tried to claw my eyes out.

    Would you knock it off with the Sanrio conspiracy theories already?

  62. "A fire-hydrant like device?" by Chuk · · Score: 1

    What is that? Something that squirts high-pressure water around in his brain? That can't be good.

    --
    chuk
  63. neuroprosthesis issues by neuropro · · Score: 1

    We publish lots of related news on our site. From the remarks here I can see that Slashdot members are still not familiar with it, although we make a concerted effort to collect such news, provide discussions and some feedback in this highly publicized research field with the goal to help individuals with sensorimotor disabilities. Although I was consciously searching for the related Slashdot discussion, I simply did not have time to chime in earlier (see reasons on our site). So I am inviting you to visit if you are interested in related news and some background info. Neuroprosthesis News

  64. Re:First Pun! by Guignol · · Score: 1

    Or better, yet artificial life for the average slashdotter