Slashdot Mirror


Mind Over Machine

broKenfoLd writes "Monkeys moving robotic arms by manipulating a cursor on a computer screen, simply by thinking about it? Mice who cause their water tube to dispense some refreshing H2O just by wishing it? Signal processing and decoding has long been a dream of Matrix fans and lazy system administrators for years, and science is amazingly keeping up! Popular Science's Carl Zimmer has written a fascinating piece documenting recent progress in decoding brain signals and interpreting commands issued from thoughts alone. If you heard a single violin playing Beethoven's 5th, you would be able to tell what piece of music was being played even though the rest of the orchestra was not heard. In the same way, by monitoring a relatively few neurons, computers can recognize patterns and allow programming based on these patterns to say, know if a mouse is thinking about pushing his water lever. You can pass the time waiting for Matrix-style video games and motionless system adminstration/utilization by reading the full article."

331 comments

  1. Channel surfing by Dashing+Leech · · Score: 5, Funny

    But can it be used for channel surfing. That's the ultimate goal.

    1. Re:Channel surfing by ArmenTanzarian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How do synapses encode the need for pr0n or cartoons? That's really the question.

    2. Re:Channel surfing by Hooya · · Score: 3, Funny

      but the TV would be stuck on the p0rn channel. if you've got a wife, LOOK OUT!!

    3. Re:Channel surfing by rusty0101 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Here I though the idea was to make it possible to force 1000 monkeys to type more continuously.

      We have got to see if Shakespear was better than 1000 monkeys don't we?

      --
      You never know...
    4. Re:Channel surfing by spectecjr · · Score: 5, Funny

      but the TV would be stuck on the p0rn channel. if you've got a wife, LOOK OUT!!

      The trick is to marry someone who enjoys watching porn with you. It's not that hard; if I can do it, anyone can.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    5. Re:Channel surfing by spectecjr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nice try, but women don't enjoy porn.
      They've got this thing with emotional bonding and sensible family life.


      Nice try, but I know several women who do enjoy porn. You're just not getting to know the right women.

      Porn isn't about objectification. It's about visual stimulation. It does not exclude or preclude emotional bonding or sensible family life - unless you have an unhealthy preoccupation with it.

      Just remember: everyone's different. Not everyone shares your particular problems with sex.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    6. Re:Channel surfing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Not everyone shares your particular problems with sex.

      I don't have a problem with sex or porn for that matter.

      My experience with women is just that they don't like (or won't admit liking) porn. I've never met a woman who would not scoff at my browsing usenet for porn, for instance.

    7. Re:Channel surfing by lcsjk · · Score: 5, Funny

      What's his name?

    8. Re:Channel surfing by SEE · · Score: 2, Funny

      Please. This is /. The only wives we have are from here.

    9. Re:Channel surfing by tanguyr · · Score: 5, Funny

      i'm thinking real hard of modding you +1 funny. let me know how it works out.

      --
      #!/usr/bin/english
    10. Re:Channel surfing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      holy shit, it worked!

    11. Re:Channel surfing by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Funny
      > > Nice try, but women don't enjoy porn. They've got this thing with emotional bonding and sensible family life.
      >
      > Nice try, but I know several women who do enjoy porn. You're just not getting to know the right women.

      Or he's not showing them the right pr0n. (This is Slashdot, after all.)

    12. Re:Channel surfing by spectecjr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My experience with women is just that they don't like (or won't admit liking) porn. I've never met a woman who would not scoff at my browsing usenet for porn, for instance.

      In most cases, it just requires communication about the subject. If you explain why you like porn, it's not longer a problem.

      No, it doesn't mean you love them any less.
      No, you don't necessarily want them to do those things.
      No, they're not being screwed*; they get paid thousands of dollars for this.

      Explain that it's visual stimulation, and it means that you're not pawing at them for sex all the time - that it gives you options. Explain how men basically want sex all of the time (believe it or not, most women do too... it just surfaces in different ways - it's more emotional than physical).

      And if you're going to watch porn with a woman, don't go for usenet stuff or bargain bin video store pornos. Get yourself some of the classy Adam & Eve stuff designed for couples, which actually have a real plot (or at least, more of a plot than most), and pick the video based on what you know turns her on.

      You'll be surprised. Sure, not all women will react that way - a lot will react exactly as you've described. But the only way to truly find out is through in-depth, honest communication. And that takes effort.

      * erm... well, you know what I mean.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    13. Re:Channel surfing by Rigor+Morty · · Score: 1

      >It does not exclude or preclude emotional bonding or sensible family life - unless you have an unhealthy preoccupation with it.

      ...or unless you've found some of the Good Stuff(tm).

      --
      Remove the spamfreak to speak.
    14. Re:Channel surfing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The trick is to marry someone who enjoys watching porn with you. It's not that hard
      Can't be very exciting porn then....

    15. Re:Channel surfing by Wintergrey · · Score: 3, Funny
      Sign of the Apocalypse #39952:

      Intelligent, insightful relationship advice regarding women on /.

      (Hold me, I'm scared...)

    16. Re:Channel surfing by El_Ehmenopio · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll drink to that. But a better trick is marrying someone who enjoys MAKEING porn with you.

    17. Re:Channel surfing by El_Ehmenopio · · Score: 1

      Just remember: everyone's different. Not everyone shares your particular problems with sex. WOW. I should make that my bew SIG!

    18. Re:Channel surfing by El_Ehmenopio · · Score: 1

      Maybe, I don't know, but I think that you are thinking about a very different type of porn. My wife, and in fact, every woman I've ever been sexual with, likes to watch porn. What you are describing is not good porn. It's a circus act. Good porn gets you horny, and gets her horny. The trick to watching porn with a spouse, or any sexual partner, is to keep track of the mood level. (don't worry kids, if I can do it, so can you) Keep the remote handy, and fastforward through all the parts that are boring. Yes, even some of the sex parts can be boring. The plots are always bad for a reason, you DONT want to be engrossed in the plot. You want to be prepared for the "window" of oppourtunity. Then turn off the TV kid, and get to "work". One last tip. Put on a nice CD or a mix in iTunes. but leave it muted. If the movie music is annoying mandolin music, then you mute the TV and unmute the musicbox. If the whole movie sucks, but you like the visuals, put the TV-o-porn on in the background, and talk. Porn, is a foreplay powertool.

    19. Re:Channel surfing by PhoenixOne · · Score: 1
      You thought him up to +5!!! I think Mensa is going to give you a call.

      --
      Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
    20. Re:Channel surfing by Kiyooka · · Score: 1

      You can also marry a pr0n star, like I did. Really.

    21. Re:Channel surfing by xpyr · · Score: 1

      If I recall, Michelle Branch in maxim magazine said she loved watching porn.

    22. Re:Channel surfing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the first things my girlfriend asked when we started going out was what kind of porn I liked, so she could forward me any good stuff she found.

      Gotta love that!

    23. Re:Channel surfing by colionalknight · · Score: 1

      very interesting web site its a must see

    24. Re:Channel surfing by isaac338 · · Score: 1

      I've never met a woman who would not scoff at my browsing usenet for porn, for instance.

      Maybe it's the fact that you're browsing usenet for porn - I mean, c'mon. Maybe the girl scoffs at the fact that you're perpetuating the typical nerd stereotype and getting porn on that computer you love so much, rather than buying it at the 99 cent porno store like everyone else.

    25. Re:Channel surfing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then it's just an issue with the women you've met, possibly with women who live in your vicinity or in your particular social circles, not necessarily women in general.

      My experience differs, as does that of many other slashdotters (based on this thread), so there are at least some exceptions. How common they are...it's difficult to say, because everyone's experiences are anecdotal, I doubt anyone uses valid statistical methods to choose the women they get to know.

    26. Re:Channel surfing by Fallen_Knight · · Score: 1

      Can you think real hard about me passing my midterm? i don't want to myself you see, i'd rather sleep.

      Thanks!

    27. Re:Channel surfing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you are describing is not good porn. It's a circus act. Good porn gets you horny, and gets her horny.

      If a crazy nympho slut gets turned on by multiple penises and showers of semen, who am I to deny her that pleasure? Every woman is different, some are crazy kinky bitches who will gobble up all the dick in sight, some just like a good vanilla sex missionary fuck. I don't have a problem with either.

      Hypocritical Guy (posted AC cause -1 karma is a bitch)

    28. Re:Channel surfing by alexpage · · Score: 1

      (Hold me, I'm scared...)

      Sign of the Apocalpse #39953:

      Somebody trying to pull on /.

  2. Useful... by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Funny
    computers can recognize patterns and allow programming based on these patterns to say, know if a mouse is thinking about pushing his water lever.

    Sounds like an old joke we shared around the IT dept about 20 years ago related to 'anticipatory paging', why not anticipatory programming. Hmm. Useful

    This could save some of the effort of heavy lifting of that axe or driving that nail.

    "after the nth time the process failed I gave the computer such a look that the software uninstalled itself, the harddrive crashed and the O/s committed suicide."

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Useful... by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

      why not anticipatory programming

      THEN x = 3
      IF x == uninitializedValue

    2. Re:Useful... by Rolo+Tomasi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You think it's funny, but that's how you actually program in a stack-based language (Forth, Postscript, ...).

      --
      Did you know you can fertilize your lawn with used motor oil?
  3. Just don't forget one thing! by Bendebecker · · Score: 5, Funny

    Monsters, John! Monsters... from the id!

    --
    There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
    most of us won't be able to afford it.
    -- Lemmy
    1. Re:Just don't forget one thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Monsters, John! Monsters... from the id!

      I don't get it. Obviously a reference to John Carmack at ID games, ie Doom III, but I still don't get it.

    2. Re:Just don't forget one thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forbidden Planet -- look it up

    3. Re:Just don't forget one thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Creating monsters from the id is surely a violation of the client access license. Just because The Krell played fast-and-loose with the license agreement won't mean we'll make the same mistake.

    4. Re:Just don't forget one thing! by Bendebecker · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, its a refernce to the SCi-fi classic Forbidden Planet. A highly species known as the Krell develope a machine that allows manipulation without instrumentation - all they had to do was think about it and the machine would create whatever they thought about right there. But the Krell forgot one thing: the monsters of the subconcious mind. The Krell had become so highly advanced that they had forgotten that deep down buried in their minds, the primitive savage still existed - a savage that still wanted to kill and destroy and in building the machine the Krell had given those monsters nearly infinite power. As a result, the Krell were destroyed by their own minds.

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    5. Re:Just don't forget one thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
    6. Re:Just don't forget one thing! by Woogiemonger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Monsters, John! Monsters... from the id!

      First you need something else!

    7. Re:Just don't forget one thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, yeah monsters.

      Some guys researching this had a problem. When there was a big red icon that deleted all the files on the system operators couldn't help thinking about it. Like when your parents tell you not to touch something, that old code of defiant curiosity is still there like a devil on your shoulder. No matter ...how ...hard....trying not to think... must not think..... damnit!!

      On a factual note I don't remember if this is some SF I read way back, or a rumour I heard or something I just made up completely.

    8. Re:Just don't forget one thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is why you build an "off" button.

  4. This was on HDNet via DirectV by Brew+Bird · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Saw this on HDNet... very very very cool..
    I esp like the lady with the leads out of both sides of the back of her head....

    She looked very Borg-Like.

    1. Re:This was on HDNet via DirectV by jbrocklin · · Score: 1

      It was also on PBS a while back...at least here in Cincinnati

    2. Re:This was on HDNet via DirectV by StarfishOne · · Score: 0

      The only 'Borg-Like; that *I* like has a name.. '7 of 9' ;)

      In that case: bring it on!! ^_^

  5. This could be bad... by jhouserizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can you imagine what might happen when a "hottie" walks though the office?

    1. Re:This could be bad... by Jotaigna · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I remember a scene from "Macross Plus" Where two batteloids where flying and one of them was "neuro controlled". In a part, the neurocontrolled batteloid falls very fast and the other batteloid saves it from crushing into the ground, but as the "neuro" pilot regains control of his mecha, he wishes the other pilot was down(there is some grudge between pilots) and inmediately the mecha obeys the wish and wrecks the old batteloid!!. Be carful of what you wish, if you are hooked to a machine, you might get it!.

      --
      "The quality of life is inversely proportional to the number of keys on your keyring."
    2. Re:This could be bad... by FooGoo · · Score: 5, Funny

      all the CD drives prematurely eject?

      --
      People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
    3. Re:This could be bad... by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Funny
      Can you imagine what might happen when a "hottie" walks though the office?

      What? Outlook automatically downloads all youre V1@gr@ spam onto your drive for your perusal?

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:This could be bad... by bluGill · · Score: 5, Funny

      Interesting question. I love questions like this that we can debate, secure in the knowledge that we will never find out the real answer. Eventually we will find out what it is like to have this working, but we geeks will never find out what it is like to have a "hottie" walk though the office.

      Congratulations, you have posed the perfect open ended question.

    5. Re:This could be bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      I suspect her anti-leering shields will activate.

    6. Re:This could be bad... by nolife · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Funny but if something did happen, the system would be a failure.

      When you "think" about doing something, you are deciding via pros and cons, deciding outcome, looking at all options, recounting experience, true desire... on wether to do something or not. When you really decide to act, you act. That signal to act causes you to act. Thinking about acting is not acting. The final go ahead trigger to act is what matters. How else could you make a logical decision about anything? If you take out the thought process involved, we all would be living in a completely different world.

      Consider the mouse and the bottle. If the mouse really wanted to get a drink, he would go over and get one. It's not like some force is holding him back and he keeps thinking about it but he just (slow superhero struggling voice) can't moooooooove.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    7. Re:This could be bad... by lcsjk · · Score: 2, Funny

      So that explains all that spam! Wait, I can't feel the wires. They must have used wireless devices! Help, I'm not sure if this is really me!

    8. Re:This could be bad... by elbarrio · · Score: 5, Funny

      ahhh.... you obviously have never worked on the same floor as HR. ;)

    9. Re:This could be bad... by dandelion_wine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Consider the mouse and the bottle. If the mouse really wanted to get a drink, he would go over and get one. It's not like some force is holding him back and he keeps thinking about it but he just (slow superhero struggling voice) can't moooooooove.

      Hahaha. You're absolutely right.

      Now, enough /. I've got things to do. ... rrrrhhhhhhaaaaaa... ok, well maybe just a little more.

    10. Re:This could be bad... by Telastyn · · Score: 1

      Not exactly.

      I don't think most men have to conciously decide to get a hard on when a hottie walks by.

      And anyways, what's the diffence between picking up the signals that say "get some water" and "you're thirsty"?

    11. Re:This could be bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Lots of Hard Disk Thrashing!

    12. Re:This could be bad... by sensei_brandon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      well, yeah, but what's the difference between the signal that makes you want to move your arm and the signal that actually does it? the monkeys learn that they get the desired response by just sending the "intent to move arm" signal instead of the whole "activate arm muscles" signal.

    13. Re:This could be bad... by RetroGeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Funny but if something did happen, the system would be a failure.

      Quite true. And it would only work with a consious effort I would think.

      After all, when you lift your arm, the other arm does not also automatically lift. Your brain distinguishes between the right arm and the left arm.

      I would think that this would work the same way. Just because you are thinking about "format c:" does not mean that you are acting on it.

      The brain will learn new pathways, and you will have an extra "appendage" which you can control directly.

      As an aside, you cannot move JUST the tip of a finger. Usually the whole finger (both joints) bend. Yet a friend of mine who has played a cello for many, many years CAN move just the tip of the left index finger. Not the right, just the left. That is one of the fingers used to select which notes you are playing. Over the years his brain learned the pathways to reach just the tip muscles.

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    14. Re:This could be bad... by tyroney · · Score: 1

      I've known some people whose brain shorts from thinking about straight to doing. Granted, they weren't the kind of folk you'd call intelligent, or successful, but not everyone is as premeditated as might be desired.

    15. Re:This could be bad... by thetaikung · · Score: 1

      I dunno about that, I can move all the tips of all my fingers just fine. I call Talking-Out-of-Ass on you.

      --
      P226 .40cal
    16. Re:This could be bad... by RetroGeek · · Score: 1

      Move JUST the tip. The rest of the finger stays straight.

      My friend can bend JUST THE TIP to almost 90 degress.

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    17. Re:This could be bad... by d3am0n · · Score: 1

      Actually your forgetting that it only reads specific neurons, not your whole mind, and no, when you think about doing something, you don't automatically act, the thought of thinking about moving your arm is different from actually moving it. This is why the test animals can control the objects without moving. Your computer isn't going to go haywire because you think about a pretty girl, unless you suddenly very specifically concentrate on say, giving the thumbs up sign while thinking about a pretty girl, which isn't too likely. This system could get even better by going symbolic in nature which means that you would have to think an extremely specific thought like the letter A in order to have an A appear on a screen for word processing. It really could be a very good system and wouldn't neccessarily go nuts due to stray thoughts.

    18. Re:This could be bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My piano teacher can do that. I can just barely do that with my index fingers.

    19. Re:This could be bad... by Edward_M · · Score: 1

      Err, I dunno about the rest of you but I can do that with almost all of my fingers. Not quite 90 degrees, but probably about 65, 70.

    20. Re:This could be bad... by incom · · Score: 1

      Bastard, you spoiled the show for me!

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    21. Re:This could be bad... by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      Interesting, I was always under the impression that the alien looking guy just lost focus, and thus lost control of a machine which I guarantee would need fly-by-wire.

      The part where he shoves him into the ground, I don't know if that was the flight controls interpreting his desires, or a conscious action on his behalf.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    22. Re:This could be bad... by Fallen_Knight · · Score: 1

      I was sure he just got pissed and did it on purpose?

      Hmm maybe this requires a rewatch... now wheres that DVD

    23. Re:This could be bad... by Jotaigna · · Score: 1

      im positive that he envisions it(he is thinking at that moment:if i just bend his spoiler just a little bit, just a tini displacement of my hand, he'll hoplessly crash), then it actually happens and there's a flash on his face showing a "what da..??". Later on he just says it was an accident(but with a tone saying he wanted it to happen).
      The real question that macross plus asks is what if apart from your objective functional thoughts, like creating beautiful music, your emotions are transmitted to a machine...will you have control over that? and if you cant, what will the machine do to satisfy your desires...will you add moral constrains to it?.will donald the duck ever wear pants? ohh so many questions...

      --
      "The quality of life is inversely proportional to the number of keys on your keyring."
    24. Re:This could be bad... by thetaikung · · Score: 1

      Yes, JUST the tips to about 80 degrees at least. People say it looks like it hurts. It doesn't.

      --
      P226 .40cal
  6. We have that already. by tktk · · Score: 5, Funny
    ...motionless system adminstration/utilization...

    I call it sleeping.

    1. Re:We have that already. by raider_red · · Score: 2, Funny

      I call it working for a government agency. (Before you accuse me of trolling, I am working for a government agency.)

      --
      It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
  7. Not such a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    My water tube can dispense a refreshing H20-based substance just by wishing.

    1. Re:Not such a big deal by StarfishOne · · Score: 1, Funny

      that sounds quite disturbing to me somehow...

  8. Say it all with me now... by grasshoppa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...this is some neat shit.

    Personally, I find it facinating that the brain can so readily adapt to adding and removing hardware ( limbs ), but reading about it is even cooler.

    What other computer do you know can learn how to use foriegn devices without a driver disk? :)

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:Say it all with me now... by ImaNumber · · Score: 5, Funny

      The best part is that this computer can be mass produced with unskilled labor!

    2. Re:Say it all with me now... by System.out.println() · · Score: 1

      You can add limbs? o_O

      *cue "third leg" jokes*

    3. Re:Say it all with me now... by Inuchance · · Score: 1

      A Macintosh. ;)

    4. Re:Say it all with me now... by penultimatepost · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd say that in the case of the brain, the drivers for the new limbs, are "written" as the person learns to use them, as it takes considerable effort to learn or relearn how to use them. In the case of transplants, they aren't new hardware, but upgrades (the drivers are already loaded).

    5. Re:Say it all with me now... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Well it's a rought job, but somebody has gotta do it. Count me in for the assembly line ;)

    6. Re:Say it all with me now... by danila · · Score: 1

      And the worst part is that the hardware design is random and not improving at all (no Moore's law for you), it takes 9 months to produce, 25 years to install necessary software and then you need to pay at least a few thousands dollards every month in maintenance fees. Not to mention it overheats (or something) if operated for more than 8 hours a day...

      Thank you, but I'd rather pay Intel for mass producing computers with skilled engineers in bunny suits.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  9. Maybe the Should Rename Magazine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    from Popular Science to Crazy as Hell Science.

    1. Re:Maybe the Should Rename Magazine... by Walrus99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Popular Science has always been crazy as hell science. I am still wating for my flying car and hotel room on Mars that was predicted in the magazine when I read in in junior high in the 70's.

  10. umm.. not just yet. by xxdinkxx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    the best of these kind of devices (devloped in nasa labs) can only do 95% accuracy. sure that might be fine for say playing a video game(unless its fast pace), but if you tried to walk with 95% accuracy, you'd be the but of more jokes then the "how do you get bob dole out of a tree, wave to him" jokes.

    but over all its really cool that they are even able to do this at all.

    1. Re:umm.. not just yet. by irokitt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even in a fast paced video game, how accurate are you with a mouse? Especially after all the sugar/caffeine? 95% is astounding.

      --
      If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
    2. Re:umm.. not just yet. by millahtime · · Score: 4, Funny

      "but if you tried to walk with 95% accuracy"

      95% is better than me and my friends after a night out onthe town and we make it home ok. 95% is pretty good betting odds, too.

    3. Re:umm.. not just yet. by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Funny
      the best of these kind of devices (devloped in nasa labs) can only do 95% accuracy.

      Well, so they claim, it's a robot that just appeared one day and keeps complaining about this horrible pain in all the diodes down its left side.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  11. Well by Rupan · · Score: 0, Funny

    I, for one, welcome our machine overlords. Welcome to the Source!

    --
    Ads? What ads?
    1. Re:Well by Zcipher · · Score: 2, Funny

      I, for one, welcome our machine overlords.

      Or, more accurately, "I, for one, welcome our new monkey-controlled robot overlords."

      Remember, the first rule of comedy: Monkeys are funny. The second rule of comedy? Anything that is funny can be made more so by the addition of monkeys.

      We now return you to your regularly scheduled /., already in progress.

  12. Wow, Me Too! by MooseByte · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Mice who cause their water tube to dispense some refreshing H2O just by wishing it?"

    Uncanny! Just this morning I caused by "water tube" to dispense liquid just by wishing it too!

    1. Re:Wow, Me Too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but was it refreshing? Doubtful.

  13. Thinking... by physicsboy500 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Printing out poster-sized Pr0n just by visualizing it?

    Everybody... The day is now!!!

    --
    The original generic sig.
  14. Cell Phone by nycsubway · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It would be interesting to have a cell-phone implant. You can call your friends and relatives, and always get them and know what they are thinking. And MAN, it would get annoying!

    How about living in a way that our bodies were actually meant to. Exercising, working with our bodies, and communicating in person. Eventually we will just be sitting at home, in a lazy-boy with our brains plugged in to a network and all work from home. But, that would suck!

    1. Re:Cell Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Exercising, working with our bodies" could be done with a realdoll. if you think about it the right way.
      working from home is just wrong though. when your 'at the office' you get bugged by all there people (customers/clients, managers, co-workers, subordinants) but when you at home, its just 'you' time. unless you get a spouse... then working from home doesn't matter, the spouse is just as bad of a bother as the rest of them. and the spouse runs MANY more performance reviews then any other jobs i've had.

    2. Re:Cell Phone by MoonBuggy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If you read 'The Light of Other Days' by Arthur C Clarke & Stephen Baxter you'll get a good insight into the possible consequences. While the book is centred around the idea that wormholes can be used to view anyone at any time, knowing what people think would have the same effect of first causing terrible unrest but eventually destroying barriers and allowing everyone to work together. It's a very interesting read and I feel that every day we get closer to that reality.

    3. Re:Cell Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eventually we will just be sitting at home, in a lazy-boy with our brains plugged in to a network and all work from home.
      Well, it's either that or sitting in the car spending hours commuting for work.

    4. Re:Cell Phone by Phroggy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about just implanting the ringer, so they don't bother the rest of us?

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    5. Re:Cell Phone by memco · · Score: 0, Funny

      I sure hope we're not "plugged in". A lot of companies are investing in some new technology called wireless or something. It may just be the wave of the future!

      --
      Get me a meat pie floater!
    6. Re:Cell Phone by Professr3 · · Score: 0

      Never, ever, set to vibrate :D

    7. Re:Cell Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How could anyone possibly know what someone else is thinking? Then you're pretty much thinking the same thing.

      It probably has something to do with time.

    8. Re:Cell Phone by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

      If there is a chip that can monitor what you think and those thoughts can be transmitted over a network then someone with a reciever chip could see what you are thinking.

    9. Re:Cell Phone by ZackSchil · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, there is pre-speech thought and there is conceptual thought. Aside from sounding like a jumblefuck of absolute nonsense, if any conceptual thought slipped into your little mental cellphone, you might have some trouble on your hands.

      "No mom, I haven't filled out the job application yet!fuckingshitfilledpieceofdeathuselesskillhatrid noneedjobgetweedsmoke"

      "What the HELL was that you were thinking?!"

      "Umm.. ahh, I think the electrodes are malfunctioning... wait... uhh, hold on, you're breaking up. I have to go bitchlifesuckingcun...." [transmission has ended]

    10. Re:Cell Phone by visgoth · · Score: 1

      Why bother with a meat based body that atrophies and grows old, when you could have a much more durable robotic body? This technology could allow for prosthetic bodies, once we overcome the engineering problems.

      --
      My patience is infinite, my time is not.
    11. Re:Cell Phone by Kjella · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While the book is centred around the idea that wormholes can be used to view anyone at any time, knowing what people think would have the same effect of first causing terrible unrest but eventually destroying barriers and allowing everyone to work together.

      Every action being publicly known would cause you to think through everything you do. Every thought being public would cause you to fear thinking too much - about ideas that might be too controversial, sexual fantasies you might want to indulge in, feelings of hatred and hurt towards someone and so on. If your thoughts take you too far, perhaps you'll be an Enemy of the People(TM).

      I don't think it'll be a better world. I think peer pressure and desire of conformity would mold people into the same shape, strangling creativity, initiative and independent thought. Not to mention what sects and such could do - brainwash initiates until they too are true believers.

      The only way it would be a good idea is if you could directly point to an action it would cause, in order to prevent it from happening - much like Minority Report. But the film convieniently circumvents the issue since they see nothing but thoughts that do result in murder.

      What if instead, they would have to monitor every thought, destroy all privacy, and couldn't tell if a perpetrator really would go through with it until the very last second? To intervene at the mere thought of committing a crime? That's the thing about thought crime - if you want it undone, it is undone. If you no longer want to kill the guy, well then it simply hasn't happened and won't happen. And the mere thought of it, I think everyone is guilty of - if even for just a flash.

      Kjella

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    12. Re:Cell Phone by koreth · · Score: 4, Insightful
      How about living in a way that our bodies were actually meant to. Exercising, working with our bodies, and communicating in person.

      What about the idea that humans were "meant to" improve themselves technologically? Check out the book "Natural Born Cyborgs" by Andy Clark -- he makes a pretty convincing argument that things like cellphone implants or robotic limbs aren't a bizarre aberration. Rather, they're incremental steps on the long road of technological self-enhancements that started the first time someone used the technology of writing to remember a piece of abstract information the unaided brain would have forgotten.

      Even if you reject that argument, you have to figure out where to draw the line, and the answer isn't at all obvious. Were humans meant to see fine details on objects miles away? Toss out those binoculars. Were we meant to instantly kill other creatures without laying a finger on them? Forget your rough-hewn spearheads and boar traps, if not. Were we meant to survive heart failure? (Careful that your reasoning doesn't also conclude that gene therapy to live for 1000 years is fine too, if you want to be traditional but still humane.) To travel halfway around the globe in a matter of hours? To walk on the moon? The list goes on.

      Humans are naturally unnatural. It's what makes us what we are.

    13. Re:Cell Phone by Ultra64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How about living in a way that our bodies were actually meant to.

      Meant to? Meant to by whom?

    14. Re:Cell Phone by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      [possible spoilers]

      If you read 'The Light of Other Days' by Arthur C Clarke & Stephen Baxter you'll get a good insight into the possible consequences. While the book is centred around the idea that wormholes can be used to view anyone at any time, knowing what people think would have the same effect of first causing terrible unrest but eventually destroying barriers and allowing everyone to work together. It's a very interesting read and I feel that every day we get closer to that reality.

      Indeed, the wormholes eventually allow groups of people to share their thoughts, but the obvious difference there is that the sharing of thoughts is bi-directional and only possible after an implant.

      I'm sure once a tool is invented that allows reception of an individual's thoughts or motivations, a small subset of society will monopolize and abuse it before it ever becomes a commonly-available tool.

    15. Re:Cell Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If enough people agree with you in that it would suck, it won't be a problem.

    16. Re:Cell Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tracking people's every thoughts is quite a deal less easy then simply making robot arms move or even getting feedback sent back to your brain. Next to that, you could easily implement things so that even if it was possible, that your thoughts would be shielded from the rest. Ofcourse misuse will happen, but as you said yourself indirectly, they wouldn't be as competitive as the people who can still be more creative and innovative.

      Quickshot.

    17. Re:Cell Phone by ozbird · · Score: 1

      How about just implanting the ringer, so they don't bother the rest of us?

      "Can I borrow your phone for a sec.? Thanks, now bend over."

    18. Re:Cell Phone by alienmole · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Humans are naturally unnatural. It's what makes us what we are.
      Granted. But one question is, will this continue to serve us well in future, or should we recognize that as our technology advances, we may need to become more careful about the kinds of unnatural things we do, and become dependent on? Might we end up self-modifying our species into something weaker, in some crucial respect, than what natural evolution gave us for free?

      What the species as a whole does blindly may not be the right choice for an individual. For example, let's say that in Christmas 2012, the hot new gizmo is Microsoft Neural Implant 1.0. Huge numbers of people rush out and get one, and brain surgeons are swamped by the number of requests for implantation (a self-implantation feature is scheduled for version 2.0). Those in a real hurry fly to India and get the implant done cut rate, in Bangalore.

      For a while, everything's cool and people walk around sending email and collaborating on projects in their heads. But then the great neural implant worm of 2013 hits, and billions of people are either lobotomized or killed.

      At that point, the people who followed the OP's advice, "How about living in a way that our bodies were actually meant to. Exercising, working with our bodies, and communicating in person", are in pretty good shape. Evolutionarily speaking, they took a risk in not going along with what the rest of the species was doing - since they couldn't function effectively in corporations filled with wireheads, and this could have had a negative effect on their survival - but it worked out well for them in the end.

      The point is, what's natural could perhaps be defined as whatever works over the long run. Cannibalism, for example, doesn't appear to be natural, since so few societies that try it seem to survive. There are many other "unnatural" behaviors which have similarly died out.

      It's true that it's natural for us to try new things, but that doesn't mean that anything we can come up with is good/appropriate/natural, at least until those things have been proven to work to either enhance or at least not impede survival on a species-wide scale, in the long run.

    19. Re:Cell Phone by nycsubway · · Score: 1

      How about living in a way that our bodies were actually meant to.

      Meant to? Meant to by whom?


      Meant to by whom? Evolution.

    20. Re:Cell Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um... Overrated? It wasn't modded up any... it was at 1. Dude, you need to learn how to laugh, please. Before you kill someone.

    21. Re:Cell Phone by segmond · · Score: 1

      how about me calling you 1,000 times a day cuz you pissed me off? :D

      your head will really be ringing!

      --
      ------ Curiosity killed the cat. {satisfaction brought it back | it didn't die ignorant | lack of it is killing mankind
    22. Re:Cell Phone by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Have you considered what cybersex in that day will be like and feel like? Your right it would suck, on every chat line, every minute of every day that little... nm, you get the point ;)

    23. Re:Cell Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the idea that humans were "meant to" improve themselves technologically?

      What about "wrong"? Humans were "meant to"[1] improve -their abilities- technologically. I'm not inalienably modifying or neglecting my body when I throw a spear at a springbok.

      [1] arguably

    24. Re:Cell Phone by Dumbush · · Score: 1

      well, you are describing a hive society. The question is, do we want to be queenless ants?

    25. Re:Cell Phone by SlashSim · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Every action being publicly known would cause you to think through everything you do. Every thought being public would cause you to fear thinking too much - about ideas that might be too controversial, sexual fantasies you might want to indulge in, feelings of hatred and hurt towards someone and so on. If your thoughts take you too far, perhaps you'll be an Enemy of the People(TM).

      Pervasive telepathy will erase the concept of evil thoughts. Right now we have thoughts that embarass us. Many people have been taught to believe things that aren't true, for instance the idea that only bad girls like sex. For a person instilled with that belief, sexual desire is something to feel guilty about. With a brain that's hooked up to every other it becomes blatantly obvious that everyone shares these thoughts. If you can read minds you are immune to this kind of brainwashing and it is apparent to you that your brain works pretty much just like any others.

      Likewise, feelings of hurt and hatred are felt by all people from time to time. In a pervasive telepathatic environment the object of your hatred can feel it as well. All people do mean things from time to time, but nobody wants to be hated. Telepathy is the ultimate behavioral feedback mechanism. No longer will people wonder why an associate is suddenly in a bad mood. No more guessing what you did to piss off your wife. With the silence of hurt out of the way, people can move on to healing with direct positive feedback to tell them if they have sucessfully made up.

      I don't think it'll be a better world. I think peer pressure and desire of conformity would mold people into the same shape, strangling creativity, initiative and independent thought.

      I disagree. Peer pressure is a very powerful factor already. Bland conformity is driven by a desire to belong and a fear of not being liked. Telepathy would provide confidence of belonging by creating much stronger rapport between individuals. Creative work has never happened in a vacuum, all creations are supported by many other people, directly or indirectly. Mind communion will strenghen the ability to colaborate, like SMP for creative acts.

      The only way it would be a good idea is if you could directly point to an action it would cause, in order to prevent it from happening - much like Minority Report. But the film convieniently circumvents the issue since they see nothing but thoughts that do result in murder.

      It is a mistake to think that there could only be one possible good outcome. This kind of change will have many unpredictible effects, good and bad. Crime would drop to practicaly nil as there would be no effective way to keep it secret. People will also develop a stronger sense of empathy and feel less isolated. Criminals generaly don't feel as if they belong in society and can't relate to the humanness of their victims. A mental connection would be a powerful tool to build empathy and inclusion.

      All this depends on an internet-like pattern of connections between people rather than a big-brother-like system, but I think that's the direction we're already headed.

      Dropping 'trodes into the heads of everyone at once and jacking them in together would probably be a bad idea, but that's not how things work. We didn't all get cellphones together at one instant in 1997, it's a gradual adoption process. It will probably take a generation for mind 'phones' to become ubiquitous.

      I for one, welcome the end of privacy and the beginning of the new communication age, or should that be communion age? It's a brave new world indeed, and exciting thing we never imagined are bound to happen. Just try and imagine the dot-com bubble from the perspective of a 1950's file clerk.

      --
      If the only tool you have is a hammer, you'd better start looking for a carpentry job.
    26. Re:Cell Phone by Joss+the+Red · · Score: 1
      I still say go for it. Those of us who, while in Bangalore, have the unit rewired to run something a little more secure than some MS OS will be fine with the worm hits ;) Anyway, what kind of an idiot would let Microsoft put some device that probably has some sort of neural DRM built in into his brain?

      Can you imagine what a nightmare "Trusted Thinking" would be?

      Those that do get hit with the worm are an example of evolution in action. They should have used the OpenBSD "patch". (Hey, Linux is good and all, but I'm not sure I want to trust my brain to anything less than OpenBSD).

    27. Re:Cell Phone by Joss+the+Red · · Score: 1
      So if the cyborgs beat the unaltered humans wouldn't that count as evolution?

      Seriously though evolution can't have intention, it just is a description for a biological process which has been shown to exist. Your objection is meaningless nonsense.

    28. Re:Cell Phone by alienmole · · Score: 1
      Those that do get hit with the worm are an example of evolution in action. They should have used the OpenBSD "patch". (Hey, Linux is good and all, but I'm not sure I want to trust my brain to anything less than OpenBSD).

      This is why this technology worries me - I don't trust myself not to install Debian, for the convenience of being able to do an "apt-get install some-cool-package". Then it's only a matter of time until I install something I shouldn't have - now I need to unmount my brain and fsck it...

  15. But what if I didn't like my neighbour? by bad+enema · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And I ran him over with my SCV?

    "I didn't run him over!"
    "Did you THINK about running him over?"

    *long pause*

    I didn't run him over!

  16. Story more than 2 weeks old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was published on CNN of places...

  17. ai by maxbang · · Score: 2, Funny

    They're talking about reverse engineering the brain - it would be pretty sweet, but one hell of a task to filter through all the activity and figure out what signal meant what, combinations, etc. I'm sure an Altair is all you would need to reverse engineer my brain. You'd flip maybe ten switches, tops.

    --
    I also reply below your current threshold.
    1. Re:ai by ImaNumber · · Score: 0

      You can't legally reverse engineer the brain...Microsoft had a patent on it years ago.

    2. Re:ai by Lattitude · · Score: 1

      Yep. When my wife asks me what I am thinking, the answer is usually the sound of static.

    3. Re:ai by thetaikung · · Score: 1

      Like I try to tell potential girlfriends, I have easily maintained code.

      HAHAHA..."try to tell potential girlfriends"...maybe you should scrap your code and start over with a better hardware base. One that doesn't have state 7 taking up 15 hours of the day.

      --
      P226 .40cal
  18. Commute by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    This could greatly simplify one's commute. "Go to hell, weaving Bastard!" Zzzzt!

  19. Ok, that should be SUV... by bad+enema · · Score: 2, Funny

    Not SCV...Damn Starcraft.

    1. Re:Ok, that should be SUV... by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1

      SCV: Sons of Confederate Veterans.

    2. Re:Ok, that should be SUV... by Rallion · · Score: 1

      Running somebody over with an SCV is cooler.

      "I told 'em I was claustrophobic, I gotta get outta here!"

  20. I don't think it will ever be like in the movies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I mean, the rat can think about water, and get some water. But a rat's mind is way simpler.

    Have you ever thought about suicide? Now imagine if when you thought about it a machine would come and kill you. Also I don't know about you, but I can't control my mind completely, sometimes I have thoughts that are completely unrelated with what I am doing... I really don't think I could trust a machine to make my thoughts come true, I'm sure in the future machines will be able to interpret the signals in your brain with a 99% precision, I just can't trust my own mind.

  21. oh no by millahtime · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If we can control the machines, can someone else come back through the machine an control me??? Could I be hacked??? Would I have to have a firewall in my head???

    1. Re:oh no by Halthar · · Score: 1
      If we can control the machines, can someone else come back through the machine an control me??? Could I be hacked??? Would I have to have a firewall in my head???
      Maybe. Though, firewalls don't seem to work all that well against Section 9 or "The Laughing Man".

      Wait, you mean it isnt 2029 yet?

      Oh........Nevermind then.

    2. Re:oh no by GnrlFajita · · Score: 1

      You would be overcome with an uncontrollable desire to eat Spam. Lot's of it.

      --
      When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained.
      Mark Twain
    3. Re:oh no by gobbo · · Score: 1
      OH yes. Welcome to the wonderful wacky world of MKULTRA.

      This is the true origin of the tinfoil hat stuff! And damn if they aren't still doinGHGHRSKKKKKT&!ffftt...er...

      It's a good thing that militaries around the world stopped all that research; anyone who tells you otherwise just needs a little prozac.

    4. Re:oh no by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      That is the most retarded question ever. I hate to break it to you, but when Mr. Rogers was talking to you on TV, he didn't actually see and hear your dumb ass. He was talking into a camera, which only sends info one way.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    5. Re:oh no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically, he was talking into a microphone, which can be adapted for use as a speaker. Just for the record.

    6. Re:oh no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this would be possible only if the machine could directly input electric signals at your brain.

      I believe that this won't be the case for a very long time, mainly because you can get the input using your ears or eyes.

      Also in order to gain control of a system you must have a very deep knowledge about it's workings. IMO, we will never be able to develop a standard exploit for the mind since my mind is unique, and if you're not a PHB, yours is unique too.

      Wich leaves room for only one type of attack: DOS.
      I think you can guess what the result will be...

    7. Re:oh no by batquux · · Score: 1

      No, you just need a silly helmet. It seems to work for Magnito.

    8. Re:oh no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      My question concerns this quote from the article:
      "We see 1s and 0s popping out of the brain, and we're decoding it."

      It's already been pointed out that they're not technically doing that, but if someone ever figures out how to actually do it, I'm coming out from my bunker and declaring war. >;)

      This isn't the best analogy, but right now I have an app filtering http header traffic that goes in between my browser and the web in order to rearrange the page, block banners, etc. Essentially I rewrite the page on the fly as it comes in.

      Once brain "traffic" is decoded, how long before output starts being filtered, edited, and--the biggie--reverse engineered?
      If you can do that to a brain, how long before you can program it? According to the article, new clusters of neurons can be created for new tasks. As such, a clever d3wD could write a brain backdoor exploit (or just feed the brain code it accepts) and get busy.

      If this technology becomes something that everyone's brain has hardwired in, how hard would it be to create a jamming device? It makes me picture something along the lines of an RTS fog of war jammer (vs the biological maphack everyone currently has on by default.) The kicker is, of course, the seriousness of the crash when somebody overloads the stack.

      What happens if my brain gets jammed? Does it shut down? Die? Revert to "safe mode" (which is probably the old version of my brain: 1.0 from before I got said implants?)

      What happens if someone reprograms my brain?

      Like I said, http header filtering isn't the best example (because its client side), but I think it's applicable.

      Apologies if this comes across as a troll, but, it looks to me like the human brain is going to go OPEN SOURCE!11!!! W00T! Somebody get Debian running on it, already.

  22. Shoulda seen this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Brain-Computer Interfaces for Communication and Control at the society for neuroscience annual meeting. There are already paralyzed people using this type of technology (electrode and even EEG(!)) on an experimental basis.

  23. A step to the singularity by Thinkit4 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now it's reading the brain. But eventually it will be reading a deeper part of the brain, and not needing the rest of it.

    --
    -I am an elective eunuch.
  24. Maybe in the future... by BW_Nuprin · · Score: 5, Funny
    ...we'll be able to RTFA just by thinking about it!

    But that would require thinking, and that hurts :(

    1. Re:Maybe in the future... by millahtime · · Score: 1

      If we all were able to RTFA just with a thought not even yahoo could handle the /. effect.

  25. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    umm.. yeah, that's what we want society to turn into for sure. but why limit it to sexual predators, let's all just wear one.

  26. This journal.... by sammyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Popular Science, ya gotta luv'em. I just wish the track record was a bit better, after reading about the nextgen dirigibles off and on for years I'm just a bit disapointed, that sounded like so much fun. Probe in my head? Less so.

    Mod me down, off topic troll ;-) but still...

    1. Re:This journal.... by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Popular science doesn't have the best record, but this stuff happens to be for real. I have seen a video demonstration of somebody playing pong via eeg (no invasive probes required). I'm not saying XBOX-2 will have a brain-machine interface, but this is not just another Popular Science sci-fi piece.

    2. Re:This journal.... by coyotegestalt · · Score: 1

      Not entirely off topic, IMO; the source is always worth considering for the cutting-edge stories. They were a bit more reputable back in the day; I think the last 15 years or so have seen a lot of management and editorial changes, and they look more for the spctacular than for the accurate. Here, though, they've hit one that looks to be real, and important.

    3. Re:This journal.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You're right IMO. A few years back, their chief editor retired and it went to hell in a hay basket pretty quickly afterward. Canceled my subscription within a year after that. Looking at my archives, though, they really don't have that great of a record.

      For instance, back in '91 they had a front cover issue about "bucky balls" which are complex molecules formed from carbon. It went on and on about how these molecules were going to be used for all sorts of things. Don't know about you, but I haven't heard about them since. At least there were more science articles back then with less advertisement.

    4. Re:This journal.... by coyotegestalt · · Score: 1

      They're still around, just under a new, more marketable name- do a search on "fullerenes"

  27. What about the reverse...? by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This could have a potentially incredible impact on impaired and disabled people. Imagine if Stephen Hawking would be able to work at the same speed his mind seems to function at? However, what about Mind through Machine over Mind? Put your helmet on, jack in, and remote control that fish - imagine the long-time deep-sea discoveries we could make - maybe even find a live Architeuthis?

    --

    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

    1. Re:What about the reverse...? by wowbagger · · Score: 1

      Think of the movies you could make....

      However, the problem is people have a problem with making cute little mice and rats into remote controlled toys. You need something people won't be as emotionally attached to....


      "Uhhhhng. Whe' mmm I? Wha' happnd?"
      "Just relax. The surgery went well, Mr. .... uh.... McBride...."

    2. Re:What about the reverse...? by 77Punker · · Score: 1

      So...who wants to be the first human test subject? My mother is disabled and would love to be able to use the computer, as is the case for many others. However, I really doubt she'd want to risk further disability just for this. Also, who wants to have the cranium opened up? This technology has a loooong way to go!

    3. Re:What about the reverse...? by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      Which reminds me of a Denis Leary sketch...

      "What are you?"
      "I'm a seal"
      "And what do you do?"
      "I swim around and do cute little human tricks with my fins"
      "You're free to go. Now you, what are you?"
      "I'm a cow"
      "Get on the truck"

    4. Re:What about the reverse...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever dude... Only thing I'll be jacking into is some hot barely-legal teeny action. The Olsen twins outta be of age by the time this technology hits the market, and we all know how pr0n is the driving force behind most innovations.

  28. I'm thinking... by kyshtock · · Score: 2, Funny
    1. I'm thinking to secure the server/firewall/whatever... Zzzzzt! done!

    2. I'm thinking I deserve a raise. Zzzzt! agreed.

    Idiot! 3. I'm thinking I'll have myself a raise. Zzzzt... done.

    4. I'm thinking that the leggy busty blonde wants visit my bed tonite...Zzzzt!

    5. I'm thinking I should you all leave think. Zzzzt!.. !@#RTA [NO CARRIER]

    --
    Bite my shiny metal... oops... Nevermind!
  29. Anyone ever seen.... by katboy · · Score: 1

    ...a Wim Wenders film entitled "Until the End of the World?"

    I always think of it first whenever something comes out about a new development in this area. One of the things the film is about is a many who creates a camera that takes pictures that blind people can see, he later uses it to record dreams and everyone he tests it on becomes obsessed with watching their own dreams.

  30. Average Person by millahtime · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, the average person thinks of sex like every 4 seconds. The traffic on one of these brain networks would have more porn than the internet.

  31. Already in practice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know a fair few programmers who seem to feel that their coding will get done by simply staring at their screen.

    Besides if this were put into practice, and programming were done by thought process alone, I know that a fair few of my commented sections would be not fit for human consumption.

  32. Doesn't the guy from Amazon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...have a patent on thinking about stuff? Might cramp the market for such devices.

  33. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ever seen clockwork orange? Very deep stuff.

  34. Wouldn't it be better... by ohzero · · Score: 1

    If the machines controlled the monkeys?

    REUTERS - Computer controlled million monkey army bombards Iraqi forces with distrubted feces catapult.

    --
    -- http://www.criticalassets.com
  35. This is all cool, but... by shura57 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This does not answer how brain works at all :-) As a motor control neuroscientist by trade, I can tell that finding out what the brain actually doing has little to do with these neat things.

    This is not to say that it's not important -- all kinds of prosthetic devices can be made to help people with disabled limbs or other parts of the motor control system -- so it's a great benefit to those people. The important thing is that these devices are still controlled by the human brain, and nobody has a good idea how.

    The fact is, you can probably hook up whatever device to whatever portion of the brain (e.g. an artificial arm to you toenail brain area) and after some practice the subject will learn now to move it. So when they say "we don't see the brain as a mysterious organ anymore" they are telling you a bold-face lie.

    The mystery would be demonstrated to be solved when we can build a computer with massively parallel and slow (up to 1kHz) elements that can match human performance in tasks like tracking, reaching, as well as learning those tasks.

    So far, all the beatiful performance of the cool gadgets is accomplished by super-fast feedback and super-fast computing elements. Our neurons are ways slower, but they do much better. Therefore, the whole essense and mystery of the brain is how to connect 10^10 shitty elements into a great learnable machine. Algorythms and parallelism are still the mystery of the brain, even if the popular science magazines claim otherwise :-)

    1. Re:This is all cool, but... by Phroggy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The fact is, you can probably hook up whatever device to whatever portion of the brain (e.g. an artificial arm to you toenail brain area) and after some practice the subject will learn now to move it. So when they say "we don't see the brain as a mysterious organ anymore" they are telling you a bold-face lie.

      Does the mouse get water by thinking about water, or by thinking something completely different that happens to trigger the machine? Once he figures it out, he'll do it again when he's thirsty.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    2. Re:This is all cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The brain is the result of something, not the cause of it.

    3. Re:This is all cool, but... by shura57 · · Score: 1

      How does the monkey decide that it needs to get water and what exactly "decide" means on neuronal level is still a mystery, by and large. If we're not considering that question, however, the next question is "how does it actually get water once it decided to do so."

      The process of getting is, the motor control portion specifically, involves activating the muscles in a certain fashion, taking into account a lot of things: how far are you from the water source, what's it's orientation, how heavy your limbs are, are your limbs stuck in honey or slipping on the mud, etc :-)

      Plus the water source can be moving, and you may want to correct your action in the process. So, it's not the same task whenever you're thirsty.

    4. Re:This is all cool, but... by Woogiemonger · · Score: 1

      Therefore, the whole essense and mystery of the brain is how to connect 10^10 shitty elements into a great learnable machine.

      I wonder if anyone here knows how research/progress of spontaneous intelligence is going. Theorists suggested that when you replicate the behavior of a neuron and let them talk with 9,999,999,999 copies of that virtual entity, then we'd instantly see a computer that can think and learn just like a human. Is a neuron that complex? What is the hold up? I always suspected that this idea was a massive oversimplication of the issue at hand.

    5. Re:This is all cool, but... by shura57 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Theorists suggested that when you replicate the behavior of a neuron and let them talk with 9,999,999,999 copies of that virtual entity, then we'd instantly see a computer that can think and learn just like a human. Is a neuron that complex? What is the hold up? I always suspected that this idea was a massive oversimplication of the issue at hand.

      The neuron is not that complex, it is believed to be mostly understood. The research is still being done on "how does this drug affects that channel in neuronal membrane" and stuff like this, but the basic functionality of the neuron has been known for some decades now.

      What's complex is the 10^10 portion :-) As to what's the hold-up: try connecting that many pieces. So far, the number of people on earth is not that large. One can speculate that that we've already connected about 6^9 elements in the form of Earth's population. Just like the neurons, each is connected to as much as 200 of others (no neuron is directly connected to all of others in the brain :-)

      If so, the "theorists" should see the human population of this planet as that very computer. It is way too dumb as a whole, if you ask me :-) It definitely exhibits no signs of thinking and learning.

    6. Re:This is all cool, but... by SEE · · Score: 2, Informative

      Is a neuron that complex?

      Yes. There exists no complete, accurate simulation of even an ordinary human cell; neurobiochemistry is even more complicated even before you try to model interconnections.

      Now, currently, interesting things are being done with simplified models of the neuron in moderately large arrays, and it may be that we won't need a complete model of neural chemistry to create the first truly intelligent neural-net models. But even then, 10^10 elements is well beyond the capacities of even our best supercomputers to model.

      I don't see any particular reason why the approach won't work, but even with a simplified model working, a frog-level intelligence is a 20+ year problem.

    7. Re:This is all cool, but... by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1

      One can speculate that that we've already connected about 6^9 elements in the form of Earth's population. Just like the neurons, each is connected to as much as 200 of others (no neuron is directly connected to all of others in the brain :-)

      So if sentience is an emergent property of connecting a critical mass of evaluating units, does that make the internet a mind about to awake? Has it awoken? How would we tell - how can a neuron tell that the brain has thoughts except in how it is influenced by those it is connected to?

      If an alien civilization / being came to visit it us, would it talk to a person, or would it talk to Google via posting websites?

      Maybe I'm an alien civilization and this post is one letter in a word in a sentance of a message to humanity?

      Have you thought about that, Earthlings? Have you? Eh?

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    8. Re:This is all cool, but... by gobbo · · Score: 1
      As a motor control neuroscientist by trade

      Great! so can you confirm for us that endogenous electrical (& other) fields are hardly studied beyond specifics like embryonic organ development and healing, and some particular emission at the skin? Also, anyone have a link to information about the frequencies and intensities of endogenous EMF generated by humans?

      A geneticist I know thinks there may be a case for something like an intercellular wireless system inside the body, and the idea's been rattling around in me cranium.

    9. Re:This is all cool, but... by Psmylie · · Score: 2, Funny

      "If an alien civilization / being came to visit it us, would it talk to a person, or would it talk to Google via posting websites?"

      Actually, this is more or less true. The X-10 ad pop-ups were an invasion that we just barely managed to fight off with penis-enlargement spam.

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

    10. Re:This is all cool, but... by shura57 · · Score: 1

      So if sentience is an emergent property of connecting a critical mass of evaluating units...

      This is still a big if :-), so until that is answered (preferrably, experimentally demonstrated) the rest is a good set of very interesting speculations, isn't it?

      how can a neuron tell that the brain has thoughts except in how it is influenced by those it is connected to?

      That would depend on what the "thought" is. My guess is that the neuron neither knows nor cares about the thoughs in general. Each neuron is summing up the inputs and producing the output, and that's it.

      It does seem that sentience is a property of a large mass of untis, however there's a huge leap from that statement to the statement that connecting the critical mass of those whould do the trick. I'm not sure about that leap, but I don't have anything better to offer either :-)

    11. Re:This is all cool, but... by shura57 · · Score: 1

      Great! so can you confirm for us that endogenous electrical (& other) fields are hardly studied beyond specifics like embryonic organ development and healing, and some particular emission at the skin?

      I guess I'm going to disappoint you, but here's my view of that. I would agree that endogenous electrical fields are not studied all that much. I don't know what other fields are there, to tell you the truth. I'm a firm believer in that the fundamental fields (gravitational, electro-weak, and nuclear aka strong) are the only forms of matter (i.e. energy) in our universe. Maybe my physics PhD is to blame.

      I am not saying that other fields are 100% impossible, but I don't believe they exist. To change that belief, I would have to be faced with the hard-core experimental data indicating otherwise, and it's just not there.

      I know nothing about special particulat emissions at the skin. Does not mean the do not exist, but I'll believe it when I see it (or some one else does in a reproducible way). There could be all sorts of EM fields, as well as thermal gradients, surrounding humans skin, but that perfectly fits into the physics we know, and so far there's no need to add another field to explain reproducible phenomena, is there?

      As for the intercellular wireless systems, what would be the need for them if the cells are already connected through bloodstream, hormones, neural signals, etc.? After all, the cells are not that mobile to have a need for a wireless laptop when they can happily use existing sockets in the wall :-)

    12. Re:This is all cool, but... by nhaze · · Score: 1

      These are good points unfortunately Nicolelis' group has never done any controls on their 'scientific' work. All their papers are gee-whiz engineering work. And you would be dissappointed to hear that their training set includes closed-sandbox X,Y,Z positions and not just movement vectors or specific muscle controls. Additionally, their 'online' processing is really not real-time.

    13. Re:This is all cool, but... by shura57 · · Score: 1

      I know :-)

    14. Re:This is all cool, but... by sycodon · · Score: 1

      In fact, one could say this is not "decoding" the brain signals at all. It's merely statistically analyzing the noise and then matching the noise patterns with the movement.

      Kind of like watching the sheets move and determining that someone is having sex in the bed; a far cry from a matrix like interface.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    15. Re:This is all cool, but... by MacJedi · · Score: 1
      So when they say "we don't see the brain as a mysterious organ anymore" they are telling you a bold-face lie.
      In all fairness, that's a misquote, or was taken out of context, or both.

      /joeyo

      --
      2^5
    16. Re:This is all cool, but... by Maljin+Jolt · · Score: 1
      Maybe I'm an alien civilization and this post is one letter in a word in a sentance of a message to humanity?

      Warning: This planet is under exclusive control of Sirian Empire. Your interference with our Slashdot human con-trolling agenda is a violation of Intergalactic Temporary Cease Fire Agreement which applies to your civilisation no more. Destroyer fleet dispatched.

      --
      There you are, staring at me again.
    17. Re:This is all cool, but... by gobbo · · Score: 1
      I guess I'm going to disappoint you, but here's my view of that.

      Wow, you just jumped all over that "other fields" thing, eh? That was an aside, merely a nod to the unknown. I'm really just asking about EM here. The emissions at the skin that I mentioned were in reference to the 150mV/mm or so that happen around a wound, or the general battery-like potential of the skin (you can see this exploited if your physiotherapist ever uses 'transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation' for pain management, common enough though not really understood).

      What I really am looking for is an index of the frequencies and strength of various EM emissions that have been observed in and around the human body.

      As for the intercellular wireless systems, what would be the need for them if the cells are already connected through bloodstream, hormones, neural signals, etc.?

      Well, we don't really know, do we? The body is as mysterious as the cosmos. But my buddy thinks it might explain how we go through such rapid and massive mitosis while sleeping, or why some cellular reactions seem to happen faster than the chemical/neural vector would allow, and he was talking about something way over my head, cell reprogramming or some such. Anyway, it doesn't take much imagination to answer your question "why" more fundamentally: for speed, redundancy, reliability, maybe?

  36. Mind Wide Open by CleverDan · · Score: 5, Informative
    NPR has an interesting interview with Steven Johnson, author of Mind Wide Open: Your Brain and the Neuroscience of Everyday Life . One segment talks about manipulating on-screen animations with Alpha brainwaves, to retrain people with ADD how to focus.

    1. Re:Mind Wide Open by Halthar · · Score: 1

      I have often considered getting an IBVA system to play around with. May be sort of along the lines of what you saw, and if nothing else would make a damn cool set of gadgets to keep around.

      Their website also mentions that a Linux version is to be announced.

  37. Thought Power by matt_martin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Still waiting for the implantable math co-processor, ideally with optically interfaced plotting/visualization capability ...

    Imagine the possibilities.

    --
    Lurking in the desert
  38. great, that's all i need by 74nova · · Score: 1

    i move too little as it is. do i really want to move even LESS? being a computer jockey hasnt made it easy on me for staying fit already... this is all i need

    --
    use your turn signal! you people act like it's divulging information to the enemy
  39. Is this a troll? by GuyMannDude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd like to see a simple switch based on brain activity that would toggle on during sexual thought/arousal and toggle off in the absence of that.

    Jesus sweet fucking christ I sure as hell don't want to see that! What the hell are you thinking?

    Children could then be taught that if somebody's "face button" is glowing when that person is asking them to [get in the car|go play with a cute pet|have some candy|etc.], to run and get help.

    Why don't we just teach children that when a "person is asking them to [get in the car|go play with a cute pet|have some candy|etc.], to run and get help" without the face-button shit?

    GMD

    1. Re:Is this a troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'd like to see a simple switch based on brain activity that would toggle on during sexual thought/arousal and toggle off in the absence of that

      I believe its called a penis my friend.

  40. I Wish by RetroGeek · · Score: 2, Funny

    Singing to self: "I wish I was an Oscar Myers wiener"

    P O O F !

    --

    - - - - - - - - - - -
    I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
  41. This could be a bad thing..... by boredofthesane · · Score: 1

    The average man thinks about sex 5 times a day. You do the math. This could be disastrous at work with autopr0n popping up every couple of minutes.

    1. Re:This could be a bad thing..... by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 1
      5 times a day....

      Riiiiiiiiight

  42. Controlling your computer by thought: could be bad by DaRat · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It could be bad to be able to control your computer by thinking. Just imagine if you were sitting at your thought controlled computer when a "friend" comes up and asks, "hey, what's the command to delete everything recursively without confirmation?"

    Then, before you know it, you've thought, "\rm -r *"

    Okay, I saw something like this (minus the thought part) happen in real life once upon a time. A friend and I were just talking about people accidentally typing "\rm -r *" in the lab when suddenly, someone using the Sun boxes yelled "oh shit!" because he absentmindedly typed what we said.

  43. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by woohoodonuts · · Score: 1

    just a few things that come to mind after reading your comment... offtopic? eh... maybe, maybe not.

    What does Bog want? Does Bog want goodness or the choice of goodness? Is a man who chooses the bad perhaps in some way better than a man who has the good imposed upon him?

    Alex - But what I do I do because I like to do.

    Alex - No time for the old in-out, love. I've just come to read the meter.

    Alex - What we were after now was the old surprise visit. That was a real kick and good for laughs and lashings of the old ultraviolent.

    Alex - You were not put on this earth just to get in touch with God. That sort of thing could just sap all the strength and the goodness out of a chelloveck.

    Alex - As we walked along the flatblock marina, i was calm on the outside but thinking all the time. So it was to be Georgie the general saying what we should do and what not to do and Dim as his mindless grinning bulldog. But suddenly I viddied that thinking was for the gloopy ones and the oomny ones used like inspiration and what Bog sends. Well now, it was lovely music that came to my aid. There was a window open with the stereo on and I viddied right at once what to do......

  44. What If.... by millahtime · · Score: 1

    The people where I worked put a virus out there that made us all like our jobs. Mental Note: Don't use M$ control implant.

  45. Re:I don't think it will ever be like in the movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's called insanity.

  46. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by bug-eyed+monster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course. And when this project becomes successful, we can implement it on convicted murders, robbers, terrorists, communists, tax-evaders, cheaters, liars, ...

    But we shouldn't stop there, the ultimate goal is to prevent crime. So we should implement it on everybody, just in case even a law-abiding citizen starts having impure thoughts about the validity of the president-for-life's reign on the country.

  47. Anyone else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think of Evangelion when they saw this?

  48. feedback loop? by hitmark · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ill be more impressed when they have hooked it up so that when you grab the glass you will feel the pressure building rather then going by a visual clue...

    basicly we need this device to talk back to the brain, not just listen to it.

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  49. I don't understand something... by NorthDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They talk about using this for people with disabilities. This would be great for sure but
    they say in the article that they need to "train" the computer beforehand (no pun intended)
    before it can ... interpret though.

    My question, which was not answered in the article, is: Are every brain emmitting the same signals for the same action
    or do they need to "train" the program for every new user (monkey)? I would think that every individual have a somewhat
    unique "brain signature" and if it is the case, how can a totally impaired person train a computer to use an artificial arm or
    leg or whatever if anyway he isn't able to move a "joystick"?

    Can the computer associated anything as an input to compare with the brain activity?
    Could (let's say ) S. Hawking program the system by blowing in a tube harder or smoother for example?

    Am I clear? ;-)

    --


    I'd rather be sailing...
    1. Re:I don't understand something... by MacJedi · · Score: 1
      how can a totally impaired person train a computer to use an artificial arm or leg or whatever if anyway he isn't able to move a "joystick"?

      This is an open research topic. People are working on this very issue.

      --
      2^5
    2. Re:I don't understand something... by CarlZimmer · · Score: 1

      I wrote the article in Popular Science that sparked this conversation. NorthDude brings up a great point that I wish I had had time and space to go into. Every brain does indeed produce its own special set of signals (which change over the years), which means that you can't just plug in a generic interface and start moving an artificial limb. Training will always be necessary. Obviously, if you can't move your hand, training on a joystick is not going to be much of an option. But all a computer really needs to do is reliably map some signal coming from the brain to some movement of the robot. So, for example, you could theoretically just move your eyes, and the movements could be mapped to robot movements. And then, once the computer had figured out the code, you wouldn't have to move your eyes any more. Not only would the computer be learning how to read your brain; your brain would be learning how to produce signals that controlled the robot more reliably. Of course, this is all off in the future, but the researchers are getting ready to do some basic human trials. I blogged some more about this here.

      --
      Carl Zimmer, Science writer. Author of Soul Made Flesh
  50. -1 Not Funny by froody · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Are you thinking what I'm thinking, Pinky?

    I think so, brain, but you and Natalie Portman? What would the children look like?

  51. just think about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    all of the life0cidal agression taking place on the planet, could be lessened in part by yOUR focused intentions alone?

    consult with/trust in yOUR creators.... the lights are coming up now.

  52. Re:I don't think it will ever be like in the movie by kfg · · Score: 5, Funny

    But a rat's mind is way simpler.

    Allow me to introduce you to our management team.

    KFG

  53. Speaking of Which... by FearTheFrail · · Score: 1

    I could've sworn that I wasn't logged into this terminal when I read this article, though I thought about doing so. Then, somehow, as I left to go to a different page, then came back, I'm greeted by "Have you meta-moderated lately?" ...Slashdot really is cutting edge!

    --
    ___ In the words of Gen. Douglas McArthur: "I'll be right back."
  54. Psionic Exercise Devices. by torpor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Cool. (not)

    We could use this to build psionic exercise devices which restore our latent mind-over-matter powers.

    Oh no. Psionic Wars, here we come.

    {Honestly, I'm beginning to see what all the fuss is all about over The American Beast, in those Middle East sects ...}

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  55. 6 Million Dollar Man by millahtime · · Score: 1

    Could this be the first step to really having a 6 Million Dollar man??

    1. Re:6 Million Dollar Man by SEE · · Score: 1

      No.

      (Why not? Inflation, of course. Six million is just a drop in the bucket nowadays. ;-) )

  56. As his cat goes up in flames... by bobdotorg · · Score: 2, Funny

    As his cat goes up in flames...

    No!!! God dammit!!! I thought a BUD LIGHT!!!

    --
    __ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
  57. Mana From Heaven. by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This sort of reminds me of Ursula K. Le Guin's story, "The Lathe of Heaven". For the uninitiated, "The Lathe of Heaven" takes place in Portland, Oregon in the year 2002. Its main character, an insignificant working class man named George Orr (Bruce Davison who appears in "The X-Men" movie), is plagued by 'effective dreaming', where his dreams literally come true.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  58. I'm thinking of.... by weeboo0104 · · Score: 5, Funny

    FIRST POST! FIRST POST!

    (Damn, didn't work)

    Natalie Portman in my cube.

    (Nope, still doesn't work)

    I want to be overworked and overpaid, but still have time to surf slashdot from work.

    (Woohoo! It works!)

    --
    It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
    1. Re:I'm thinking of.... by Keybounce · · Score: 0

      If you are able to slashdot from work, are you really overworked?

      [ I'd like to just be worked and paid. ]

  59. We are the Borg by AragornSonOfArathorn · · Score: 1

    The Borg are not some faraway enemy; we will become the Borg. Although I doubt most people would go for the collective conciousness... and our future Borg selves will probably be less ugly than on Star Trek.

    /me looks forward to when he can buy a Total Bionic Conversion ^_^

    --
    sudo eat my shorts
    1. Re:We are the Borg by vericgar · · Score: 1

      You may be interested in my writeup regarding society's similiarities to the borg.

  60. Coding dream by Remlik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm sure most coders out there have dreamed of this ability for years. No more clunky keyboard interface to slow you down.

    Typos would be a thing of the past. Imagine scanning though some source and noticing that you assigned 100 to a var rather than 10, before you can even refocus your eye on the line the value has been changed.

    Grep would be a thing of the past! Need to change all the instances of a function name? Think it and its done.

    I want to be the lawnmower man!

    --
    Apple free since 1990!
    1. Re:Coding dream by lunarlander · · Score: 1

      Imagine scanning though some source and noticing that you assigned 100 to a var rather than 10, before you can even refocus your eye on the line the value has been changed.

      Yeah, and how many programmers do you know who wouldn't use this to prove that they write perfect code? ;-)

      "Hey, Bob, you've got an error in line 127..."

      *blink*

      "What error?"

    2. Re:Coding dream by segmond · · Score: 1

      you are right, they have DREAMED, and you are in dream land too, programming challenge is never about typing fast or correctly, it is about good algorithms, etc, etc. what next? think about quicksort and your computer codes it for you? please!

      --
      ------ Curiosity killed the cat. {satisfaction brought it back | it didn't die ignorant | lack of it is killing mankind
  61. i am a bipedal broadcast station by gobbo · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Just another bipedal bag of mineral salts and trace elements capable of complex EMF broadcasting at low-range, subtle super-conduction at room temperature, and high-voltage carpet-capacitance pitching in my 2 coppers here...

    Look developers, just get speech recognition running already, willya? If what your software does to my luminous eloquence is any example of the current state of interface tech, that thinking-cap UI is going to lead to some pretty psychedelic dyslexic synaesthesia in photoshop once it gets that olfactory plugin I've been waiting for...

  62. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by spectecjr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd like to see a simple switch based on brain activity that would toggle on during sexual thought/arousal and toggle off in the absence of that. The application I have in mind would be taking convicted sexual predators (rapists, child molesters, etc.) who are being released back into society, and permanently affixing something to their face that would glow when they're thinking that way. Children could then be taught that if somebody's "face button" is glowing when that person is asking them to [get in the car|go play with a cute pet|have some candy|etc.], to run and get help.


    Sounds double-plus-good to me.

    Also sounds like those studies they did recently for "latent racism". Studies that were fatally flawed because they didn't take into account that people who are painfully aware of racism and who try to avoid it at all costs - including the appearance of being racist - are the same people who were labelled as being racist in the study.

    Please, don't go down the thought-crime avenue. Actions are what count - not thoughts. And as noble as your goals might appear to be to you, consider this:

    If you have a predisposition towards doing something (whether child molestation, smoking, drinking or breathing), it takes conscious thought to not do that act. And that thought will trigger the same "flashing button" that deciding to do that act will.

    Try thinking about not breathing without thinking about breathing. It ain't going to happen.

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  63. Re:I don't think it will ever be like in the movie by System.out.println() · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just because you're controlling something with your mind doesn't mean it will be "think something, and a machine makes it come true." Think of it more as a mental mouse and keyboard - instead of using your hands to control a computer, it would be your thoughts.
    However, typing in to a computer "make me a sandwich" won't make my computer contact a sandwich-making robot over the intarweb and order a sandwich. You'll still have to issue the commands like you would now.

  64. long term failure should be expected ? by MySt1k · · Score: 3, Interesting

    computers can recognize patterns and allow programming based on these patterns to say, know if a mouse is thinking about pushing his water lever.
    what would happen to the mouse if, at long term, she knows that by thinking about pushing the lever she don't have to push that lever anymore, the computer can't find that previous pattern because the mice have forgotten the use of the lever. thus reprogramming is re-required. seems like an infinite loop ...

    --
    Doh !
    1. Re:long term failure should be expected ? by bheerssen · · Score: 1

      No, because when the mouse figures out that it doesn't have to press the lever, a different set of neurons fire instead of the ones that fired when the mouse actually pressed the lever. They figured out that the new set of neurons could be used instead of the old set. After a while, the mouse stops generating the old set (pressing the lever) and just issues the new set. The computer reacts to the new set without the presence of the old set.

      In effect, the mouse has learned to control the water tube as though it were a new muscle.

      --
      (Score: -1, Stupid)
  65. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by ThogScully · · Score: 1

    Don't forget cute little girls with pigtails and ice cream cones, with sprinkles.
    -N

    --
    I've nothing to say here...
  66. Note taking by raider_red · · Score: 1

    I'd like something like this just to take notes for me all day. It'll keep me from losing ideas. Of course, it will need some good recognition technology so that it knows what shouldn't go into the notes. Otherwise, I'll be turning in notes that go something like "Attach the embedded controller to the system using a standard--damn! that girl's got a nice ass! --interface protocol"

    --
    It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
  67. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by Have+Blue · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What might be more useful, and even MORE controversial and ethically complex, is developing an implant that would suppress those thoughts before the offender has a chance to act on them at all.

  68. Re:Controlling your computer by thought: could be by raider_red · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Better yet, what happens when you feel like destroying the computer. Will it self destruct, or act in self defense?

    --
    It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
  69. Fuck that big time! by KlomDark · · Score: 1

    Talk about the worst invention ever - you KNOW that our goverment/employer/etc would just love to be able to read the thoughts directly out of your brain. That's just terrifying!

    "Next thing you know, they'll take my thoughts away!" - Last line of Megadeth: Holy Wars (The Punishment Due)

  70. Lazy!?!? by h8macs · · Score: 1

    Why does it have to be 'lazy' sysadmins? Lazy has nothing to do with it, being able to 'think' something faster than type, mouse click, speak or what have you; for forced input is the point.

    Now granted even the slowest of minds would most likely toast modern computers, however this will have many more advantages than for helping the 'lazy'.

    Personally I will love to see the day when this is fully integrated into PC's!

    --
    :-( --- argh. Despair, I owe again. :-b
  71. What the hell by bad+enema · · Score: 1

    are you talking about.

    The given scenario illustrates that the machine goes out of control, carrying the thoughts of the mind too far.

    So now that you know what *I* was talking about, what are *you* talking about?

  72. Re:Controlling your computer by thought: could be by EllF · · Score: 1

    And this, children is why you don't take the name of root in vain, and always add a line to your shell config file that confirms any rm.

    --
    We who were living are now dying
    With a little patience
  73. How about Ashcroft and Gang? by MooseByte · · Score: 1

    "Jesus sweet fucking christ I sure as hell don't want to see that! What the hell are you thinking?"

    On the other hand, I'd give up my Mel Torme' collection to see a "Sex/Arousal" face button installed on Ashcroft, Falwell or any other self-appointed "guardian of morality". Would be fun to see the results.

    I'm thinking Ashcroft and the goatse guy may have more in common that we realize....

  74. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by ed333 · · Score: 1
    Ever seen clockwork orange? Very deep stuff.
    Right on. When society tries to control people to the point where no individual freedom of choice exists anymore, life is no loger worth living.
  75. Good bye privacy! by helraiz · · Score: 1

    I can already see authorities salivating over possibilities of this technology.

  76. Race condition by crawdaddy · · Score: 1

    Something tells me this is going to start a race between hackers trying design something that kills your boss just by wishing it and spyware coders trying to design something that will alert your boss when you're wishing to kill him.

  77. the exciting part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real exciting part isn't about the machine learning what the brain is doing, but rather the brain learning how the machine works. Near the end of the article, he talks about a cluster of neurons that grew in the monkey brains after the implants, and would fire only when the implants were active. The monkey's brain, in effect, sensed a new presence and adapted to it within minutes of its arrival.

    If you've ever tried learning an activity that instinctive reflexes like skateboarding or ice skating or even playing the piano, you realize that no matter how much instruction someone gives you, at some point you feel like once you've done it enough, you just "get it". It's the whole muscle memory thing, how your brain encounters something new and just adapts, learning exactly which neurons to fire at the right moments to get the desired affect. Seeing neuron's grow and cluster especially for the robot arm is indicative that the monkey's brain can assimilate the arm and treat it as a natural extension as opposed to a external tool with an awkward interface. In geekspeak, it's like a kernel that, on detecting a new device, can probe it, learn the API, and build its own device driver automatically, without ever knowing anything other than that it's something on the other end of a bus.

    Extending that line of thought, who's to say that if the signal processing and classification algorithms advanced far enough to classify even our thoughts, our brains wouldn't be able to instinctively learn how the mind-readers worked and retaliate in return?

    1. Re:the exciting part by Calamity+Jane · · Score: 1

      Your kernel analogy is a good one, but not perfect: the brain is learning which neurons to fire by observing what happens when it does. This kernel, then, would learn to (say) print to a new printer by having the operator type in which character was just printed. Or OCR via a scanner, or use multipls inputs to vote for the true outcome, when there are conflicting inputs.

    2. Re:the exciting part by aixou · · Score: 1

      The real exciting part isn't about the machine learning what the brain is doing, but rather the brain learning how the machine works. Near the end of the article, he talks about a cluster of neurons that grew in the monkey brains after the implants, and would fire only when the implants were active. The monkey's brain, in effect, sensed a new presence and adapted to it within minutes of its arrival.


      Sweet! Our brains are plug-n-play. Take that Linux!

  78. If Kerry wins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    If Kerry wins, imagine the wonderful Supreme Court"> he would appoint.

    That would take care of the religious and social conservative nuts for quite some time.

    If, on the other hand, the boy king wins a second term...

  79. What happens when I get REALLY Drunk ? by MajorDick · · Score: 1

    I mean, I have INTENTIONALLY done some pretty stupid shit while I was drunk, changing passwords to things I couldnt remeber, but promptly remebered once drunk again.

  80. Ultimate VR by lwsimon · · Score: 1

    OK, so now we can theoretically READ from the brain. Just wait until we can WRITE! Tad William's Otherworld series has some great background on this, even if the plot makes little sense :)

    Imagine being able to transfer your consciousness into a different body, even if it is a virtual body. You could play a MMORPG that is truly immersive. You could find out what it feels like to die. To skydive. To jump into the heart of the Sun. To experience a female orgasm...

    --
    Learn about Photography Basics.
  81. Tried something like this once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check out the MindDrive at http://www.other90.com
    I remember trying this device at a computer city several years ago. It was hooked to a skiing game and all you had to do was think "left" and "right" to steer the skiier down the hill. No neural probes necessary.

  82. The very simple solution to this by Illissius · · Score: 1

    is that you don't entrust the machines with things like that. You don't apply brand new, unproven technologies to critical systems. That's just elementary. And once you do, the technology will hopefully be ironed out enough that there won't be (too) many issues with it (for example, you'd have to think "get a robot here to kill me" for it to happen and not just about committing suicide, and most likely (hopefully) it would deny the request even then).
    However, where it doesn't really place anything in danger, this could have some incredible uses. You know how you can think much faster than you can talk or type? You could think the words and have them on the screen automatically. Taking it a level further: telepathy. Musicians (or hell, anyone) could create music without actually needing any instruments to do it. You could create music which would be physically impossible otherwise, sounds that simply don't exist. Playing games with it would also be quite an experience.

    Speaking of which. Once LCD technology is advanced enough to embed a high-resolution display in a pair of glasses (preferably in the glass itself), WiFi is ubiquitous, and this becomes viable as well, what do you get?
    Portable Snow Crash.
    :D

    --
    Work is punishment for failing to procrastinate effectively.
  83. Millahtime's Law by univgeek · · Score: 1

    Every technological improvement increases the availability of Porn.

    --
    All bow to his Noodliness!! His Noodle Appendage has touched me!
  84. Speaking of Borg... by Wun+Hung+Lo · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Imagine if Microsoft was doing this...I wonder what it would feel like to have your brain bluescreen...?

  85. No. Not this way. by nicklaszlo · · Score: 1

    The systems discussed in the article are brain output only. Some years ago, there was an exparament where a blind man had electrodes implanted in his head so he could "see" through a camera. Unfortunately, I don't have the details. Such a device could be cracked if it were on a network, but the biggest danger would be that lighning could strike the system and kill the user... or it could be intentionally overloaded.

  86. Obligatory UserFriendly References by ggvaidya · · Score: 1

    One and two

  87. Is it time for ... ClippyXP? by ggvaidya · · Score: 5, Funny
    "You are thinking of typing a letter ... "

    Pleeeeeeease don't let MS get their hands on this one, mister!

  88. Politically incorrect, but serious question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone have any proof that Stephen Hawking is a for real crippled genius?

    I saw a documentary about him-- but I saw nothing to convince me that it definitely was *not* a sham.

    When I was watching the classroom interaction, one of his grad students was doing all the talking with the class, and he would look over at SH every once in a while and "correct himself" or a student based on a few grunts and ticks from SH. There was no way that that much information was being conveyed.

    It looked suspiciously like the people who would "help" the autistic kids type-- the autistic kids weren't even looking at the keyboads yet they were writing poetry.

    So--- does anyone have a good video link of SH being clearly lucid?

    Or is he the Wizard of Oz?

    I apologize for being so offensively curious.

    1. Re:Politically incorrect, but serious question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If his grad student had a pretty good grasp of what to say, the only info SH might need to convey in that case might be "wrong", "right", "close, try again". Just how much did the grad student change what he was saying after being corrected?

    2. Re:Politically incorrect, but serious question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sorry-- I don't really recall-- it was a while ago, it's just the impression of "this is BS" that stuck with me.

  89. Would they want to know? by nicklaszlo · · Score: 1

    Personally, I don't want to know what someone is thinking if it's not someone I know well enough that I could just ask. That's a disgusting idea.

  90. Vulcans? by nicklaszlo · · Score: 1

    I think that if people were to communicate directly with this technology, and be able to "hear" each other's thoughts, we would all have to become much more in controll of our emotions. It would probobally be easiest just to keep our thoughts between our selves and our personal computers, and not even try to see other people's.

  91. Re: A Clockwork Orange? by h4rm0ny · · Score: 3, Insightful


    This was the main theme of A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess.

    In it, a violent young man is subjected to a psychological process that renders him unable to commit violent acts. Undergoing it is one of the conditions for his release from prison.

    One of the main questions posed by the book (or film) is whether someone who is forced to be good can be considered to be good or if they're the same person as before, just in an enternal prison. It's a disturbing idea when dwelled upon - what happened to progress, development and redemption?

    Equally disturbing is the the side-effects of this operation on the character. Aside from accidentally conditioning him to despise the music of Beethoven which he'd formerly adored, there is a horrible scene where he is picked up by two of his former friends and almost killed now that he is incapable of defending himself.

    I am sure that there are people who think such control over others would be wonderful. In fact, it would render people little more than robots living according to their masters' (the police/judge's) ideals of correct behaviour. At that point you might as well just kill the people.

    I also can't help thinking of the main characters last words in the film of 'Clockwork Orange.'

    "I was cured alright."

    At that point, the audience's sympathies are with him.We've lived through the mind-altering experience ourselves and we want to be free.

    --

    Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  92. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Screw that "glowing face button" sissy BS. Impure-thought triggered testicle clamps are far more effective, for both prevention and deterrence. Purchase them here.

  93. This is more William Gibson rather than Matrix. by ObiWonKanblomi · · Score: 2, Informative

    The poster is either really young or got into geekish stuff after he saw the Matrix screensaver.

    In the Matrix, the singals only control movement in a virtual environment. As for moving objects within the physical world, this is much more in the alley of William Gibson. I'd suggest reading Burning Chrome as a start. These short stories, most which were written long ago in the late 70s (yes late 70s) to be published in Omni magazine (remember that?). In addition to tapping into cyberspace with a headjack, a person could hook up to a jet and pilot it with no hands (Turner in Count Zero).

    If you also check out Gibson's Cyberpunk trilogy from the 80s, you'll see the reasoning behind the mind/machine link - the military began with hooking up monkeys to vitural cockpits to see if human pilots would be able to fly jets with no hands and ideally, romotely.

  94. I thong ot well be cool! by rjelks · · Score: 4, Funny

    I can't waid two get this of my home computer. I hoop is works is goat as me speak recondition program!

    -

  95. Matrix? Please. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Signal processing and decoding has long been a dream of Matrix fans...

    Uh, right. Like nobody had ever thought (pun intended) of this type of interface before The Matrix came along.

  96. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by gobbo · · Score: 1
    Try thinking about not breathing without thinking about breathing.

    The classic example used in phenomenology that I've read is "try not to think of a white bear"-- which since it is an image derived from speech shows how we experience the world around us in a sociolinguistic sense (among other things).

    Being aware of breathing without thinking about it is a trick used by Theravada and some Vipassana Buddhism as well as some Zen to demonstrate the impulsive nature of thinking and to train in awareness without sociolinguistic overlay [OK that's my non-buddhist interpretation, not canon]. However, the interesting thing is that sometimes it does happen, something difficult to describe.

  97. Where is all this going... by mpthompson · · Score: 2, Informative

    Reading the article it occurred to me that in the future jobs may require that an employee get brain implants in order to perform some job related task or interact with future computer systems where manual user interface interaction is no longer practical. Would such systems separate workers into a group who are willing to submit to such an invasive operation and those who would refuse implants. I wonder how long we have before implant specifications start to appear on job descriptions and resumes?

    The article did touch on the ethics of placing such implants into healthy soldiers, but ethics and morals that would prohibit such activity tend to be very fluid.

    Non-invasive techniques may one day be developed for interacting with machines through thought, but this technology is probably much further off than taking the short-cut of hardwiring the brain.

  98. monkeys by butane_bob2003 · · Score: 1

    The quality of life continues to improve for the rhesus monkey. Such fortunate creatures, now they have but to think it and their wish is granted. If only we could be so lucky. I read an article a little while ago about a man who used something like an EEG to control the navigation system in his sailboat. Talk about lazy. Think left and the boat would go left, right and the boat would go right. Maybe he was anticipating some kind of dismemberment that would keep him from steering with his arms, I dont know...

    --


    TallGreen CMS hosting
  99. BOFH by menscher · · Score: 1

    Can't say how many times I've thought about doing an rm -rf ~luser. This seems dangerous.

  100. Penile plethysmograph by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd like to see a simple switch based on brain activity that would toggle on during sexual thought/arousal and toggle off in the absence of that.

    The device already exists, only it works on your dick instead. Google for "penile plethysmograph" for more. It's a very good 1:1 mapping of sexual arousal. The real problem is that arousal and desire to commit the acts isn't - how many men get turned on by a hot lesbian scene, without wanting to be a lesbian?

    The other fallacy is that the mind isn't one-dimensional. People can be in some way happy, yet in some way sad over exactly the same thing. In the same way, they can be both aroused and disgusted at the same time. There's a saying that "Most people wouldn't dream about doing what they dream about doing."

    The mind is simply associative. Show it something sexual and it will connect, be it performed by an adult or a child. The only thing you measure is if you're able to drown it out by sending conflicting signals - much like your average male does when he wants to lose an embarrasing boner - think of a complete turn-off.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  101. Watch out for those monkeys! by ZipR · · Score: 1

    Next thing ya know, they're going to be attacking us with psionic blasts from their exposed monkey brains!

  102. original paper by Miguel Nicolelis by bruhnsemann5 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here's the original paper:

    html:
    http://www.plosbiology.org/plosonline/?request=get -document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.0000042

    pdf:
    http://www.plosbiology.org/archive/1545-7885/1/2/p df/10.1371_journal.pbio.0000042-S.pdf

  103. I had a machine like this once... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I wished for a glass of high-proof whiskey and got it, but then spilled it on my shirt. I wished for a sponge to clean it up, but the machine gave me a lit cigarette instead. After I got out of the hospital, I sold it.

  104. Does this remind anyone else of Firefox? by penultimatepost · · Score: 1
    FireFox

    In this movie, Clint Eastwood's character, is tasked with stealing a top secret Soviet Plane controlled via brain waves. The catch is he had to think in Perfect Russian! (his character was a retired double spy). I Used to love that movie

    Boy I'm getting old!

  105. Matrix? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    None of this has anything to do with the Matrix. It nothing like the Matrix. In fact it's the opposite. In Matrix, brain = input, not output. Simple as that. Keep the lame blockbluster references out of it.

  106. Chicken or Egg? by nnnneedles · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does the water come when mice are thinking they want water...OR

    have they learned that every time they think about death/sex/food the water comes?

    --
    Will code a sig generator for food
  107. A squid stole my spaceship. by h4rm0ny · · Score: 3, Interesting


    What this really opens up is the possibility of training animals to operate machinery. Imagine taking an aquatic animal (such as a dolphin) and using it (or its brain) as the central component in a spaceship autopilot.

    By stimulating various parts of the brain (including pleasure centres), one could train it to respond to your input in the way you want - it already has the hardware to deal with three dimensional maneuvering, timing and calculating trajectories and intercepts.

    This was used in a novel called Space, in which GM Squid controlled a space probe. In the novel, the squid became smart enough to do a runner with it.I would look up the author's name for you all, but try typing "Science Fiction" and "Space" into Google and see what happens ;)

    --

    Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  108. Brain able to detect viruses early? by arock99 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm sure most of you are aware the brain is a very complex system. I have a theory. The brain tries to relay information to the rest of our body as much as it can, although the rest of our body is complex I doubt it comes even close to the brain in terms of complexity. The brain can be thought of as a monitoring system; it relays information back and forth within the body. I think it is very conceivable to think that the brain is able to measure a lot more about our body in general than it is able to show the rest of the body. This means that in theory it is able to measure minor changes within the body (such as the start of a cold) before the changes reach a level deemed critical by the "system". Once a signal is deemed critical your body starts feeling it (such as the pains associated with a cold). Assuming my theory is correct why would it throw away such information? It is like any other monitoring systems; you just cannot keep all information and affect your entire system because of it. Your body quietly attemps to fight off a virus early on without your knowledge because of information relayed back and forth between it and the brain. If it is succesfull you will never be aware of it, should it reach a "critical" stage you are aware of it as you feel the symptoms. The body would not be able to handle all of these signals; no matter how complex the humain body is, there must be billions of signals alone. Your body is obviously aware of the cold before you are since it transmits information to parts of your body to produce the cells capable of fighting infections (as you can see here I'm not fammiliar with all the mechanisms of a cold but I'm sure I'm probably not too far off). Anyways; I'm leaving you with this thought: What if your body is able to detect the "Intrusions" of a cancer as it forms still in a stage that is very easy to kill? What if it can detect a foreign entity (such as the virus that causes AIDS?) What if the Brain wave patterns can be found....what if?

  109. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by thetaikung · · Score: 1

    They already shut down the Department of PreCrime Tom.

    --
    P226 .40cal
  110. And you thought spam was bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. in email form.

    Just imagine being forced to endure mental images of "3Nl@rge the s1Ze of yOuR P3n!S!!!"

  111. I was interested until I saw "Popular ..." by crovira · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The same people who brought you "Nuclear, sorry, Nucular Cars," "Flying Cars," and what ever else doesn't require much imagination and even less knowledge of math and physics.

    Entreprenurial posers.

    Still it sells magazines.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  112. Visualizing ... your mama. by crovira · · Score: 1

    Man what a bummer... Given the average visualization skills, your mama might be good.

    A stick figure with big boobs... Yuck.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  113. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1

    Would it be based on actual arousal or just thinking about sex? Of course, if it's the latter you know that the thing is going to be "glowing" every 2 seconds and therefore useless. It's on everybody's mind almost constantly. It's a wonder we can get anything done at all besides make attempts at procreation.

    --
    http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  114. got the show for you... by joggle · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's called "Ghost in the Shell" and discusses issues like this (it's an anime BTW). In the case of the article, though, there isn't any feedback or direct neural stimulation, so now you couldn't be hacked.

  115. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by sarcastodon · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see a simple switch based on brain activity that would toggle on during sexual thought/arousal and toggle off in the absence of that.

    I have one of those. I call it my dick.

  116. Something's wrong by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's not that hard

    Then what's the point? Especially when married?

  117. In my job, I practice with this everyday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "motionless system adminstration"

    Yip.

  118. you're a moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you're a moron

  119. Re:I don't think it will ever be like in the movie by UserGoogol · · Score: 1

    You control your muscles with your thoughts. And yet people don't just randomly flail their arms around. Clearly, the robotic stuff would clearly become an extension of your body after a while.

    --
    "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
  120. How did nobody already say.... by jkent · · Score: 1

    Okay, so what if we made a Beowulf Cluster of these things.....

  121. What am I thinking? by Fiz+Ocelot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What about the thoughts you "really" don't need everyone else to know hear though. Somehow it needs to determine what to transmit and what not to. Even if it is controlled by you thinking, 'say this or that', what if you're thinking of saying it but don't really want to. This is getting confusing. You could imagine thinking about talking and having it projected into a room 2,000 miles away," says Craig Henriquez. "I don't see that that will be a problem. It's very, very possible."

  122. Ugh by Laconian · · Score: 1

    Every type of convenience we invent just makes us lazier. The car made us too lazy to walk anywhere. The remote control made us too lazy to get up and walk across the room. The microwave made us too lazy to cook. After this, will we be too lazy to think?

  123. Wrong focus? by Control+Group · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Every time I read something about machines interpreting brain signals, how we might have identified the brain pattern which means "raise my arm," I have to wonder if we're going about this in the fundamentally wrong way.

    Why design an arm that has to figure out which brain signals mean "lift up?" Why not design an arm that will respond to brain signals in a number of ways, and one of them is by lifting up? We've each got the best learning device known to our species in our heads, why not use that skill? We all learned to use our original arms through trial and error (albeit when there was a lot less clutter in our heads), I've got the sneaking suspicion that we'd figure out how to make a mechanical one do whatever we want.

    It would be no different than learning to swim, or ride a bike, or swing a golf club.

    Then all you need is a way to get signals from the brain to the device, and you're set.

    --

    Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    1. Re:Wrong focus? by MacJedi · · Score: 1

      Good point. However, do you remember how long it took you to learn how to walk? ;)

      --
      2^5
  124. Re:I don't think it will ever be like in the movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The way I understand it, the machine isn't reading your mind. The machine is set up to read specific impulses as specific actions. Our brains learn, through trial and error, which impulses produce which results. After enough training, the process of translating what you want into impulses in the brain becomes sub-conscious, but it still takes place.

    So, the machine would be just another extension of the mind like our muscles are. Do you have 100% certainty that when you ask a muscle to move it will move exactly how you intend it to? Probably not...I'm a touch typist yet I still make occasional mistakes. But do I trust sending those impulses as a way to achieve what I'm trying to do? Yes, becuase I can always correct for anything that goes wrong.

  125. It still doesn't work right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I sat and stared at the Full Article link for fricken 5 minutes, just thinking about it opening.

    But it didn't do it. So I just clicked it.

    -Critter Hart

  126. Re:I don't think it will ever be like in the movie by jacobjyu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're thinking about it in the wrong way. The robot that you control will just be like another limb to you, like your hand. If you think about suicide, your hand doesn't just automatically get a knife and jab yourself (hopefully). There's a certain amount of filtering done between what you're actually thinking, and how your body moves. Basically, it's not a one-to-one mapping

    The robot/machine that you are controlling will be no different than your usual body: there won't be anything out of your physical control.

    First, when you think about an action, like suicide, it's a bit vague. What limb are you actually wanting to move? I'm willing to bet you would be thinking more on a high level: why is my life miserable? What did I get myself into? I want to die.. etc. This article isn't talking about machines actually interpreting these high level thoughts, it's talking about interpreting low level thoughts like "I want to grab that glass of water. Move my hand to the right, and squeeze, etc." These thoughts will generate a specific action.

    If our bodies actually interpreted high level behaviours and thoughts on its own, there would be havoc. It's really the brain that does that, and tells the peripherals the specific movements.

  127. What are you talking about? by bheerssen · · Score: 1

    Popular Science is America's science reference! /ducks

    --
    (Score: -1, Stupid)
  128. Beware of the id! (idem) by GMC-jimmy · · Score: 1

    After reading that bit of news, I suddenly got a brief flash back of the old 1950's "The Forbidden Planet".

    --
    __________________________________
    Free your mind - Flush your toilet
  129. Re: A Clockwork Orange? by ericspinder · · Score: 1
    At that point, the audience's sympathies are with him.
    But that's what you were "conditioned" to think (by the movie). I for one, believe that that ass got what he deserved, after spending a lifetime preying on the innocent and the weak, he was forced to become the weakest of the weak, and couldn't even find solice in his music. Now that's Justice.

    Personally, I believe that sex preditors should have their balls cut off. Of course, that kind of pushishment would take "overwelming" evidence, such a semen taken from the victim.

    --
    The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
  130. Online gaming! Just imagine! by LesPaul75 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Imagine going head-to-head (hehe) with someone in a game where you both put on your "mind caps" and you battle it out... and the winner is simply the guy who can think the fastest. Forget moving a goofy little thumbstick around and pressing buttons. Imagine the feeling of playing some FPS game and moving around in the game just by sheer willpower. Wow. With good enough graphics, you could probably forget that it's a game pretty easily.

    Cool, but a little scary, too.

  131. Cerebral Plug & Play by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean tot tell me that not only does it automatically load drivers for hot-plugged hardware, it also creates drivers on the fly? Wicked. (when does 2.0 come out?)

  132. Humorous Situations by Zaphod+Beebelbrox · · Score: 0

    There was an episode of Red Dwarf where Lister had his arm amputated because of a virus and got a robotic prostetic arm. When he was practicing making the arm move using his will he kept punching Kryten in the face. Apparantly Lister's subconscious was angry at Kryten for amputating his arm off. I can imagine the funny situations that can arize. Well, not really funny in the real world. It wouldn't be funny if someone got hurt.

  133. Standard jokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine a beowulf cluster of brains!

    I have no brain, you insensitive clod!

    1. Stick things into your brain
    2. ???
    3. PROFIT!!!

  134. Obligatory: by ivan1011001 · · Score: 1

    I think I can! I think I can!

    --

    I was thinking of converting to paganism, but where the hell can you find sacrificial virgins these days?
  135. Re:Channel surfing (Realdoll.com) by Tandoori+Haggis · · Score: 1

    Very impressive!

    In your experience, can you fit these dolls in the washing machine? Or is it best to use soapy water and a bottle brush, then rinse them out under the shower?

    I dunno. Only asking out of curiousity. Short term, these babes are too expensive. I'd rather have a woman who can pay her own way.

    Is it my imagination or do 80% of the models look like porn actresses? If this is the case, I wonder if Real Doll will produce realistic voice synthesisers. These could give you really useful options like out of phase dubbing in Spanish, slow motion or%$&#163;ms and buffering...

    --
    My hyperlinks aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
  136. Also check out by Screamer49 · · Score: 1

    Article from Dr. Nicolelis:

    Controlling Robots with the Mind from Sept. 2002

  137. Re:Controlling sexual predators through technology by minorthreatbmxxx · · Score: 1

    I think that's just a terrible idea. I have never killed anyone in my life, but I have definitely had thoughts about killing them. The implant you're suggesting would suppress my thoughts about killing and possibly even anger even though I'll never carry them out. That is a huge restriction on what I would hope everyone sees as a right to every human being to free thought. So I guess while I clearly agree that it would be more controversial, I completely dissagree that it would be more useful.

    --
    Free iPod!eBay o
  138. Mod parent up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the truth!

  139. Can it work BOTH WAYS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ok so you can hook up a computer to read your brainwaves ect...BUT
    can the computer communicate with your brain.
    Be awsome to be able to learn things by hooking into a computer

  140. We need more Protoculture!!!! by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

    @ If i had the patience to be an engineer/programmer, psionics would be my focus. Ever since Robotech the idea of NUI (neural user interface) has fascinated me. Combined with high quality VR the possiblities are bogglesome.

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
  141. Re:Controlling your computer by thought: could be by chendo · · Score: 1

    I thought -r is just for recursion, and -f was force (without confirmation). So wouldn't it be rm -rf?

    --
    Founder of Mirror Moon - Tsukihime Game Trans
  142. Last post! by paradaxiom · · Score: 0

    Finally! Last post!!

  143. Calibration? by chendo · · Score: 1

    If I understand neurons correctly, I believe they are linked differently for every person. Therefore, they just can't make a solution that'll work for everyone. I'm thinking of something like those tablet configuration screens where you have to tap where the crosshair is. The configuration program tells you to look left, or whatever function, and finds out what neurons are being activated, etc.

    On the other hand, is it somehow possible to extract the optical data from our eyes? Wondering if 'spying' through another person's eyes is actually possible. (The idea came from the 'interceptor' concept from Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex)

    --
    Founder of Mirror Moon - Tsukihime Game Trans
  144. a dangerous path for humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they can "reprogram" the brain so that it can adapt to using these artificial bioenhancements, what's to stop them from using this technology to create an army of zombie drones? If they can make the machines part of us, then they can also make us part of the robot.

    Seriously, this is not "cool" technology. It is downright frightening, especially when you consider that the military is connected.

  145. Re: A Clockwork Orange? by s04e · · Score: 1

    The "A Clockwork Orange" you are referring to here is not one which was supported by Anthony Burgess - it is the Kubrick film, based on the American edition of the book. Burgess hated this film with a passion.
    This edition had the most important (final) chapter culled, as the publishers did not think that an American audience would buy a book without a defined (formulaic) ending.
    In Burgess' book Alex does remeet with his old peers - most notably Pete, who has grown up and found a wife. While Alex is again free to pursue a life of violence, he _begins_ to choose not to.
    Anyway, the whole point of the final chapter was to illustrate that we all make mistakes in our youth, and maybe that the older we get the easier it is to assimilate us into *polite* society ;) Everything in this book is based on the idea of free choice. The one problem I have with the 'curing' of Alex is that it is a simple reversal of procedure - after he assists the government in retaining power over those who speak out against it.

    In other words, if you want your mind restored to its natural form, you have to sell out the people on slashdot.org ;)

  146. Re:I don't think it will ever be like in the movie by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1
    So have a bluetooth button or footswitch to hold down when you want the computer to pay attention to what you are thinking. Automatic after some adjustment (like driving or a video game)

    Just like the Mac's speech recognition - you hit a button, then give the spoken command. That way you don't have the computer searching through your drives for your 'goddamn pen'.

  147. Re: A Clockwork Orange? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "OMG! That's like totally what happened on Buffy!
    You know, like when Spike got the chip in his head?"

  148. hmm. by Niacin · · Score: 1

    This could have many advantages or dissadvantages.

    First of all, this may in the future allow governments to control population. If every citizen has a chip implanted, and they dont want people to reproduce, the can turn off their sperm producing or ovaries through the use of a radio signal and through nanobots rendering that organ useless for a temporary ammount of time. This could be bad because it could be hacked most likely or the government might use it to its advantage as far as making people behave as they want. If they want population control, they could give out a lottery type system where if you get on the list you have a time limit to concive a child, this would greatly reduce population growth, and could stablalize it, and even make people who sit around on walfare and make 20 kids unable to do that any more! Good for our taxes!

    Also through use of nanobots or whatnot, if a new illness comes about they could send out a signal to broadcast a cure signal for the nanobots to reprogram the immune system and make the person immune to the newest flu or whatnot.

    Also, a lot of industries could benefit. Suppose you work in a warehouse. And you are packing stuff, and you want a pallate moved, you think about it and make the forklift drive over, and move to wherever it needs to go.

    There are many pro's and cons, but i dont think we are ready for this sytem as it stands because of the security issues, maybe when a new algorithm will be invented where there is a 100% chance it cant be exploited.

    Anyways, sorry for the ramblings, lack of sleep and work killed me.

  149. You mean.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I might finally get to see her naked????
    *I wish* *I wish* *I wish*

  150. Don't you know anything about Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Asking to be modded down is the surest way not to be modded down.

    Please mod me down.

  151. Forget about speech recognition by burbilog · · Score: 1
    Forget about speech recognition. Really. I suffer from RSI and I can tell you that today speech recognition is perfect. You can do almost anything with it at reasonable speed. The problem is that you can ruin your vocal cords much faster than your hands. Just one hour of talking to computer and I croak as raven. Speech recognition is okay if you want to dictate some tex, but unfortunately it is out of question when it comes down to programming.

    Just take C or perl program and try to read it aloud. Really. Just one or two screens of text. Read it. Spell it as if you want to dictate it to computer using alpha-bravo. Don't forget you have to pronounce spaces, newlines and all tabs. You'll feel the problem with your vocal cords.