Slashdot Mirror


Non-Invasive Computer Control Through Brainwaves

mikael writes "An article on the BBC website is reporting that U.S. scientists have managed to develop a 'thinking cap' which allows a computer to receive commands from the electrical activity of a person's brain alone. Comprised of 64 electrodes, this cap allowed two users to control a cursor through pure thought alone, rather than through eye movements or other physical gestures." Unlike some previous efforts, this one doesn't require anything to be implanted in your brain.

433 comments

  1. Woo hoo! by DrStrangeLug · · Score: 5, Funny

    The end of left handed surfing!

    1. Re:Woo hoo! by Walrus99 · · Score: 1

      Unless you are lefthanded.

    2. Re:Woo hoo! by ceeam · · Score: 1

      It's for the head, not dickhead.

    3. Re:Woo hoo! by Freexe · · Score: 1

      I think he's left handed, and refering to the use of a mouse in general.

      I'm not sure what your dirty mind is thinking about!

      --
      "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
    4. Re:Woo hoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I guess you won't be getting one.

    5. Re:Woo hoo! by ArsonSmith · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why does my computer keep going to gay porn sites now that I hooked up this brain control device? I'm not gay.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    6. Re:Woo hoo! by eno2001 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I guess it depends on which head a guy thinks with... Think cap could take on completey new meanings. ;P

      --
      -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
    7. Re:Woo hoo! by numbski · · Score: 1

      Did you program MythTV to record "Will and Grace" by chance?

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    8. Re:Woo hoo! by Kombat · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why does my computer keep going to gay porn sites now that I hooked up this brain control device? I'm not gay.

      Not that there's anything wrong with that.

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    9. Re:Woo hoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a funny show! I like it for the humor!

    10. Re:Woo hoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Why does my computer keep going to gay porn sites now that I hooked up this brain control device? I'm not gay.

      Maybe not, but your computer is.

    11. Re:Woo hoo! by nadadogg · · Score: 1

      No! NO! Bad penis! No looking up porno at work! Ignore the cute co-worker!

      --
      i use linux and windows oh god how can i have an opinion
    12. Re:Woo hoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ohhh, he has a Mac.

    13. Re:Woo hoo! by midav · · Score: 1

      I hope it did not forward you to the AOL Sign-Up page. At least not before I have mentioned it:)

    14. Re:Woo hoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What??? U mean I can play with my *cough* joystick using both hands now????

    15. Re:Woo hoo! by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      That's not what your TiVo thinks...

    16. Re:Woo hoo! by spike+hay · · Score: 1

      The end of left handed surfing!

      I'm left handed, but interestingly enough I am completely incapable of using a mouse with my left hand. I've been doing the righthanded thing ever since I've been but a wee lad, so my neurons are wired for it at this point. Doesn't mean I can catch a ball or write with my right hand, though.

      --
      If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
    17. Re:Woo hoo! by relaxrelax · · Score: 1

      Why does my computer keep going to straight porn sites now that I hooked up this brain control device?

      I'm not straight!!

      Not that there's anything wrong with that.

      --
      Microsoft is pure dog-ma. FreeBSD is pure cat-ma.
    18. Re:Woo hoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (Score:0)

      Why is that?

      Oh, I forgot. This is Slashdot. Heaven forbid someone express the thought that a Mac is not a superior computing device...

      /cowers from thunder and lightning

  2. I, for one, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... oh, nevermind

    1. Re:I, for one, by empaler · · Score: 1

      They're welcome and everything, but what about my silver foil hat? I suppose I'll have to take it off if I want to use this thing...

  3. First thought... by RobertB-DC · · Score: 5, Funny

    Saw the headline and thought "Non-Invasive Brain Control Through Computers". I need a new tinfoil hat.

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    1. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I saw the headline and I thought of this:


      Scotty: Computer. Computer?
      [Bones hands him a mouse and he speaks into it]
      Scotty: Hello, computer.
      Dr. Nichols: Just use the keyboard.
      Scotty: Keyboard. How quaint.
    2. Re:First thought... by double-oh+three · · Score: 1

      Mine was "Someone obviously read 3001:The Final Odyssey".

      Of course, they could do more with their computer/skullcaps.

      --
      "For years, I struggled with reality... but I'm happy to say I finally won out over it." -- Elwood P. Dowd
    3. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone understand that these are brain to computer interfaces. They can't send any information into the brain they can only receive information from it. Computers can't control your brain for the same reason computers can't control your mouse (the connection is one way). It's my personal belief (as a psychologist) that it will be many, many years before we understand the brain well enough to send any type of meaningful information into the brain. Receiving signals from the brain is simple because we can learn how to send signals out. Therefore even if the signals at first are hard to intepret eventually they'll change to signals that are easy to interpret.

    4. Re:First thought... by colinleroy · · Score: 1

      Does anyone understand that these are brain to computer interfaces.

      Of course, but that's less funny this way!

      --
      blah
    5. Re:First thought... by Rei · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The thing is, using an EEG for a "thinking cap" is problematic due to EEG resolution. You can't come close to individual neurons - you can only grab "regions" of the brain. Training the brain to activate entire regions is a harder task than training it to activate various neurons. There are severe limits to this sort of technology as a consequence.

      It seems to me that if we want true noninvasive thought reading, we're going to need to use some kind of stimulated emission scanning method to determine firing states of individual neurons. Of course, that's easier said than done. :P

      --
      The human body can be drained of blood in 8.6 seconds given adequate vacuuming systems.
    6. Re:First thought... by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Come on, it's non-invasive. All it's going to do is insert a few targetted text ads into your thoughts. Just don't install any windows into your scull, or you could become a spam zombie. Umm. SPAM! Itchy... Tasty!

    7. Re:First thought... by Rei · · Score: 1

      > Computers can't control your brain for the
      > same reason computers can't control your mouse

      Oh, Can't They?

      Of course, I'd love to have the computer have even more control over the mouse.... it'd make cracking someone's system all the more amusing. :)

      --
      The human body can be drained of blood in 8.6 seconds given adequate vacuuming systems.
    8. Re:First thought... by Haydn+Fenton · · Score: 1

      Heh, there's a few sentences in the first paragraph of that page that made me laugh, I think he must be new here:
      "But after a while, I got used to it and I started enjoying it. Now, it feels natural to have my mouse vibrating when I'm working in Windows or playing a game."

      Anyway, yea, computers can control your mouse, of course they can. There's a few Win32 APIs which you can set the mouse position with, right/left click, drag, etc. Kinda OT, but I once made a program which blocked the user input (keybd && mouse), then began moving the mouse around, opened up notepad and began typing. Looked pretty much like a human was doing it.. then sent it to a mate, heh. I was thinking about re-making a prog like that today actually, except in a virus-ish form, and send it out to a few mates in disguise as a friendly prog and wait till one day for it to trigger, crimbo/birthdays or something, then wait for them all come into college and say their comp got taken over and started telling them to do stuff.

    9. Re:First thought... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, the firing of individual neuron is not nearly as interesting as the pattern in which large groups fire. If you know the transform equation, you can derive what the whole thing is doing by sampling from a few key points.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    10. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think what you meant is "cursor" not "mouse". If someone were to design a motorized mouse with computer control that would be a diferent story.

    11. Re:First thought... by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      And the difference between what you just said and practical reality is the difference between E=mc^2 and the Manhattan Project.

      Go in peace.

    12. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dr. Otto Octavius, is that you?

    13. Re:First thought... by Rei · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's part of the problem. We don't want to know what the "whole thing" is doing. You can tell by looking at an EEF if a person is lying or whatnot. But you can't tell that they're lying about strawberries. "Strawberries" are distributed in a fine-level firing pattern for which you need to be able to monitor individual neurons.

      We don't want their mouse to move up when they think creatively, and down when they become tired, and right when they become aggressive, etc. We want it to move on individual thoughts, not aggregates. Trying to teach people to move things by aggregates is far more difficult.

      Note that I said "distributed". There is no "strawberry" neuron; however, by monitoring a single neuron in the right region, you can detect patterns that correspond to thoughts of strawberries.

      --
      The human body can be drained of blood in 8.6 seconds given adequate vacuuming systems.
    14. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no "strawberry" neuron; however, by monitoring a single neuron in the right region, you can detect patterns that correspond to thoughts of strawberries.

      Though possibly also sausage as well.

    15. Re:First thought... by relaxrelax · · Score: 1

      ...because us computers don't like to be controlled?

      Come on. Get real. Don't deny your keyboard and mouse as controlling. Tin foil hats can't save us from those.

      --
      Microsoft is pure dog-ma. FreeBSD is pure cat-ma.
  4. could this be... by domenic+v1.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    could this be the first actual useful tinfoil hat?

    1. Re:could this be... by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      This tinfoil hat induces brain controll rathter than protection from it. So, yes it is the first actual useful tinfoil hat.

      -GWB

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  5. Someone making mind control Illegal by stecoop · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I imagine this technology illegal if someone hooked this mind control up to a tivo like machine - when a commercial is playing you could think "I wish to skip this commercial" and the remote does basically a fast forward. Yeah we read the other day on /. that skipping commercial will be illegal one day so no one get a bright idea in making a mind control remote for tivo or we'll have to ban this too.

    1. Re:Someone making mind control Illegal by worst_name_ever · · Score: 1

      Dude, if my Tivo could read my mind, it would be constantly playing Victoria's Secret commercials and my wife would be pissed.

      --

      In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.
  6. This was a good idea in the 80s by robyannetta · · Score: 2, Informative

    Remember Brainstorm starring Christopher Walken?

    --
    - Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
    1. Re:This was a good idea in the 80s by nomadic · · Score: 1

      No.

    2. Re:This was a good idea in the 80s by Treacle+Treatment · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, now if we can just get more cowbell ...

      --
      TT
    3. Re:This was a good idea in the 80s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? THis has nothing to do with recording peoples thoughts and throwing Natalie Wood off of a boat.

    4. Re:This was a good idea in the 80s by e-gold · · Score: 1

      Wow. Exactly what I was thinking (the movie is not an exact analogy to the technology here, of course, but Brainstorm was a GREAT movie in a number of ways).

      1. Best *non-preachy* anti-tobacco-industry moment (back when it took guts to say anything against big tobacco, too!) when the female scientist dies of a heart attack *WHILE* she's smoking, recording her own death with "the hat." A powerful scene that ends in a focus on her cigarette itself going out, IIRC.

      2. A funny (and interesting!) moment when one scientist gives another the experience of "being" one of their research chimpanzees with the hat.

      3. Funniest line convincing the girlfriend to have sex, too: "Aw, c'mon honey, do it for science!!" to which she replied those words all guys occasionally long to hear: "Oh, all-right!" ;^)

      4. Various unexplored geekly possibilites that make this a great movie for Slashdotters to watch, even if it weren't Natalie Wood's last movie (she died hot!). This movie lends itself to DVDs/VCRs, and it doesn't seem to require a full movie screen IMO.
      JMR

      All opinions mine-ONLY! Nobody else's!!

      --
      Try e-gold - (contact me). I'm NOT e-
    5. Re:This was a good idea in the 80s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5. Recording a high-bandwidth datastream on optical tape.

      6. Transmitting that same high-bandwidth datastream over a modem hooked up to a pay phone with an acoustic coupler.

  7. Electrodes by Treacle+Treatment · · Score: 5, Funny

    I for one will be waiting for the 128-electrode technology to come out so I can think faster.

    --
    TT
    1. Re:Electrodes by krunchyfrog · · Score: 0

      Actually it'll be cool to defrag our brains.

      --
      printf($randomline(sigs.txt) \n "-- "$randomline(authors.txt));
      -- myself
    2. Re:Electrodes by MrFreezeBU · · Score: 1

      No, this one only goes to 11.

    3. Re:Electrodes by IWorkForMorons · · Score: 1

      So, did you see the line "Comprised of 64 electrodes..." and immediately wonder why they were doing all this with BASIC too?

    4. Re:Electrodes by frankvl · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates would say: '64 electrodes is enough for everybody.'

      Well, forget that; I want nanotubed hair!

    5. Re:Electrodes by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      Bah! I won't be satisfied until I have a datajack implanted into my head.

      Screw non-invasive, I want invasive.

    6. Re:Electrodes by venicebeach · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, there are 128 electrode arrays, which are used quite frequently in cognitive neuroscience research. (see here for example.) However, they take longer to put on (you have to make sure each electrode makes a good connection with the scalp) and the increased spatial resolution (which is minimal since signal is quite smoothed by going through the skull) is not necessary for an application like this one.

      This is not new, by the way. There were some studies done back in the early 90s using only two electrodes where people learned to move a cursor around on a screen. Just one on the left hemisphere and one on the right, and you hook it up so that different relationships between the activity at the two sights controls the different parameters of movement on the screen.

      See Wolpaw, JR., McFarland DJ, Neat GW, Forneris CA. An EEG-based brain-computer interface for cursor control. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1991 Mar;78(3):252-9

    7. Re:Electrodes by Wes+Janson · · Score: 1

      What makes you so certain your brain needs that much bandwidth? :P

    8. Re:Electrodes by Chaswell · · Score: 1

      You probably said this in jest, but seriously, why do they only talk about monkey brains or crippled people. I WANT TO JACK MY BRAIN! Use me for experiments, give me epilepsy, let's get it ON!

      I am sick of all the, "one day some crash victim will be able to wiggle a finger with their brain through a ball cap shaped device." WTF, I want to plug a 6 inch needle into a socket in the back of my head that allows me to control my 4 extra arms, my direct net feed, and what ever else I throw together. I want my visual feed to be able to be overlayed by external signals, preferably only the left eye, leave my dominant for the real world view.

      Just go, go, go!

    9. Re:Electrodes by payndz · · Score: 1

      I'm waiting for Apple's version so I can think different.

      --
      You must think in Russian.
    10. Re:Electrodes by kyouteki · · Score: 1

      Hey, with just 10 fingers, 10 toes, one mouth, and the various other muscles and such, I'm sure this large brain of mine could take advantage of a higher-bandwidth connection to the computer. I mean, let's see...I can type at 65wpm, assuming that each word has an average of five letters and a space...that means that I only have a 6.5 byte/sec connection to my computer via the keyboard. Yeah, I think I could take advantage of more bandwidth.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    11. Re:Electrodes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You owe me a new keyboard for that!
      Anyone know how to get beer out of a keyboard? Maybe I'll post an Ask Slashdot about it..

    12. Re:Electrodes by norton_I · · Score: 1

      Amen.

    13. Re:Electrodes by MadBabbler · · Score: 1

      Yeesh, hold your horses. I'm workin on it.

    14. Re:Electrodes by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      Oh no, I wasn't joking.

      I want a Shadowrun-style datajack. I want to be able to jack into my computer, car, whatever. I honestly hope I live to see the day where this stuff is available at a consumer level.

  8. Mental power by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'll probably get modded down for this, but I can't be the only one who sees the connection between this ability and psychic "vibrations".

    If we are able to detect and monitor energy waves that are emitted from our brains merely by thinking about things, how much more difficult is it to believe that there are people who are physically tuned to be able to "pick up" those brain waves?

    People who oppose paranormal research are always claiming that they want quantifiable, reproducible data. Well, here it is.

    1. Re:Mental power by koreaman · · Score: 0

      Wow, that is a really good point. I may actually have to consider my absolute detest of paranormalism because of your highly insightful topic. Not that I all of the sudden believe in it now, but this does shed a lot of light on the topic.

      Thank you, sir.

    2. Re:Mental power by Linux-based-robots · · Score: 1

      Um, no. Just because the brain "sends out waves" (so does Pluto when you think about it) doesn't mean anyone else's brain is able to read them. The only thing this proves is that we can build a machine that can read brainwaves in a primitave fashion when placed atop someone's head.

      propz 2 GNAA

    3. Re:Mental power by Dana+P'Simer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is not outside the realm of possibility, however, as Carl Sagan was fond of saying "Extrodinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Those who claim to have extra sensory perception (ESP) have consistently failed to substatiate those claims when scrutinized with truly scientific methods.

    4. Re:Mental power by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      I think the problem being that 99.999% of paranormal claims are false, faked, imagened, easily explainable, or just plain a scam.

      but there is still that .001% and yes this does fall into it.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    5. Re:Mental power by Icarus1919 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a hell of a lot more difficult to believe.

      Putting electrodes right next to the brain and using computational power to detect the VERY faint electrical signals within the brain is worlds and worlds apart from someone being able to pick up these electrical signals from the span of -- let's say two feet away to be fair -- THROUGH THE AIR and having it penetrate their skull, and then being able to interpret these electrical signals into meaningful thoughts. Keep in mind that since every mind is different, the electrical signals in one brain that signify a certain thought -- let's say something simple such as "I like cheese." can be fairly different from one person to the next because of the way the synapses are linked and pulse their electrochemical signals to make up said thought. I consider this to be an even greater obstacle than the electrical signals from the brain going through the air. The electrical signals to move a cursor are so much simpler than the simplest of thoughts (I like cheese).

    6. Re:Mental power by IncarnadineConor · · Score: 1

      With what? Yeah sure, we can make funny looking shower caps that can detect it, but in order for your idea to work you would have to show that there was some way for the human body to pick it up.

    7. Re:Mental power by VistaBoy · · Score: 1

      I find this post to be hilarious soley due to the fact that it conforms to a classic stereotypical Slashdot comment. Specifically, an "I'll get modded down for this, but..." getting modded to 4 or above.

    8. Re:Mental power by LadyVirharper · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Reminds me of Anne McCaffrey's Tower & Hive/Pegasus sci-fi series. In "1997", about when the book "To Ride Pegasus" was set, science "discovered" the EEG could pick up specific variations in brain waves of psychics "using their power", thus proving that psychics did exist. As this was a novel, obviously that didn't happen, but the parallels are interesting.

    9. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If a space alien came down to earth and made contact with us was a being of extraordinary intelligence but lacking in the sense of sight, do you think he would have trouble understanding the concept of sight?

      Wouldn't he also say, "So you are able to detect an object from some distance without being in physical contact or within aural distance of it? I don't believe it. How would the sense come to you? Would it travel through the air and into your brain where you sensed it? It doesn't seem plausible."

      The problem is that the alien simply does not have the sensory organs that humans have. As such, he can't even contemplate what it is like to have that sense.

      If there are humans who have some organ (perhaps a genetic mutation in the skin or retina) that most of us do not have, how would we be able to understand that without study? Dismissing it as bunk out of hand is the method of religious schemers. Scientists ought to be interested.

    10. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Actually I'm rather glad that people like yourself and the scientific community in general rejects psychic ability, because it means you'll leave those who possess it alone. For, if the scientific community ever came around to accepting it as reality, they would wish to dissect the brains of those with the ability and keeping them in labs for the rest of their lives running experiments. So three cheers for the dominant paradigm that is against psychic ability.

    11. Re:Mental power by 4of12 · · Score: 2, Funny

      If we are able to detect and monitor energy waves that are emitted from our brains merely by thinking about things, how much more difficult is it to believe that there are people who are physically tuned to be able to "pick up" those brain waves?

      Just wait until the electrodes attached to the skull are not just sensors, but are powered transmitters used to induce right thinking!

      I'm already thinking I need to take out a loan at Ditech to buy some more products that will surely ease my anxieties about my projected sexual desirability!

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    12. Re:Mental power by Dana+P'Simer · · Score: 2

      You know what, now that I think about it a little longer, it is pretty damn close to being "out of the realm of possibility". Think about it, electrical fields fall of at the square of the distance. This means that at normal conversational distances the already faint signals are going to be essentially undetectable.

    13. Re:Mental power by Flamesplash · · Score: 1

      Maybe we need to discover some sort of funnel looking device that can pull in psychic signals much like out ears do auditory and stick in our ear to conentrate the 'waves'

      --
      "Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
    14. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      The common understanding concering psychic ability is that it is not limited to distance, apparently it operates in an entirely different spectrum of energy than prosaic EM radiation.

    15. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dismissal comes from complete and total lack of evidence let alone proof of any kind.. jesus, as if it's fanatical to require at least some iota of evidence outside of some fucking stupid shared human intuition

    16. Re:Mental power by Dana+P'Simer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is totally rediculous! If there were any validity to the claims of psychics, there would be intense scientific interest but no one would be deprived of thier life and liberty over it. The truth is, most psychics have such muddled thinking processes, they cant understand the basics of the scientific method and therefore dismiss it out of hand. Check out randi.org and if you do have psychic powers, collect your million dollars.

    17. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People who oppose paranormal research are always claiming that they want quantifiable, reproducible data. Well, here it is.

      No, here it isn't. The very definition of paranormal means that there can't be quantifiable, reproducible data.

      If you had meant psychic research, you would still be wrong. The fact that you can detect general changes in brainwave patterns when somebody is concentrating at a distance of mere millimetres is hardly proof or even an indicator that one person can tell precisely what another is thinking merely by transmitting "energy waves" with their brain.

      It's akin to saying that because I can see somebody waving at me from across the road, that is quantifiable, reproducible data that helps prove the theory that I can see something on the far side of Mars.

    18. Re:Mental power by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Maybe we need to discover some sort of funnel looking device that can pull in psychic signals much like out ears do

      When we find out how to do this it will turn out that the required accessory makes you look like some sort of anime character. Skimpy outfits are optional, but did anyone who watched ST:TNG notice that Troi's powers became less effective about the same time as they raised her neckline? Maybe there's some kind of psychic emanation that comes from the breasts and is blocked by clothing.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re:Mental power by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      As light gives off heat, and is a fairly obvious radiation source I'm sure any alien even without sight would have discovered it by now.

    20. Re:Mental power by Golias · · Score: 1

      And that same alien probably would have created a light-reading device which converts light into easy-to-understand audio information, allowing the alien to hear far away objects, and even hear the shapes of distant planets.

      So if we were to tell him that we detect light with a biological organ, he would eventually be able to wrap his head around the concept, but if you told him you could read minds by detecting unconfirmed mystical energies, he would scoff at you and say something like, "yeah, we've got crackpots and swindlers back home on pltz'grb, too."

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    21. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So turn this around. Take a pair of night vision goggles back to the Romans.

      You'd be able to see in the dark when no one was able to. The average person would attribute this to magic, but the smarter ones would guess that you were cheating or lying. In fact, you were doing neither. The ability to see in the dark is a result of the knowledge that infrared "light" can be detected with the proper equipment. In fact, some animals can even see in the infrared range.

      Just because you don't understand the ability does not mean that it does not exist.

    22. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that the alien simply does not have the sensory organs that humans have. As such, he can't even contemplate what it is like to have that sense.

      Walk up to any human who was born blind, and ask them if they can "even contemplate" what sight is.

      There goes your whole point, right out the window.

    23. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, except for the Ganzfeld experiment...

    24. Re:Mental power by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Sorry I meant to say "any alien capable of space travel".

    25. Re:Mental power by Golias · · Score: 1

      Maybe there's some kind of psychic emanation that comes from the breasts and is blocked by clothing.

      Ph34r my n3kid m1nd r34din6 sk1lz!

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    26. Re:Mental power by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      Wasn't this the idea behins Jordi's visor in STNG? I recall an episode where someone else put on his visor and it looked like a thermal viewer to them since it was not attuned to their brain. This "thinking cap" when linked with a thermal viewer could in fact be the first primitive steps towards that. We already have items like the communicator, and the medical scanner (CAT or MRI scan). Maybe the tricorder is next! Warp drive is still several 100 years away.

    27. Re:Mental power by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Carl Sagan was a great guy and all, but you seem to not understand the basics of the scientific method.

      The scientific method is a process for proving something as definitely untrue or possibly true. You observe a phenomenon, form a hypothesis that you believe explains this phenomenon, use that hypothesis to predict the outcome of experiments designed to recreate this phenomenon with a minimum of variables, perform experiments designed to see if your prediction is correct, and thats it.

      At no time is anything "extraordinary" in the scientific method. Lets say that we observe that a person is able to guess what is written on a card with uncanny accuracy. We produce a hypothesis that this person is able to predict the outcome of selecting a random card. We predict that if we perform an experiment consisting of shuffling a deck of cards, then asking for the name of the top card, then drawing the card to see if it matches, then shuffling the deck again, that this person will name the card correctly 100% of the time.

      Then we perform the experiment, and either our predictions are right or our predictions and hypothesis are wrong. Nothing "extraordinary" happens in this process because to the scientific method, everything is either false or maybe true.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    28. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your missing an obvious flaw in the alien plan.. If they cannot see - they surely would have crashed on their way to earth.. I mean space is full of things which are likely to be in the way... *sighs*

    29. Re:Mental power by bloodredsun · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes you are the only person and this ain't paranormal research

      I'll come clean and say that I spent 4 enjoyable years studying "energy waves" from the brain, also known as EEGs (Electroencephalograph).

      A MSc in Epileptology and a PhD in Clinical Neurophysiology later, my considered opionion is that there is a world of difference between "monitoring" activity in the brain and actually making sense of it. EEGs, MEGs and FMRIs can give you a world of data but the specifics you can attach to this are very limited. Even in epileptology, where EEGs have been used for over a hundred years (since 1897), the clinical power of EEGs is far less than a lay person could imagine.

      To receive "useful" signals of peoples thoughts, there would have to be a series of breakthroughs in dipole modelling, brain function mapping, and a whole host of other technologies. Otherwise you are restricted to the gross/obvious signals such as alpha, beta and delta rhythms

      Another point against pychic receptivity is that the receiving brain is also giving off its own signals at a far greater amplitude than the "transmitting" one; the equivalent of listening to someone whisper a foriegn language at the end of a football field in a howling gale while you bellow what ever is on your mind.

    30. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would explain the mechanisms of the eye and give the alien a few pigs eyes to dissect. After examining the organ and give evidence of its functionality, the alien would quickly agree that I can indeed see as I say I can, and I would be crown ruler of Earth.

      Humans are very capable of understanding senses that we do not have. Granted, we might have a hard time 'visualizing' an alien sense, but that is no barrier to understand it. If we had to visualize something in order to understand, we would be pretty fucked when it came to quantum structures, as we absolutely can not visualize such things. At best we can develop a model to help fit a vision to it. Sonar is probably the most obvious example an alien sense that we understand. A snakes ability to detect heat is another example.

      ESP on the other hand is complete crap. ESP has failed to validate itself scientifically. ESP has been studied many times by more far more then one group. The simple fact of the matter is that absolutely nothing has managed pass even the bare minimum of scientific scrutiny. Further, beyond the inability to even tests for the existence of ESP, we have found no organs capable of picking up electronic pulses a few feet away, much less out of the range of sight. We have seen nothing to suggest that even if humans could magically pluck such signals out of the air, that we could interpreter them. Simply put, there is absolutely no evidence for ESP. In the light of absolutely no evidence for even the existence of ESP, much less a mechanism, calling ESP a load of crap is pretty safe.

    31. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know though...Some hookers who are very good at there jobs probably don't perform as well in public, under scrutiny.. get what I mean?

    32. Re:Mental power by OrangAsm · · Score: 0

      You're right, that detector would differ wildly from person to person. For example, it might go off if I look at the moon. Maybe to detect "I like Cheese" you need to detect possible related thoughts since the brain has all kinds of links from one thing to another. Just a thought. I think.

    33. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this human who was born blind has had contact with sighted humans for their entire life.

      There goes you whole point, right out the window.

    34. Re:Mental power by Wescotte · · Score: 1

      and then being able to interpret these electrical signals into meaningful thoughts. Keep in mind that since every mind is different, the electrical signals in one brain that signify a certain thought -- let's say something simple such as "I like cheese." can be fairly different from one person to the next because of the way the synapses are linked and pulse their electrochemical signals to make up said thought.

      Alright, let's say an organ exists to pickup these signals. Think of it as a very complicated voice recognition algorithm. Everyone's voice is different and there are many different langauges. Early apps would force you to spend significant amounts of time training the program to your voice. As we learn more and more about the brain I'd assume we'd find more common elements, reducing the complexity of understanding any given person's thoughts.

    35. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any alien capable of space travel will be aware of the electromagnetic spectrum. Such aliens would be able to understand sight as the perception of physical shapes based on their refractive and reflective properties.

      In fact, for such aliens, we could even construct mechanical eyes in the form of optical sensors that translate the data to a grid of black and white pixels which are communicated to the alien via touch (an array of blund-ended pins which contact the skin if their corresponding pixel is black, and lift off the skin for white).

      This analogy for ESP falls a bit short because it is not the quality of the perception that is in dispute, but rather the MECHANISM of the perception. What sort of substance or wave is being emitted by the brain, through what sort of medium does it travel, and what sort of organ can detect it? The answers provided (electromagnetism in the form of the bi-products of neural activity) fall short because the signals are too weak, too lacking in variety, and too different from person to person for any such communication to be logically possible.

    36. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hear, hear

    37. Re:Mental power by Loacher · · Score: 1

      It must be a lot harder than detecting faint mechanical waves on the air, discriminating signal from a lot noise, analizing the signal, filling in the gaps, and extracting and reconstructing another person's toughts from that signal. As in listening to radio in a crowded room. We have the power to interpret the signal, sensing it is what remains to be proved.

      How long did it take scientists to discover that termites, among many other animals, sense and act according to the earth's magnetic field? Even bacteria can detect faint electromagnetic fields.

      It is my undersdtanding that most people who sincerily beleive to be able of ESP talk about perceiving 'vibes' or 'moods', not specific toughts or sentences. May just a little bit of sensibility will be enough.

      I propose a kind of ESP Turing Test: Record the signals from the brain, reproduce them using a computer and an antenna, and have an ESP enabled person in a room tell if the signal comes from anotehr mind or a machine.

    38. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...to pick up these electrical signals from the span of -- let's say two feet away to be fair -- THROUGH THE AIR and having it penetrate their skull, and then being able to interpret these electrical signals into meaningful thoughts.

      This is precisely why I don't like such pesudo-scientific means of defining psychic abilities. Once dressed up as anything other than mysticism, psychicism becomes overtly silly.

      Telepathy, if it exists at all, does not make use of electromagnetism. There is simply just too much interference. If telepathy is anything beyond acute body-language perception combined with pheromonal response, then it must makes use of a mechanism that is non-material (and non-electromagnetic) in nature. That is to say, it has something to do with the disembodied aspects of mind, rather than the aspects that are produced by the brain.

      For those who believe that the mind is entirely produced by the brain, any claims of telepathy are rejected outright (simply for contradicting one's existing world-view). For those who believe in something like a "spirit" or logical equivalent, such a thing is theoretically possible but scientifically inexplicable.

      That, in my opinion, is the bottom line.

    39. Re:Mental power by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      If we are able to detect and monitor energy waves that are emitted from our brains merely by thinking about things, how much more difficult is it to believe that there are people who are physically tuned to be able to "pick up" those brain waves?

      A lot more. Keep in mind that this method uses highly sensitive modern electronics to amplify tiny electromagnetic signals, and even then it doesn't work unless they are right in contact with the scalp, and distributed all over it so that they can detect which areas of the brain are active.

      No study has ever shown that humans can perceive such low level electromagnetic signals. Neurons certainly are not sensitive to such signals. Indeed, if we could perceive them, we'd probably have to come up with some other method of transmitting information--the din from the enormously stronger radio, television, and cell phone signals would be driving us nuts!

    40. Re:Mental power by iamacat · · Score: 1

      The scientific method is a process for proving something as definitely untrue or possibly true.

      Ah, I am kind of curious how you are going to prove/dispove evolution - should bible-thumpers now be justified in pointing out it's not scientific? How about orgins of universe? Black holes?

      I thought scientific method is just choosing the most probable explanation based on the best of current human knowledge and intuition and without restriction of having to conform to some standards of religious/political correctness.

    41. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Ha! I knew you were going to say that!

    42. Re:Mental power by Glock27 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The scientific method is a process for proving something as definitely untrue or possibly true.

      Um, no. Part of the scientific method is to perform experiments in which measurable results are observed in the real world in a repeatable fashion.

      Why these results occur is often explained by a theory, which apparently is what you refer to above. However, why ESP works would be a strictly secondary issue alongside it's actual existence, if observed. Fairly simple experiments should be able to demonstrate telepathy if it exists - see the famous Duke University experiments for example.

      I hope that cleared things up a bit for you.

      --
      Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
      Score: -1 100% Flamebait
    43. Re:Mental power by Wybaar · · Score: 1

      It depends how you explained it. If you explained it in terms of the cones in the eye and the wavelengths that make up visible light then they probably would be able to understand at least theoretically what it is to see.

      Now you'd probably have trouble explaining what, for instance, a beautiful painting looks like or why we find it beautiful -- that doesn't come out very well in terms of wavelengths of light reflecting off it. But you could probably get a basic understanding of sight across to the alien.

      As an example closer to earth, there are some creatures that can say (or could if they could speak) "I can detect objects from a decent distance away without being in physical contact or within sight of the object" -- think about bats and some aquatic creatures that use echolocation. We lack all but very crude echolocation (getting a general sense of the size of your surroundings based on whether or not you hear an echo) but we can still understand what those creatures are doing, basically.

      --
      Y|
    44. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      William James, father of American psychology, tells of meeting an old lady who told him the Earth rested on the back of a huge turtle.
      "But, my dear lady," Professor James asked, as politely as possible, "what holds up the turtle?"
      "Ah," she said, "that's easy. He is standing on the back of another turtle."
      "Oh, I see," said Professor James, still being polite. "But would you be so good as to tell me what holds up the second turtle?"
      "It's no use, Professor," said the old lady, realizing he was trying to lead her into a logical trap. "It's turtles-turtles-turtles, all the way!"
      Don't be too quick to laugh at this little old lady. All human minds work on fundamentally similar principles. Her universe was a little bit weirder than most but it was built up on the same mental principles as every other universe people have believed in.
      As Dr. Leonard Orr has noted, the human mind behaves as if it were divided into two parts, the Thinker and the Prover.
      The Thinker can think about virtually anything. History shows that it can think the earth is suspended on the backs of infinite turtles or that the Earth is hollow, or that the Earth is floating in space; [Millions of people believe that (including the present author).] comparative religion and philosophy show that the Thinker can regard itself as mortal, as immortal, as both mortal and immortal (the reincarnation model) or even as non-existent (Buddhism). It can think itself into living in a Christian universe, a Marxist universe, a scientific-relativistic universe, or a Nazi universe--among many possibilities.
      As psychiatrists and psychologists have often observed (much to the chagrin of their medical colleagues), the Thinker can think itself sick, and can even think itself well again.
      The Prover is a much simpler mechanism. It operates on one law only: Whatever the Thinker thinks, the Prover proves.
      To cite a notorious example which unleashed incredible horrors earlier in this century, if the Thinker thinks that all Jews are rich, the Prover will prove it. It will find evidence that the poorest Jew in the most run-down ghetto has hidden money somewhere. Similarly, Feminists are able to believe that all men, including the starving wretches who live and sleep on the streets, are exploiting all women, including the Queen of England.
      If the Thinker thinks that the sun moves around the earth, the Prover will obligingly organize all perceptions to fit that thought; if the Thinker changes its mind and decides that the earth moves around the sun, the Prover will reorganize the evidence.
      If the Thinker thinks "holy water" from Lourdes will cure its lumbago, the Prover will skillfully orchestrate all signals from the glands, muscles, organs etc. until they have organized themselves into good health again.
      Of course, it is fairly easy to see that other people's minds operate this way; it is comparatively much harder to become aware that one's own mind is working that way also.
      It is believed, for instance, that some men are more "objective" than others. (One seldom hears this about women...) Businessmen are allegedly hard-nosed, pragmatic and "objective" in this sense. A brief examination of the dingbat politics most businessmen endorse will quickly correct that impression.
      Scientists, however, are still believed to be objective. No study of the lives of the great scientists will confirm this. They were as passionate, and hence as prejudiced, as any assembly of great painters or great musicians. It was not just the Church but also the established astronomers of the time who condemned Galileo. The majority of physicists rejected Einstein's Special Relativity Theory in 1905. Einstein himself would not accept anything in quantum theory after 1920 no matter how many experiments supported it. Edison's commitment to direct current (DC) electrical generators led him to insist alternating current (AC) generators were unsafe for years after their safety had been proved to everyone else. [Edison's pigheadedness on this matter was partly the result of

    45. Re:Mental power by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      the clinical power of EEGs is far less than a lay person could imagine

      What is your opinion of the use of EEGs to diagnose things like Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder and other conditions (depression, schizophrenia, epilepsy, etc.)? I hear varying opinions, some saying that it can be a physical diagnostic tool for conditions that would otherwise be a doctor's subjective observation, while others say that there is debate on it's usefulness. If it is useful for physical diagnosis, is it good for all of them or just some?

    46. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFL. Making a lot of assumptions here, aren't you?

      Personally I don't choose to believe that telepathy exists, but I don't claim to be all knowing about it.

      You are assuming that any telepathy would involve electro-magnetic waves of some kind. You are also assuming that any telepathy being done would involve one brain reading the other rather than any deliberate transmitting being done at all.

      Finally, you are assuming that there would be no *language*, so to speak, involved. Our brains AREN'T that different, but even if they were, some kind of language might develop. Certainly seems to have worked for speech. Otherwise, because all of our vocal cords are so different, one person's grunting would never make sense to another person.

    47. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For, if the scientific community ever came around to accepting it as reality, they would wish to dissect the brains of those with the ability and keeping them in labs for the rest of their lives running experiments.

      Yes, because, as well all know, it's impossible to be a scientist and have ethics and respect for fellow humans at the same time.

      /me rolls eyes. Where do this nut-jobs come from?

    48. Re:Mental power by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 1
      but there is still that .001% and yes this does fall into it.
      Falls into what? The category known as "pure dumb luck"?
      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
    49. Re:Mental power by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 0
      The problem is that the alien simply does not have the sensory organs that humans have. As such, he can't even contemplate what it is like to have that sense.
      Humans don't have the same echolocation capacity as bats, and yet someone must have contemplated what it was like - they built an artificial verson.
      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
    50. Re:Mental power by bloodredsun · · Score: 2, Informative

      First off, my clinical experience is in epilepsy not ADHD, but a quick skim of the journals would indicate that EEGs are starting to be used in this area.

      The trouble is, an EEG can only show brain activity and it is then up to a skilled neurophysiologist to analyse the record and make a clinical decision. Such conditions as epilepsy, post-concussion syndrome, and tumours may show noticeable activity (although tumour detection has obviously been increased by the use of MRI and CT). Activity that is pathomnemonic (due to one condition and no other) is few and far between, so a patient may have epileptiform activity (spike/spike and wave) in the EEG and yet never suffer an epileptic seizure. So to extend this and claim that it can be used as a tool to confirm things such as the above is a little strong.

      Specifically to ADHD/ADD, doctors are still uncertain about what constitutes the syndrome of ADHD as it varies depending on which diagnosis criteria you use (DSM-IV or ICD-10), so the use of EEGs to confirm diagnosis seems early to say the least.

      In short, EEGs are very good for some conditions but not sensitive or specific enough for others.

    51. Re:Mental power by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1
      At no time is anything "extraordinary" in the scientific method.

      In the method itself, yes, but science is not just the scientific method. It is also a culture. Because of those social aspects, scientists demand different levels of proof.

      To paraphrase an idea from, IIRC, Asimov: If I claim to have 5 kg of common salt, no one's going to demand any proof. If I claim to have 5 kg of gold, people won't believe me unless they see it or have some good form of verification. If I I claim to have 5 kg of plutonium, even seeing it wouldn't be enough proof, it's such an extraordinary claim that trickery would be suspect.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    52. Re:Mental power by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      Think of it as a very complicated voice recognition algorithm. Everyone's voice is different and there are many different langauges.
      But language has evolved to be transmitted in an external representation from one person to another; it's its grape of being, as they say in France.

      Thought hasn't.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    53. Re:Mental power by Dana+P'Simer · · Score: 1
      From Merriam-Webster Online:
      Main Entry: extraordinary Pronunciation: ik-'stror-d&n-"er-E, "ek-str&-'or- Function: adjective

      1 a : going beyond what is usual, regular, or customary b : exceptional to a very marked extent c of a financial transaction : NONRECURRING

      2 : employed for or sent on a special function or service

      Given this definition it is quite clear that certain questions that science tries to address can, in some ways, be characterized as extraordinary. To show that gravitational lensing effects actually occur as general relativity suggested, astronomers had to go to some extraordinary lengths to get into position for a solar eclipse so that the phenomena could be observed. It is in this sort of context that Mr. Sagan was using the word.
    54. Re:Mental power by A.Chwunbee · · Score: 1
      the receiving brain is also giving off its own signals at a far greater amplitude than the "transmitting" one; the equivalent of listening to someone whisper a foriegn language at the end of a football field in a howling gale while you bellow what ever is on your mind.
      Excellent analogy, my good sir! I will pray that the mods of goderation will be smiling upon you.
      --
      select * from base where originalOwner = 'you' and currentOwner != 'us'.
      0 rows returned.
    55. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >howling gale

      not necessarily. resonating waves add. connective signal on additive carrier is what youre looking for. :)
      i refrain from commenting further. :)

    56. Re:Mental power by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't he also say, "So you are able to detect an object from some distance without being in physical contact or within aural distance of it? I don't believe it. How would the sense come to you? Would it travel through the air and into your brain where you sensed it? It doesn't seem plausible."

      It may not seem plausible but unless he is stupid it is trivially verifiable. Hence why people don't believe in ESP, you don't have to understand it to know it doesn't work.

    57. Re:Mental power by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 3, Insightful
      You are assuming that mental processes are EM fields. They are not. Thinking does produce an EM-field, but its like the wake of a boat.

      We don't know what conciousness is made of. Thus we do not know its true limitations. And that's not voodoo talking. That's the scientific community.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    58. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah that would be real smart. Talk about killing the goose. I doubt they would be so stupid. Like we understand the brain well enough to get any information from it by slicing and dicing it. Give me a break.

      That's like the idea of disecting the the brains of extremely intelligent people to find out what makes them so smart. Actually, I have heard that eating the brain of your enemy makes you as smart as him and gives you all of his knowldedge.

    59. Re:Mental power by Wescotte · · Score: 1

      Think of it as a very complicated voice recognition algorithm. Everyone's voice is different and there are many different langauges.

      But language has evolved to be transmitted in an external representation from one person to another; it's its grape of being, as they say in France.

      I really don't think it's all that different. I believe the most difficult aspect of this will be reading somebodys subconsious mind.If I'm thinking of something specific like "wow that girl is really good looking" most likely literally thinking the words in my head. Emotions also could be taught by monitoring other parts of the body. If I'm nervous maybe my heart rate and body temperature increase. I think it will be very possible to communicate directly with another person without using sight or sound in the not so distance future.

      I believe the tricky part will be when I'm reading a book or driving and I begin to do the task unconsciously. Like when you're reading a book and suddenly it's more like you're dreaming then reading. I think that will be significantly harder to "encode" so to speak.

    60. Re:Mental power by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      I thought scientific method is just choosing the most probable explanation

      That is just one step. You then perform experiments to see if you explanation is disprovable. You're right, macroevolution, black holes, etc. are unproven. However, scientists have developed theories that are borne out by observation and experimentation (hence proven observed microevolution; observed objects in space that repeatedly exhibit similar light-bending properties, x-ray flares, etc that indicate a number of similar bodies in space which behave in a similar, predictable way).

      There is nothing un-scientific about macroevolution, except when people claim it is proven truth. I wish more textbooks would emphasize that macroevolution is unproven (and not really provable). Bible thumpers can point this out all they want until they start telling me that my science book should preach creationism as truth while lacking that same proof.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    61. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Um, no.

      Thanks for emphasizing the step in the process which I pointed out here:
      perform experiments designed to see if your prediction is correct
      I hope that cleared things up a bit for you, next time before you slam someone as wrong please read past the first sentence of the post.
    62. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't know what conciousness is made of.

      Actually, we do. They're called neurons. They're cells. They're not broadcasting a psychic spectrum on any magic frequency or making waves in a sea of ether. Keep dreaming.
      That's the scientific community talking.

    63. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paranoid schizophrenia?

    64. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, we do. They're called neurons. They're cells. They're not broadcasting a psychic spectrum on any magic frequency or making waves in a sea of ether. Keep dreaming. That's the scientific community talking. -- Are you saying that consciousness is made of neurons? Firstly, this is not even remotely close. And as far as the scientific community knows, a clear basis for consciousness has hardly been established.

    65. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If there were any validity to the claims of psychics, there would be intense scientific interest


      Actually, mainstream scientists are often the source of the most violent opposition to new or challenging ideas. Intense scientific interest is usually a sign that a particular field isn't going to have much revolutionary in it. It's the obscure stuff, the stuff Robert Park doesn't like, (he wouldn't have liked AC, Relativity, or Columbus sailing across the ocean either) that brings the greatest scientific and technological progress.

      Granted, of course, most obscure stuff that people say is bunk really turns out to be bunk. But nestled somewhere in there are good ideas, and intense scientific interest has never been a marker for them. Maybe intense scientific opposition, but, eh, like I said, most of those things turn out to be bunk.
    66. Re:Mental power by Dana+P'Simer · · Score: 1

      It never fails, whenever a formerly "crackpot" idea suddenly has an undeniable volume of evidence that supports it, hundereds to scientists in the field will jump on the bandwagon and try to pretend they were there the whole time. This is what I am talking about. The first experimental or observational evidence will not produce the intense scientific interest I am talking about but maybe the 10th. The previous poster was saying that he was glad that scientists would not take psychics seriously because he thought scientists would imprison him and dissect his brain. I was just saying that IF there were a large body of credible evidence for psychic or ESP phenomena, there would be intense scientific interest.

    67. Re:Mental power by Glock27 · · Score: 1
      Thanks for emphasizing the step in the process which I pointed out here:

      perform experiments designed to see if your prediction is correct

      I hope that cleared things up a bit for you, next time before you slam someone as wrong please read past the first sentence of the post.

      I read your whole post. The problem was the above doesn't jibe at all with "The scientific method is a process for proving something as definitely untrue or possibly true." For something to be true, it must be observed in the real world. That opposite charges attract is "true", not "possibly true", as established by repeated experiments.

      The existance of telepathy could be determined by experimentation in the same manner. Not "possibly true" but "true".

      --
      Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
      Score: -1 100% Flamebait
    68. Re:Mental power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That opposite charges attract is "true", not "possibly true", as established by repeated experiments.

      Why do opposite charges attract though? We have a theory consisting of lots of mathematics that I don't even have a hope of understanding, but when you crunch the numbers, the theory matches with the experiment every time so far.

      To continue with the psychic powers experiment, what if someone guesses the card 100% of the time in the experiment, then we come back the next day and that person guesses the card 100% of the time again, and does this again and again? Does this prove the person is psychic? Or is he reading the reflection of the card off my glasses? Very few things in science are provable. The best you can do is hope that the guy gets a card wrong and disproves your hypothesis. Otherwise you have a long life ahead of you of people trying to disprove it, and even after you're dead and buried, people will still be trying to disprove it.

  9. Non-Invasive computer comtrol by Pants75 · · Score: 0

    Through Keyboard and Mouse!

    1. Re:Non-Invasive computer comtrol by mrjb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Tell that to mr. Steven Hawking and see if he's amused. To us this may be little more than a toy, but for some disabled it may be the only way to control a computer, perhaps even the only effective way to communicate with their environment.

      --
      Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
    2. Re:Non-Invasive computer comtrol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's Dr. Hawking to you!

  10. What does the person think? by superstick58 · · Score: 5, Funny

    So what exactly goes through the person's mind when they are moving the cursor. Do they just think "Left" and "Right" etc. Or do they simply have to look in the direction they want the cursor to go? It'd be interesting to try it out. It would bring me one step closer to utilizing the power of the force.

    1. Re:What does the person think? by irokie · · Score: 1

      from the article: "Such brain activity does not require the use of any nerves or muscles, so people with stroke or spinal cord injuries could use the cap effectively."

      i wonder now would it be possible to do the reverse...

      for example, would it be possible to adapt the technology to allow blind people to see?

      it'd be cool (but kinda scary) if that worked.

      --
      and if you see me strut, remind me of what left this outlaw torn...
    2. Re:What does the person think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would imagine that (when this technology is perfected (or atleast more advanced than it is now)), that it won't be a matter of "Ok, now I have to think "Left" to get the cursor to move left".

      When you move your mouse now, do you think "move mouse"? Or, do you think, "press the button 'k'"? No, your brain does all that in parallel without you concentrating on it really hard. I think it will be just as it is now, except you won't be moving your fingers to type (or moving your mouse - there won't be a mouse).

    3. Re:What does the person think? by horrens · · Score: 1

      sending sensory signals remotely to ones brain is a scary thought
      as far as making blind see again, so far it involves attaching cameras to your optic nerves, and they are making some progress in this field also

    4. Re:What does the person think? by cambipular · · Score: 1

      Just a guess, but there's probably a learning period kind of like what physical rehab patients go through when they lose a limb or forget how to walk.

    5. Re:What does the person think? by superstick58 · · Score: 1

      I remember reading an article about blind people "seeing" again with the help of implanted electrodes. (http://biology.about.com/library/weekly/aa012000a .htm ) This link has a story about it.

    6. Re:What does the person think? by orion41us · · Score: 1

      The Brain Port was reported to "Reprogram" sensory preception.

    7. Re:What does the person think? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      There is research on this but still it is primitive. it is invasive where Blind test subjects were placed electodes on the vision areas of their brains (much like how they do it for deaf people). As far as I know they are able to see dots and some simple shapes, Kinda lo rez stuff think monocrome 32x32 Resulution, with no grayscale.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:What does the person think? by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      I remember seeing something on a discovery channel the other day about how they had worked up a device that could remotly implant feelings into someones brain. But that person had to be wearing a skullcap and basically electrical impuses were directed from several directions at once at an exact part of the brain that had been mapped to be associated with a certain emotion. It worked, but obviously would be hard to accieve from a distance, but the idea is scary.

    9. Re:What does the person think? by cryptochrome · · Score: 1

      I think this tech will really be useful for able bodied people when they can just put on a scanner on an arbitray machine controlling arbitrary stuff and just use it. Moving a cursor is OK, but unless you can register "clicks" it isn't very useful as a mouse.

      Really, if we had the functionality of a typical handheld game controller - with two joysticks, and analog and digital buttons - then this tech can really be useful.

      Of course since game controllers are imperfect devices, a mental controller that has more powerful attributes would be welcome. Think 6-axis control x2 or more, plus an arbitrary number of toggles and variable inputs. Feedback so you could know the state and identity of said inputs would also be important.

      --

      ---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?

    10. Re:What does the person think? by david.given · · Score: 2, Informative
      So what exactly goes through the person's mind when they are moving the cursor. Do they just think "Left" and "Right" etc. Or do they simply have to look in the direction they want the cursor to go? It'd be interesting to try it out. It would bring me one step closer to utilizing the power of the force.

      The way these things work, if they're anything like the similar systems I've read about in the past, is that you learn to change your brainwave patterns in a way that the computer can detect.

      When you get hooked up to one, there's a long training session (like, weeks) where you spend a lot of time staring at a jittering cursor. After a while you learn the sort of mental attitude required to make it go one way, and the different one to make it another way. Actually assuming the attitude requires concentration and a little time. You get your feedback from watching the screen. The operative words here are crude and slow: the Matrix it ain't.

      This system seems to be multidimensional, but I don't imagine they've managed to improve the speed. You'd still be far better off just reaching out and pressing a key.

    11. Re:What does the person think? by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 1

      Or would it be possible to adapt the technology to implant advertising into your brain?

      --
      www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
    12. Re:What does the person think? by MacJedi · · Score: 4, Informative
      "Each dimension of cursor movement ... was controlled by a linear equation in which the independent variable was a weighted combination of the amplitudes in a mu (8-12 Hz) or beta (18-26 Hz) rhythm frequency band over the right and left sensorimotor cortices."

      (Jonathan R. Wolpaw and Dennis J. McFarland. Control of a two-dimensional movement signal by a noninvasive brain-computer interface in humans. PNAS published December 7, 2004, 10.1073/pnas.0403504101)

      From the methods and diagrams in the article looks like the slower mu oscillations moved the cursor in the horrizontal axis and the vaster beta osicllations moved the cursor in the vertical axis.

      --
      2^5
    13. Re:What does the person think? by zors · · Score: 1

      Why is helping the blind see "scary"?

      Anti-Blindist!

      OR do you mean the thought of putting information into people's minds?

    14. Re:What does the person think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tasps, anyone?

    15. Re:What does the person think? by Epistax · · Score: 1

      Have you ever just had fun playing with your brain? Rest your arm on something, and think really hard about lifting it. I mean, really really hard. Soon it feels as if you don't actually move the arm it'll be paralyzed forever. If you do it right you can trick your brain into thinking you have another limb or two. This effect will wear off quickly since it isn't getting any sensory from it. Maybe it's just me but I'd love to see what I can do with one of these things.

    16. Re:What does the person think? by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      You would probably have to think something seemingly random, depending on how your brain was built up under the electrodes. The brain is remarkably adaptable and over time you will associate this thought with moving the cursor as you have associated some other pattern with moving your hand.
      With the wearable device versus implant, I suppose it would be harder to learn because the connection is less permanent and prone to move around. Maybe today you have to think of green to move left; tomorrow you have to think of shattering plastic.

    17. Re:What does the person think? by DerWulf · · Score: 1

      too me at least it seems obvious that the device can be calibrated as the user likes. Remember, this is not a thought reading machine. Picture this like a joystick calibration: you have to tell the software that the joystick now occupies a position that you refer to as left. However, you can also set the 'normal' right as software left and have it inverted like that. There is no interpretation going on, the joystick just sends some values (like 100,0) and the software maps this, on your command, to 100% left. Calibrating the braincap thing probably works like this: "Choose a thought that will map to 'left' ... ready ... 3 2 1 go'". Then the ensuing brainwave pattern is recorded and the software just sends whatever input interupt signals 'left' to games or the windows UI or whatever.

      --

      ___
      No power in the 'verse can stop me
    18. Re:What does the person think? by Wescotte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So what exactly goes through the person's mind when they are moving the cursor. Do they just think "Left" and "Right" etc. Or do they simply have to look in the direction they want the cursor to go? It'd be interesting to try it out. It would bring me one step closer to utilizing the power of the force. I would assume these thoughts would be somewhat unique and require each person to train the device. For example the screen would show a mouse moving to the left and record your thoughts. Then maybe say think about moving the mouse to the left and record that. Do it a few hundred different ways and now we know what you're thinking about when you want the mouse to move left.

    19. Re:What does the person think? by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Hell, just a mouse with a single button would be useful ;) All those muppets who use Macs get along somehow... it'd be like having a third arm :)

    20. Re:What does the person think? by Wescotte · · Score: 1

      from the article: "Such brain activity does not require the use of any nerves or muscles, so people with stroke or spinal cord injuries could use the cap effectively."

      i wonder now would it be possible to do the reverse...

      for example, would it be possible to adapt the technology to allow blind people to see?

      it'd be cool (but kinda scary) if that worked.

      It's hard to teach an old dog new tricks. I suspect it is significantly more complicated to reverse the process. I believe the longer a person goes without using that portion of their brain the more likely it is rewired for another task.

    21. Re:What does the person think? by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Have you ever just had fun playing with your brain?
      ...
      If you do it right you can trick your brain into thinking you have another limb or two.

      I recall seeing a documentary about a doctor that cured a patient of problems with a "phantom" limb. The patient had lost a hand, had problems with feeling as if it was still there, but in an uncomfortable position. The doctor fixed it by making a simple box that created a mirror image of the missing limb, and telling the patient to place his hands in the box. The mirror image tricked the patient's brain into thinking the hand was still there and allowed him to move it around. Here's a link I found.

      There was also some connection between missing limbs and tactile senses on other parts of the body. Apparently, the human body maps onto the surface of the brain. In some cases, when people lose a limb, the unused sensory area on the brain gets confused with nearby areas that correspond to different parts of the body. Here's a link.

      As for what you are talking about - tricking the brain about your limbs - there is some mention of that as well.

    22. Re:What does the person think? by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      The idea of putting information, specifically in this case feelings, remotly into someone else. The power that could be weilded by such a device is huge.

    23. Re:What does the person think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need to wonder. Some reasearchers have used brain computer interfaces for people that are "locked in" (can't move anything). They implanted an electrode into the brain of these patients. They started by having patients imagine moving their hand to move the cursor across the screen. After some training patients were asked what they thought about to move the cursor. They said that they didn't think about anything, they just moved the cursor (just as when you move your hand you don't think about moving your hand you just move it).

      http://www.cis.gsu.edu/~mmoore/

    24. Re:What does the person think? by f(Root) · · Score: 1
      would it be possible to adapt the technology to allow blind people to see?
      Seriously, it could be a possibility. The only problem being that it would require interfacing with the brain on a much more detailed level. I mean, we couldn't simply interface with portion of the brain, as this moving cursor experiment does. Something this advanced requires the computer to be linked on the individual neuron level. This is probably why only low res. monochrome has been achieved so far. This reminds me of the good old days of Win95 when monochrome was actually a desktop colour option. Thank goodness graphics cards have become more standardised in higher colour levels.
      --
      Programmers never get old.. They just can't C as well.
    25. Re:What does the person think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i know kung fu.

    26. Re:What does the person think? by G-funk · · Score: 1

      You'd still be far better off just reaching out and pressing a key.

      Not if you're a quadraplegic. This research isn't for us (comparitively) able-bodied slashdot nerds.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    27. Re:What does the person think? by cryptochrome · · Score: 1

      The whole point of a mouse is just to click on a spot on the screen, which then does something. More mouse buttons means that you can change what it does when you click, but outside certain highly graphical programs this is not really necessary, and you can always modify a plain click with other keys or toggle between states, which is what the mac does.

      But if you're talking about real-time control you can do a lot better with more. Ever try running a flight simulator with just a mouse? Forget about it. You NEED a joystick or better. Console-style controllers are a good compromise and are highly flexible.

      --

      ---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?

    28. Re:What does the person think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the only reason to have a 3rd arm is so you can waterski while wrasslin an aligator.

  11. Invasive by teiresias · · Score: 4, Funny

    Because invasive would be that long spike jammed into the back of your cranium in the Matrix.

    --
    -Teiresias
    1. Re:Invasive by infinite9 · · Score: 1

      Because invasive would be that long spike jammed into the back of your cranium in the Matrix.


      Yeah, that would feel... a little weird.

      --
      Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
    2. Re:Invasive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You one overpaid terd sniffer. Get back to work.

      Also, I want to fuck you.

      -Jay English

  12. Good, good.. by hab136 · · Score: 4, Funny

    .. now get cracking on the bi-directional interface. I need my legion of computer-controlled human drones to do my evil bidding!

    Robots and sharks with lasers on their heads can't do everything, you know.

    1. Re:Good, good.. by ArsonSmith · · Score: 3, Funny

      I for one welcome our new....

      Nevermind.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    2. Re:Good, good.. by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Now I really can imagine a beawulf cluster.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    3. Re:Good, good.. by indianajones428 · · Score: 1

      Robots and sharks with lasers on their heads can't do everything, you know.


      Your problem is that you need to upgrade. Friggin' lasers have been out for some time.

      --
      When a thing has been said, and said well, have no scruple. Take it and copy it. --Anatole France
    4. Re:Good, good.. by angedinoir · · Score: 1

      Except for your minions will be quadrapelegic, or paralized.

      Spelling at the moment isn't worth the effort.

    5. Re:Good, good.. by hab136 · · Score: 1
      Except for your minions will be quadrapelegic, or paralized.

      Well, I was thinking of using my mind-control caps on able-bodied humans, but a legion of handi-capable(tm) evil minions would be kinda funny. Plus, nobody really expects the dude in a wheelchair to have an AK-47, or a Steven Hawkings look-a-like to be a suicide bomber. For added effect, I'd make sure that they all have speech impediments.

      "Thstick 'em up, thith ith a wobbewy!"

  13. On NBC Monday Night by Azghoul · · Score: 1

    Robert Bozell did this story Monday night on NBC. I don't usually mock /., but come on, once it's been on network news, it's a little late.

    Then again, how many /.ers watch NBC news regularly?

    It looked amazing to me. It looked rather like early pong games, the user just learned how to move the small dot onto the large one. Nothing real precise, but imagine 30 years from now...

    1. Re:On NBC Monday Night by JFitzsimmons · · Score: 1

      These are computers remember? 30 years ago scientists assumed that 'personal computers' these days would take up only a room, and would be very user-friendly through the use of the FORTRAN language. I think in 5 or 10 years this could be very popular indeed - perhaps even faster...

      --
      Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
    2. Re:On NBC Monday Night by blakestah · · Score: 1

      It looked amazing to me. It looked rather like early pong games, the user just learned how to move the small dot onto the large one. Nothing real precise, but imagine 30 years from now...

      Well, to get a truer understanding of what is possible you'd need a measure of information transfer from the surface of the scalp. It's kinda like a 120 baud modem. Controlling, in one dimension (or even two dimensions), a cursor, is not a task requiring massive bandwidth. Could be analogous, though, to piloting a wheelchair around the house.

      Now, think of the bandwidth required to type this message in at /. I put out 14 keystrokes per second, each one a choice of about 2^6 available keys. Maybe 1200 baud to capture the text production, several times more than that to control my fingers using sensory feedback.

      The real limitation, to anyone that has looked at scalp potentials, and invasive techniques, is the information transfer rate. The scalp will always be at least an order of magnitude (maybe several) behind. Even surface potentials (sub-cranial, but still not within the brain) are an order of magnitude behind invasive signals. An invasive implant carries the possibility of transferring information at the same rate, or faster than a human can with his motor output. Scalp potentials will always be far far far behind. It is certainly worth exploring how far you can get with a scalp potential signal, but in another 10 years Cyberkinetics will be allowing humans deprived of motor output to send text streams at realistic rates to computers to interact with their environment. That is the future I look forward to.

    3. Re:On NBC Monday Night by cbr2702 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that what you saw was this, which involved implanted electrodes, not detection through the skull.

      --


      This post written under Gentoo-linux with an SCO IP license.
    4. Re:On NBC Monday Night by Azghoul · · Score: 1

      Nope. Nice try telling me what I saw. Robert Bozell even put the "skull cap" on, which was blue, and looked remarkably like a shower cap.

      He did manage to move the "cursor", and most certainly had nothing implanted anywhere.

  14. bout damn time by AviLazar · · Score: 3, Funny

    because I, like the rest of you, have other uses for our hands while surfing the net.
    On a real note (though the above is true), imagine playing CS or any FPS game with mind control. Now it will even mean that shooter games will be won by the smartest - not the most physically capable (hand to eye coordination).

    --

    I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    1. Re:bout damn time by OverkillTASF · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one who thinks the idea of Counter-Strike players being "the most physically capable" is +1 funny?

    2. Re:bout damn time by LordFoo · · Score: 1
      Now it will even mean that shooter games will be won by the smartest - not the most physically capable (hand to eye coordination).
      Or, like it is now (all things being equal), they'll still be won by the person with the lowest ping time.
    3. Re:bout damn time by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      It's pretty easy for us (read: people) to adapt, and learning the nuances of h.e.c. are easy, but can take 6mos-1year for any given FPS, I'm going to venture out on a limb and say that h.e.c. is not the bottleneck in fps games.

      I have my vote for intelligence being the bottleneck. I more often outwit my opponents as opposed to out-battle (for lack of better term).

      For instance, halo2. Run around them in a circle, get behind their back and melee them (donkey punch). Even in Q3 excessive, in a battle use your bfg to jump on a ledge and kill 'em while they're still trying to find you. UT2003, just strafe a lot.

    4. Re:bout damn time by sarlen · · Score: 1
      For instance, halo2. Run around them in a circle, get behind their back and melee them (donkey punch).

      I have to instantly object to that as a scenario - who in God's name would allow you to do that in Halo? As soon as you see someone you're immediately killed by dual weapon spam anyway =(

    5. Re:bout damn time by rjelks · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is the only place in the world where a video game can be described as a physical activity. /wish a had a mind controller for CS

    6. Re:bout damn time by infinite9 · · Score: 1

      Now it will even mean that shooter games will be won by the smartest

      I don't think "smartest" is the right word. I'm not sure what is the right word. I suspect this ability would have more to do with being able to focus or concentrate. That's very different from intellegence.

      --
      Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
    7. Re:bout damn time by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      No way man. Granted, there is a lot of dual weapon spam, and it's easy to get instantly killed with dual plasmas, but they have to have to be really good.

      If it's the spam that makes you dislike it, I'd recommend 2 things:
      #1. Do team skirmish/team battle, it's not focusing on super killing skills.
      #2. Get above level 10, and the newbs are no more. From there on out, you won't get spammed anymore. That same thing happened when q3 got its excessive mod, 4/5 rooms had little bastards just spamming rockets. Halo2s ranking system (I am not a halo2/bungie zealot:)) got rid of that. You have to be *good* to get past level 10, and halo2 only lets you play people that rank close to you (+/-5 levels). I'm level 13 (I bounce up and down quite a bit), and very rarely get spammed, and on average I think I donkey punch 2-3 times a game.

    8. Re:bout damn time by sarlen · · Score: 1
      I don't play on Live because my box is modded, but I do play with my friends and what I dislike so much is the propensity for immediate death in almost every scenario.

      I find it very hard to believe moving up in ranks reduces spam (why would it? You hold down two triggers and it effectively kills everything in seconds) but still allows you to run behind them and punch. I guess since I don't play on Live, this is just my inability to imagine - but it seems rather outlandish.

    9. Re:bout damn time by Zangief · · Score: 1

      Hey hey hey! you aren't being Politically Correct!

      There are a lot of kinds of intelligence. Math Intelligence, Emotional Intelligence, Basketball Intelligence...

      We have just discovered another kind of intelligence, CS-intelligence.

      (Everybody is intelligent, in their own way, because we are all special!!!).
      --
      Wiki de Ciencia Ficcion y Fantasia

    10. Re:bout damn time by Garse+Janacek · · Score: 1
      Now it will even mean that shooter games will be won by the smartest - not the most physically capable

      That analogy doesn't really work, though -- games with a mental interface won't be won by the "smartest" any more than games with a physical interface are won by the strongest. It'll probably still be an issue of reflexes, and of some sort of "mental coordination"...

      --

      I am the man with no sig!

    11. Re:bout damn time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i don't know about smartest....and besides, if you can think fast, chances are you can react fast, and that's the true se3cret to FPS, spray and pray baby, oh yeah!

    12. Re:bout damn time by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      but it seems rather outlandish.

      Indeed, I didn't do a good enough job explaining, I'm sorry. Basically the point is this:
      When you start out on live, everyone is a newbie, everything is just a just live or die situation. As you move up in levels, you'll find that the people you are playing against have evolved, they realize they can't just run up to someone anymore and spam the shit out of them, because teams generally stick together and you will get owned every time.
      You have to start playing *smarter* to get in the lowers 10s. Most People who are at the 10 level realize that they have a 50/50 chance of living or dieing in a 1-to-1 confrontation and it's more important that they live, because if they don't, the team will evaporate. If (dumb) people decide to jump in a room with 3 other guys, and constantly die, their team will be weaker. This level 10 goes to level 9, then 8. In a short amount of time, he will no longer be in the overlap I play in, unless he adapts.

      This system alone makes halo2 online superior to every other team game I've ever played. When I hop on live now, I *know* I'm playing with good teammates.

      My other box is modded (yeah, I own 2:)), and I'd say that modded is the 2nd best use for the hardware, outside of halo2 live. Of course, KOTORII came out a couple days ago, and I have yet to try it.

    13. Re:bout damn time by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Will people stop harping on "smartest"...you are like the fifth post. It is a general statement - I am not a neuro scientist so I have no idea under what part of the brain or what term to use (and I doubt most people on here do). Smartest is good enough.

      An analogy does not have to be exact - hence an analogy.
      And "physically capable" also had the attachment of (hand to eye coordination). The correlation should be fairly simple...damn don't people have better things to do with their lives then nit pick something that really does not call for nit picking.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    14. Re:bout damn time by ChreexLe · · Score: 1

      ...won by the person with the lowest ping time. I find it very annoying when people get owned in cs and then blame it on "lag" even though most of the time their ping is below 40. Anything below 250 seems about the same for me, and I know people on du who are fuckin decent with 900 ping (although there is some definite lag at that latency). btw in css and probably most mods "cl_cmdrate 1" gives you (most connections that I've seen) a ping of 5.

      --
      -- haha i know it's not funny but i said it so i'm gonna pretend it's funny --
    15. Re:bout damn time by ChreexLe · · Score: 1

      I more often outwit my opponents as opposed to out-battle (for lack of better term).

      For instance, halo2. Run around them in a circle, get behind their back and melee them (donkey punch). Even in Q3 excessive, in a battle use your bfg to jump on a ledge and kill 'em while they're still trying to find you. UT2003, just strafe a lot.


      I don't see how donkey punching them is "outwitting" them, especially if they know you're there.

      When I think of outwitting someone, I think of throwing a smoke grenade in the main route of the map and then taking the side way, while still throwing flashes over the buildings and into the center area, only to end up coming round the back and raping them all from behind. :)

      lol@assassin!

      Oh and I suppose bfg'ing up to a ledge is sort of outsmarting them, but I don't think the health-loss would ever be worth it unless you're very desperate to live (ie have no health) and only DA would try it then.

      Your "strat" for ut is strafing? omglolwtfbbqrofl

      --
      -- haha i know it's not funny but i said it so i'm gonna pretend it's funny --
    16. Re:bout damn time by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      Try it in halo2...circle with them, they'll circle with you for 20 seconds. They're thinking about killing with the guns, I cut the the circle and *bam* they're dead. It's outwitting because:
      A. I decided I didn't want to circle with them.
      B. I thought about cutting the circle first.
      C. I wacked them in the back, and they should have known that was a possibility.

      Your method is a great example for outwitting, a simple outwit is still an outwit.

      Yeah, it's true for q3 excessive, because in excessive:
      A. You don't get hurt from your own bfg.
      B. I have knowledge of a large amount of jumps and angles on every map.
      C. I know *exactly* where I'll land, 99% of the time, and they will have no clue.
      Thus, by using my resources, and controlling the battle, I successfully outwit my opponent.

      Yeah, strafing. No, not strafe right. Strafe right 2 seconds, left 1, right 4. They can't hit you, you win because you controlled the battle. Their gun may be more deadly, but if I kill them, I've successfully outwitted them, before they could out spam me.

    17. Re:bout damn time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I wouldn't be surprised if hand to eye coordination depends on your brain and not "auxiliary" nervous system. The only way the smartest would have an advantage would be to have auxiliary software guess what they intended and compensate for mistakes, really turning CS into a strategy game.

    18. Re:bout damn time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now it will even mean that shooter games will be won by the smartest - not the most physically capable (hand to eye coordination).

      You know you're pathetic when your excuse for losing a computer game is that it's too physically demanding.

    19. Re:bout damn time by ChreexLe · · Score: 1

      ...circle with them, they'll circle with you for 20 seconds...

      Ah, I see. If, indeed, you encounter someone who does not see their enemy and start firing straight up or run for cover then perhaps they can be easily outwitted with such skilz as strafing round them in circles, and you are correct.

      However, you are the first person I have ever come across who would not immediately fire at the enemy. In my experience it is more likely that someone in that situation (attacker) will be killed running towards the victim, however I do not play halo 2 live (even though I have two copies due to parents not communicating) and I know that there are some stupid people out there. (Perhaps you've noticed that they are dumb cunts and that is why you've chosen to take this course of action?)

      As for q3 excessive, I totally agree with you now that I know that the bfg doesn't do splash-damage. I have fucked around with rocket jumping (as everyone has) and mainly plasma climbing.

      Strafe right 2 seconds, left 1, right 4.

      This is very insightful and I will try to adapt it. I'm well aware of how most people's movements (including mine) are extremely predictible but the most I've done to prevent it is when coming out from a corner I don't strafe out about a meter as most people do, I jump out and continue running for about 3 meters and then run back.

      --
      -- haha i know it's not funny but i said it so i'm gonna pretend it's funny --
    20. Re:bout damn time by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      However, you are the first person I have ever come across who would not immediately fire at the enemy

      Forgive me, I guess I should have elaborated. We are firing when we do this, and I'd venture to say that only 20% of the bullets hit. That's why we can circle for 20 seconds. I get sick of wasting my time (and bullets). The plasma rifle is especially bad for this, as it seems the plasma blasts are more affected by your velocity(Does that sound right? I don't know how to explain it. I don't think it's centripetal force, unless bungie coded that in along with plasma blasts having mass.).

      Perhaps you've noticed that they are dumb cunts and that is why you've chosen to take this course of action?
      I'm sure you are aware of this, but most people who post on /. with a registered account are highly intelligent, even extremely intelligent. We're on the right side of the bell curve, you might say. Most people who play halo2 would be oblivious to the concepts of game theory. Once you get above level 10 or so, you get to the right side of the bell curve...the smarter ones. It's not as easy to circle and donkey punch, but you can still get away with it every so often(and it's still funny as all hell).

      Strafe right 2 seconds, left 1, right 4.I find this much easier on halo2, but first experimented with it in ut2k3. There are very few people who can keep an accurate aim on that, and once you have your aim down while strafing you can be deadly.

      Say you and your opponent have equal weapons with an equal amount of ammo, you meet head-to-head. You vary your strafe, but since you've practiced you are achieving 39% landed. He's good at hitting strafing people, but not the ones he can't predict, so all you need to hope for is he has a 38% shot accuracy.

      BTW, please experiment. And don't blame me if it doesn't work, I am far from a master at any fps except maybe q3 excessive (5 years of playing). I may just be getting extraordinarily lucky (I wish I could transfer that luck to the lottery:)).

    21. Re:bout damn time by ChreexLe · · Score: 1

      I'd venture to say that only 20% of the bullets hit. That's why we can circle for 20 seconds.

      I haven't played much halo at all compared to how much q3/dod/cs I've played and I'm a lot more used to the "one hit and you're dead" gameplay. But I know that with less effective weapons you can practically strafe across the map with each other.

      ...it seems the plasma blasts are more affected by your velocity(Does that sound right? I don't know how to explain it...

      I know what you mean. I seem to think of it like this: if you are strafing right and fire a bullet when you arrive 1m to the right of your original position, it may arrive 1.5 meters right of your starting point on the back wall. (although people have disagreed with me on that)

      I'm sure you are aware of this, but most people who post on /. with a registered account are highly intelligent, even extremely intelligent... ...above level 10 or so, you get to the right side of the bell curve...the smarter ones.

      I don't know if you were illustrating range of intelligence in halo2 or if you meant something else. I don't consider myself extremely intelligent, but I usually find myself being in the top 1/2 of a group of 10/30 people. I've grown up with geek friends and pothead friends simultaneously and I've developed a relatively unique personality (never met anyone like me) and I can say some odd things at times.

      ...He's good at hitting strafing people, but not the ones he can't predict...

      A friend of mine has played A LOT of q3 and I would consider him in the top 25% but once I got to know his style I could predict his routes etc and also how many seconds it would take him to line up his shot with the railgun, to the point where I would jump and he would shoot at where my feet were (apparently a 1 hit kill??). I figured he would have equal knowledge of how I acted so I decided to emulate the style of "the typical noob" (in my mind) and totally threw out my strategy. After that, I seemed to have a definite advantage over him (for a short while, say 5 or 10 kills tops). Being predictible is often unpredicted.

      btw sorry if that doesn't make sense, it's 6am (my first week of adsl)

      --
      -- haha i know it's not funny but i said it so i'm gonna pretend it's funny --
    22. Re:bout damn time by SlimFastForYou · · Score: 1

      I don't really see how sending a signal to your computer is any different than sending a signal to your hand, as far as how long it will take for the action to be processed. If you have a long reaction time before pressing a key, I would think you would have a similar reaction time before telling the computer to perform an action.

      With FPS, a good thing to do is to master your reaction time. For example, if you want to shoot someone, shoot while moving. Know when your scope is going to pass over the enemy and signal your hand to click the mouse at the right time. I try to click a little before the scope is over the enemy and I usually end up clicking at the right time.

    23. Re:bout damn time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is just a re-hash of something done roughly 30 years ago. My father (professor of psychology with an expertise in psycho-physiology aka polygraphs and the like) had grad students doing the same research in the program he taught but through different interfaces. At the time (early 1970's) they did the same thing but they hooked the people up to your average Lionel train set and made the train go around in circles when the subject relaxed. Subsequent to that, I remember him bringing home a Commodore 64 that did roughly the same thing with only three sensors and a very simple 3d plane where you moved forward or backward based on how much you were relaxing.

      The interesting part is that not more of this research has been conducted. As we have seen from the various posts, there are infinite number of uses both good (say helping a paralyzed individual) to say hands free surfing for porn! IMHO, it is a bit of an untapped field.

    24. Re:bout damn time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Message from Stephen Hawking: PWNED!

    25. Re:bout damn time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because I, like the rest of you, have other uses for our hands while surfing the net. On a real note (though the above is true), imagine playing CS or any FPS game with mind control. Now it will even mean that shooter games will be won by the smartest - not the most physically capable (hand to eye coordination). -- Not the smartest, but those who have surfed for the most pr0n.

  15. new type of h4x0r!! by TheWart · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now all you have to do to be a hacker is to wear one of these and stand behind people who are using a computer.

    Imagine the fun in a library or computer lab...mauahaha!

  16. Already in use? by which+way+is+up · · Score: 2, 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.

    1. Re:Already in use? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go away, Troll.

  17. Now if only they could implant it. by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 1

    Very neat, of course, but what good is it if I have to put on a fruity hat? Work on making it cheaply implantable without risking a lifetime of vegetable-ness, please.

    1. Re:Now if only they could implant it. by robyannetta · · Score: 1
      Now if only they could implant it

      ...and walk around your neighborhood with it wired to a universal remote control you keep in your pocket. Neighbors playing their TV too loud? Not any more.

      --
      - Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
    2. Re:Now if only they could implant it. by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 1

      I guess that'd be neat, but why wouldn't you just push the buttons on the remote?

    3. Re:Now if only they could implant it. by gclef · · Score: 1

      And then have to have surgery every time a wire breaks, battery dies, or they come out with an improvement? No thanks. The fact that it doesn't need to be implanted is a huge advantage from my point of view.

    4. Re:Now if only they could implant it. by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 1

      I would hope the power source would be external, and I'm not sure you really need upgrades with electrodes stuck in your brain. But making sure that stuff works is the kind of thing I thought they should be working on, so I don't have to keep my head shaved and covered in conductive gel all the time.

  18. Tactile Feedback by Bonker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While I think this is wonderful for people who lack mobility or the use of their limbs, I for one, can't see this kind of tech gaining much ground for everyday use.

    One of the primary reasons for this is the sensation of tactile feed-back you get from using controllers that require physical interaction. You can feel the mouse scraping against your desk as you move it back and forth. You can feel the microswitches 'catching' when pushing the buttons. You can feel the keyboard keys 'click' into place as the latex compression switches underneath connect.

    Remember all the 'touch sensitive' microwaves that came out in the 80's and early 90s? Notice how all the buttons now at least provide some semblance of movement when you touch them, even if it's a small amount?

    Even if this tech becomes cheap and wide-spread, there's just no replacing the touch-sensation inherent with using mechanical input devices.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:Tactile Feedback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Remember all the 'touch sensitive' microwaves that came out in the 80's and early 90s? Notice how all the buttons now at least provide some semblance of movement when you touch them, even if it's a small amount?"

      That is a bad comparison. Those touch systems failed because it required the operator to look at their finger pressing the button and then look at the screen to make sure they pressed the write button. With feedback (a button moving when pressed) the operator was able to have confidence that a button was pressed.

      Now, by controlling things with your brainwaves, you don't have to look down at your hand for feedback - you're staring at the screen the entire time. Now I'm not saying that this stuff is sure to take off, but I'm not saying it won't either. I'm basically saying that you're analogy is waaay off base.

    2. Re:Tactile Feedback by FesterDaFelcher · · Score: 1

      Why cant they provide this feedback that you desperately need? How about a Beep, or visual feedback (cursor changes color). And as far as feedback goes, what about the mouse moving, isnt that feedback?

      --
      My user number is prime. Is yours?
    3. Re:Tactile Feedback by Flamesplash · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You are correct, which means that to be in any way feasible for the average user it needs to be quick and accurate. There's a HCI technique called Fitt's law which measures the amount of movement required to perform actions with an interface, the lower the number the better and you could conclude that high numbers lead to RSI et al.

      So something that removed the need to make many fine grained movement, which we are good at but maybe shouldn't do to the excess that computers require, would be a good thing

      --
      "Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
    4. Re:Tactile Feedback by Libor+Vanek · · Score: 1


      "Remember all the 'touch sensitive' microwaves that came out in the 80's and early 90s? Notice how all the buttons now at least provide some semblance of movement when you touch them, even if it's a small amount?"

      Like iPod? .-)

    5. Re:Tactile Feedback by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      I disagree, I've heard people say the same thing for type writers.
      People saying "Well, I don't hear a loud-ass click, how am I supposed to know it typed", or "Word doesn't increment the paper up every time I enter a newline, how am I supposed to know it's working?".

      This is a pavlov's dog kind of thing, well..maybe..that's what my "kneejerk" reaction is. People have learned to live with this feedback, and use it effectively, but that doesn't mean we can't work well without it. (Call bs on that if you feel it's appropriate, it was my first thought)

    6. Re:Tactile Feedback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I certainly would get a kick out of controlling something other then my limbs with my mind.
      I guess they'll just have to add the electrical shock feedback.

    7. Re:Tactile Feedback by ipjohnson · · Score: 1

      Ipod has audable feed back if desired.

    8. Re:Tactile Feedback by Libor+Vanek · · Score: 1

      But you can say that microwave has also some kind of feedback

    9. Re:Tactile Feedback by ninthwave · · Score: 1

      Ok after reading many comments on how to use this in the world of the abled bodied, and how it may not take off because of this or that I have to reply to your comment of not being sure to take off. This will take off. This will be in use by people who have been using joysticks hooked to their tongues, it will be used by people who cannot move below the neck, it will be used by those for whom the ability to interact with a device easily is impossible for them currently, can have that ability with this.

      And that use of the technology will improve it, and maybe if it improves to the point where those of us with more able bodies find a use for it find a good use for it, it may be used further.

      --
      I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
    10. Re:Tactile Feedback by timster · · Score: 1

      Note that Apple abandoned the touch-sensitive-only buttons on the 3rd-generation iPods and all the buttons are once again mechanical. The scroll wheel is still touch sensitive but you only use that when looking at the screen or adjusting the volume.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    11. Re:Tactile Feedback by ninthwave · · Score: 1

      semi bs

      Touch typing was taught when I was in school that you do not look at your output, just the input line you were typing. With no audible cue it was hard to learn touch typing. This is why I tend to get click enabled keyboards. I remember my Timex Sinclair with the bubble keyboards. I loved the surface texture and the idea of a bubble keyboard. But it forced you to stare at the output to make sure there was keypress. This slowed down the typing.

      So in general it is how you are taught to do things.

      But the side affect of not looking at the output when you type is you can type from notes or other material very quickly.

      So I think the physical and audio cues help in learning the skill quickly. The added learning mechanisms needed to increase the skill without those feedbacks would need to be balanced on how they change the amount of people who can gain those abilities versuses the difficulties in changing the learning methods for them to attain a high enough skill set with the device.

      But in general I agree with your argument.

      --
      I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
    12. Re:Tactile Feedback by fish+waffle · · Score: 1

      Even if this tech becomes cheap and wide-spread, there's just no replacing the touch-sensation inherent with using mechanical input devices.

      Just because your brain activity is forming the input doesn't mean a secondary device couldn't provide tactile feedback, e.g., a wrist band that tightens or loosens slightly as you move a cursor around, and/or briefly pokes you each time you select something...

    13. Re:Tactile Feedback by Zangief · · Score: 1

      After a lot of years playing Street Fighter Zero 2 (on arcade), I developed a sense of "tactile-feedback" with the characters on screen. I could say where the hits landed, how hard they were, in a tactile fashion, beyond the sight and sound of it, and that was unrelated to the switches on the arcade.

      My explanation? The brain is quite good on mapping. I guess that my brain just mapped all the information from the game, to something I could relate better, like tactile sensation.

      I think it would be easy to create interfaces that made the brain think that you are actually touching something, even if it is through light and sound. And, once people learned that, it would just be matter of repeating the design.
      --
      Wiki de Ciencia Ficcion y Fantasia

    14. Re:Tactile Feedback by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      You have a point, learning would be more difficult.
      Right now, we use 3 senses to input information:
      #1. Touch
      #2. Sight
      #3. Sound

      By taking touch and sound away, it may be more difficult to get the initial grasp. It seems to me, however, that touch and sound are the bottlenecks in this information transfer. Perhaps for the well trained mind, this will show a dramatic improvement in our brain to computer transfer.

    15. Re:Tactile Feedback by ninthwave · · Score: 1

      Hard to say because the mind uses those senses to define how it operates with reality.

      I have not seen a communication method faster than a good touch typist.

      I search on voice recognition I see software at 140-160 words per minute max. Touch typists go well past that. I would suspect that the neural paths created to manipulate this device would be just as responsive as the neural paths used in touched typing. The difficulty would be making the pattern recognition for words. If you can create pattern recognition on a word level, you would beat the data input rates of a touch typist.

      To do that this device would need to work on patterns of thought that do not translate to movement.

      I would disagree with you above list.

      We use one sense to input information, touch or speech. We use the other senses to verify information. I have worked with bind typists who have excellent input skills without sight, and the same for my deaf friends who can type without sound. But when you take the senses down to just one, I believe the task becomes harder to learn and use. I think that is just a case of verification, which you use heavily when learning a skill, less when you are more proficient in it.

      --
      I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
    16. Re:Tactile Feedback by azuretek · · Score: 1

      if I could use this to replace my mouse it would be great, I wouldn't have to leave my keyboard at any time! I rarely use my mouse anyway, so not using it at all would be great! I've allways wanted to control my computer with help with just my mind. If I can get something to do that then I'd be happy.

    17. Re:Tactile Feedback by DrKayBee · · Score: 1
      There are other ways of providing tactile feedback. If there exists such a device, one can envision a tactile feedback using an array of electrodes placed on the tongue. This device can fire patterned feedback to the tongue and provide that level of feedback.

      I have seen a presentation on this kind of device that was connected to a gyroscope on a person's head, which allowed the person to maintain better balance. Applications include prosthetic training, aircraft pilots and better snipers.

      --
      Humans have such a good sense of humor!
  19. Great by Rares+Marian · · Score: 0

    Now the New World Order doesn't need to implant anything, in fact they'll just wear these themselves to control you.

    Oh fine, I, for one, er... what was I just thinking about.

    --
    The message on the other side of this sig is false.
  20. v2.0 by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Noninvasive for how long? These peripherals never last long as "write-only".

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:v2.0 by denis-The-menace · · Score: 1

      Don't worry it's coming so that you can cum without any work. (wrist or hip wise)
      The porn industry will have an orgy with such a device, regardless of price.

      It will be refered to as the "Orgasmatron", just like in the movie.

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
  21. ZZZzzz... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    It's been on TV for a few days now, with reporters trying it on for size. Are we that far behind? Oh, almost forgot which site I was on.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  22. Extended use... by dj245 · · Score: 1

    ..of the thinking cap may cause severe scalp burns and cause all of your green Need and Desire bars to flatline and turn Red.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  23. this could boost use of animal labor in factories by Cryofan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Imagine a factory workforce of trained animals (pigs? Dogs?) using this sort of technology; they might be able to handle problems a bit too difficult for a an actual manufacturing robot to handle.

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
  24. I Just Can't Help But Wonder by LifesABeach · · Score: 2, Funny

    Could the users make the mouse 'click'?

    1. Re:I Just Can't Help But Wonder by sapped · · Score: 1

      Could the users make the mouse 'click'?

      Yes, but only on a Mac. They haven't perfected the right-click yet.

    2. Re:I Just Can't Help But Wonder by mink · · Score: 1

      I can just see it now. Slahsdot reviews "Clicking on the right side of the brain".

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  25. Fire the damn missiles oh yeah, think Russian.... by The+Bandit · · Score: 1

    They want to impress me, forget doing commands, find a way to retrieve memories and put them on thumb-drives for later recalling.

  26. Old Janx Spirit by pete-classic · · Score: 1

    Won't you pour me one more of that sinful Old Janx Spirit?

    Once again, DNA fortells our future.

    -Peter

  27. Get your tinfoil hat NOW! by imbaczek · · Score: 1

    Low prices! Go get 'em!

    1. Re:Get your tinfoil hat NOW! by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      Liar!
      I didn't find any tinfoil hats on that link. I found one that is a regular baseball cap, and it says "Tinfoil hat" on it.
      Reminds me of that simpsons episode where they're driving the survelliance van around, and "Ordinary Van" is painted on the side of the van.

  28. In use today for biofeedback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A friend of mine's child has a form of depression. She is in a program that uses brainwave-biofeedback to control a cursor on the screen.

    She's a child, so the cursor is part of a computer game. In order to "win" she has to relax or whatever in such a way that her brain waves are closer to the way they should be.

    From what the father tells me, her depression is improving.

    ------
    I'm posting anonymously only to protect my friend's privacy.

  29. Will this be work safe? by ShelbyCobra · · Score: 1

    I can see it now, me typing along on yet another lengthy report, and having my mind wander. The pointer fires up slashdot... Or worse! I think I would have to resist having one of these at work or any time I don't want those around me knowing what I am really thinking.

    --

    -ShelbyCobra

    Living life in the right side of the s-plane

  30. This news makes me confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man, this news makes me so confused. To make things worse, the thinking cap is on my head and I am connected to my computer with my confused state of mind.
    I hope it won't hurt Slahdot... I really really don't want to be invasive...
    Please advise!

  31. I need one by Lizard_King · · Score: 1

    I need one of these caps. Typing commands to this chick just ruins the moment.

    --
    "My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." - Jack Nicholson
  32. A cruder version of this is used to treat ADD by EbNo · · Score: 3, Informative

    My wife (working on her PhD in psychology) was part of a program where children diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder would play PlayStation games with a special controller in order to teach them how to strengthen their focusing skills.

    The controller was tied to a machine which monitored the level of a certain brainwave (I don't remember which) and if the levels fell outside predetermined parameters the controller would cease to function properly. This helped teach the kids how to maintain focus while performing a task that required constant attention. The 'brain interface' part looked like a baseball cap with lots of little sensors inside, no neurosurgery required.

    I tried it myself (I do not have ADD) and it was interesting how difficult it seemed at first to 'grasp' the required level, and how second hand it became after a few minutes of play (obviously the patients took quite a bit longer). It was a neat alternative / addition to drug therapy. I'd bet there is a lot of value in this more accurate control interface for future treatment.

  33. Tech Support Nightmare Solved by Frogking · · Score: 1

    When these things become mainstream, we can now have the user run a utility to see if they've got enough brainpower to be running a computer. Yay!

  34. It will never catch on or be useful by spidergoat2 · · Score: 1

    Until the porn or gaming industries figure out how to adapt it. I can hardly wait. Any ideas?

    1. Re:It will never catch on or be useful by quarkscat · · Score: 1

      Youbetcha!

      First, the "braincap" must be made to be
      bi-directional, with a low power RF link
      (like BlueTooth). The age old issue of
      processing power/bandwidth versus the
      power requirements will be a problem.
      Without the bi-directional communication,
      it would be a non-starter.

      Second, those "complex algorythms" mentioned
      in the BBC article will need to be improved
      for adaptive mapping to the brainwaves. Not
      having I/O access to the "pleasure" and "pain"
      centers of the brain, as well as to the 5
      senses, would be detrimental to widespread
      adoption of the technology.

      With the advent of VoIP with broadband access,
      just think of the possibilities for phone sex.

      Also, the current incarnation of the "braincap"
      leaves a lot to be desired (please forgive the
      pun). I envision a "next gen" version of this
      with at least 1024 sensors, perhaps arranged
      stylistically into a nice S&M leather skull-cap.

      Today's sci-fi is tomorrow's reality.

  35. Firefox!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now, all we need to do it make sure we all talk in Russian, and then we'll be able to fly planes!!!

  36. I forgot: it uses a cap, it's not invasive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's also been around at least a year.

  37. non-invasive? boo! by benson+hedges · · Score: 2, Informative

    where's the fun in controlling my computer via brain waves or thought patterns if i don't get to stick a fiber cable into my head? i want a datajack, for dodger's sake!

    --
    Karma : Soylent Green (Mostly due to eating junk food and mocking religion)
  38. Couldn't this be a bad thing? by which+way+is+up · · Score: 2, Funny

    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?"

    And you think... "\rm -r *"

    DOH!

    1. Re:Couldn't this be a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what exacly stops you from typing rm -rf / when you're thinking about it? Same concept here...

    2. Re:Couldn't this be a bad thing? by FreshnFurter · · Score: 1

      It will also make it easy to finally generate virusses (viri?) that get through pine. Just send e-mail with the commands. The reader acts as a batch command. 1) open your webbanking site 2) transfer all your money to account n0 555 55555 55 (Swiss bank of course) 3) Delete all cache memory 4) Get Rich This is not a sig, wait a minute it is!

  39. This isn't new by Illserve · · Score: 1

    People have been using brain waves recorded from the scalp to control interfaces for many years now, it's just always been a bit clumsy (and judging from the trajectory pictures in this article, this one is also...)

    Maybe it's an incremental improvement on the technology, and that's great, but don't sell it as something completely new.

    1. Re:This isn't new by Illserve · · Score: 1

      People have been using brain waves recorded from the scalp to control interfaces for many years now, it's just always been a bit clumsy (and judging from the trajectory pictures in this article, this one is also...)

      Maybe it's an incremental improvement on the technology, and that's great, but don't sell it as something completely new.


      Sorry to reply to myself, but I found this in the article:

      "It is not the first time researchers have had this sort of success in brain-control experiments. "

      I know it's asking alot for the readers and editors to RTFA... but can the *submitter* at least read it?

  40. So when hackers write a virus for this by spidergoat2 · · Score: 1

    Will you get sick?

    1. Re:So when hackers write a virus for this by duckpoopy · · Score: 1

      This is an input device. Does a virus make your keyboard sick?

      --
      word.
    2. Re:So when hackers write a virus for this by Blitzenn · · Score: 1

      I had a virus once that remapped my keyboard. It was totally screwwed up. I think they should call the first 'thinking cap' virus 'Brain Freeze'

    3. Re:So when hackers write a virus for this by f(Root) · · Score: 1

      If a virus was to remap the input from your brain, then as your brain is an intelligent device, as apposed to a keyboard, it should be able to adapt. This means that you'd have to 'learn' to cope with the virus in the most literal sense, until of course it was removed (the virus, not the brain).

      --
      Programmers never get old.. They just can't C as well.
  41. The problem with this approach by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 1

    "I will not look at lemonparty, I will not look at lemonparty...AAARGH! MY EYES!!!!"

    --
    When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
    1. Re:The problem with this approach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You bastard. That's worse than goatse. Or maybe I'm just used to goatse now....

      Either way, BAD ZOG! BAD!

  42. One step closer... by DrJAKing · · Score: 1

    to the day when I can dispense with this puny human body. And stop getting colds.

  43. Not the first, second or third by StateOfTheUnion · · Score: 2, Interesting
    This is not the first, second or third . . . time that someone has done this . . . nor is it the first, second, or third time that its been posted on /.

    In fact, the article says: It is not the first time researchers have had this sort of success in brain-control experiments.

    So even the original cited article claims that this is not new . . . I fail to understand why such "repeats" of similar "discoveries" seem to be so "newsworthy"

    I remember playing with a device that connected to electrodes that one connected to the head and measured some level of brain activity when I was in high school. This connected to a PC which would draw a virtual strip chart of measured activity. We would move the stripchart pen with our mind . . . isn't this really quite similar? . . .

    1. Re:Not the first, second or third by jstave · · Score: 1

      That must be why when I posted the exact same story yesterday, it was rejected.

    2. Re:Not the first, second or third by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      If I understand correctly, the researchers have developed a new adaptive algorithm to use to process brain waves, which has much better performance. In fact, this is the first time that non-invasive techniques have been able to perform at the same level as invasive techniques, actually outperforming in some cases.

    3. Re:Not the first, second or third by Suidae · · Score: 1

      Not only is it not the first time, there are even homebrew, opensource versions.

      Try the OpenEEG Project. You can even partial or complete hardware from Olimex, a circuit board manufacturer.

      I'm waiting for someone to write a Winamp or WMP plugin that takes input from an OpenEEG feed :)

  44. Re:Fire the damn missiles oh yeah, think Russian.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't there a (crappy) movie about this? People would do things like have sex or rob banks with the special recording cap on it, that would later be put on disks and distributed/sold.

  45. The Firefox plugin! by Tackhead · · Score: 2, Funny
    > The end of left handed surfing!

    Well, as soon as someone writes the Firefox plugin.

    Baranovich: "You must think... of Russians!"
    Andropov: "Are you enjoyink your ride, Mister Gant? Do you like our new toy?" Gant: "Boy, is this a machine!"

    1. Re:The Firefox plugin! by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 0
      Baranovich: "You must think... of Russians!"
      In Korea only .... must ... resist ... temptation ... old people gnnnn ... YOU!
      [passes out & collapses, theatrically]
      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
  46. Interspecies Communication? by fygment · · Score: 1

    It seems some of the potentially really clever species like whales, dolphins, and elephants, really aren't equipped for communications with humans e.g., voice, American sign language, point-and-click. Maybe with this interface and computers, we can establish more successful forms of communication with species that see the world much more differently than us ... unlike say chimps and gorillas which seem so like us that it's depressing ... two both species actually.

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
    1. Re:Interspecies Communication? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you communicate with other species using a mouse with your hand? All this device does is control a cursor. It is not magic...

    2. Re:Interspecies Communication? by fygment · · Score: 1

      *sigh* Get informed:

      http://www.beanblossom.in.us/larryy/KokoChapter. ht ml

      The idea is _they_ can communicate with us, with the computer providing a common medium when body language, appendage gestures, vocal frequencies, etc. are mutually incomprehensible.

      At the moment, this device only controls a cursor. The computer can provide mutually understood symbols and the cursor movement can be controlled even by something without opposable thumbs, fingers, etc. But then what of the future? Take the same idea and perhaps allow the composition of imagery. Thus you might have a "paint me a picture" form of communication. What would that reveal? In short, don't stop with the current baby steps. Expand, extrapolate. Where could this go?

      --
      "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  47. I'll take a Daishi... by F_SMASH · · Score: 1

    Partner this with a Partner Robot and some LRMs and it'll be friggin Mech War I. SWEET!

    1. Re:I'll take a Daishi... by F_SMASH · · Score: 1

      WTF is a Daishi? Check it out here.

  48. That with First Person Shooter! by LabRat404 · · Score: 0

    I have the sudden urge to use that technology in something like Counter-Strike or Quake 3. sniping and railing would be ridiculously easy...I want it! when will NewEgg have one of these helmet-mouse... mouse-cap...thingies? :-D

    err...I wonder what the DPI is on one of those things compared to a mouse.

    --
    1001100 1100101 1100001 1110110 1100101 1001101 1111001 1000010 1101001 1110100 1110011 1000001 1101100 1101111 110111
  49. art by Legato895 · · Score: 1

    what scares me as an artist is that rapidly an era is approaching where to be an artist, you no longer need to master a stylus... when everybody becomes an artist and simply thinks about something to make it, how will this effect the world? stuff like this scares the hell out of me.

    1. Re:art by trongey · · Score: 1

      If you really think that mastery of certain skills is what makes you an artist then you should already be worried about your career.

      I don't think Monet ever got the hang of using a stylus.

      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    2. Re:art by Legato895 · · Score: 1

      everybody is an artist inside, we can all think up wonderful things, its the process of getting it from your head to the paper that makes you the artist

    3. Re:art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it will allow those with great ideas that lack hand eye coordination to create as well. just because it's deemed "easier" doesn't mean that it's not art. people said the same things(and still are) when people began to create art with computers. it doesn't have to be difficult to be art.

  50. Directional Bias? by 14erCleaner · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does it move left when you think of Kerry, and right when you think of Bush?

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
    1. Re:Directional Bias? by iggymanz · · Score: 5, Funny

      the real question is, if put on Bush, would it move at all?

    2. Re:Directional Bias? by Blitzenn · · Score: 1

      Your tag line made me think. If we eventually could share our thoughts with each other with these kind of devices, would that be considered a 'peer to peer' network? If you shared music with your friend via the 'thinking cap' would you be violating copyright? Would RIAA come after you?!

    3. Re:Directional Bias? by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1
      That reminds me of a comment somebody made about DRM-in-everything schemes: would your cellphone stop working if music was playing in the background. Likewise, would your mouse stop moving if you had a copyrighted song stuck in your head? The horror, the horror...

      I like the "peer-to-peer" idea. That sounds worth pursuing. As always, the porn industry would lead the way.

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    4. Re:Directional Bias? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Physicists call that the Bushian motion.

    5. Re:Directional Bias? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the tests show that it moves right when you think of either of them; it's just a bit easier to overshoot your mark when thinking of Bush.

    6. Re:Directional Bias? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but when put on Kerry, it produces a sine waveform.

    7. Re:Directional Bias? by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      Only if you haven't been infected by the Diebold 2.0.0.4 virus, in which case it would move right regardless of who you thought of, and would increase the cursor movement count.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    8. Re:Directional Bias? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think Kerry is left, you really need to learn what left really is.

  51. Re:Can't resist temptation.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you accept failure?

  52. Re:A cruder version of this is used to treat ADD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for crying out loud they need omega 3 not stupid Playstation controllers

  53. Oh, come on! Let's cut to the chase... by i41Overlord · · Score: 1

    The REAL goal is not to control computers with people's brains, it is to control people's brains with computers.

    1. Re:Oh, come on! Let's cut to the chase... by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      /me adds second layer of tinfoil to hat, and grounds it

    2. Re:Oh, come on! Let's cut to the chase... by Maljin+Jolt · · Score: 1

      to control people's brains with computers.

      But that's already been implemented before. See:
      www.slashdot.org

      --
      There you are, staring at me again.
    3. Re:Oh, come on! Let's cut to the chase... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real goal is to free up both hands while surfing pr0n!!! Wait, the cursor would be all over the place...

  54. Strange Days by D3 · · Score: 1

    Hmmm... now we just need it to put images into our heads and it will be like the movie Strange Days. Makes pr0n much more interesting. Would also make it so you could record every second of life and have instant recall of everything.

    --
    Do really dense people warp space more than others?
  55. Brain and Brain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what is BRAIN?

  56. wouldn't that require "hard" thinking? by Pflipp · · Score: 1

    With devices that record brainwaves through from a skull thickness' distance, I reckon the recordings cannot be very detailed.

    As such, I think it would require a relatively large amount of brain to emit these signals, and it would require yet another amount of surrounding brain to be practically dead -- as not to interfere with the signal. (I guess it's common knowledge that certain thoughts and feelings interfere within the brain because of their close positions. That is, I'm not a researcher, but I've heard of this and presume it's true.)

    So I'm not sure how harmless it is to train your brain to move that pointer.

    Nevertheless, I've found myself quite numb just using a mouse... Nope, what I want is a tablet the size of a basketball field and a jumping cushion as a keyboard. We need to move more to fight RSI, not less!

    --
    "We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
  57. odd UI design for thought control by stubear · · Score: 1

    If one can think and have their thoughts converted to actions, why have a mouse cursor? Why not just think "click the OK button" or "open $application"? It's interesting that they were able to convert thought to commands used to control a computer but why not think about the GUI along side the SUI (Solid User Interface)?

    1. Re:odd UI design for thought control by pragma_x · · Score: 1

      As much as I would like to see the same thing in such an interface, its really a matter of KISS engineering.

      You only need a minimum of 5 inputs to move a mouse: up, down, left, right, button. The other concepts you describe are far more abstract, so you'd need to somehow decode more impulses from the brainwaves.

      Even if you were to treat such a thing like a binary interface, you'd only have 3,4 or 5 bits to work with. This could be an improvement, provided that the user's brain can be trained to project impulses in combination like that.

  58. Spam and Viruses by Decessus · · Score: 1

    Could you imagine spam and viruses being uploaded into your brain. You would never be able to get the image out of your head of a pill that enlarges your breasts. Scary.

  59. day late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hell, I saw this on a report on the frickin' Today Show yesterday morning!

    yesterday's news for nerds. stuff that mattered.

  60. shaved heads? by Danathar · · Score: 1

    Does this mean that everybody will have to shave their heads in order to wear the skullcap?

    I mean...hey..if everybody does it then it would'nt be that strange...

    I'd imagine the world would look somewhat like THX1138!

  61. Atari beat them to the punch... by ydkcookie · · Score: 1

    C'mon... Mindlink anyone?

  62. Question for an expert by Free_Trial_Thinking · · Score: 1


    I don't know much about the technology they used. I am just curious:

    Is there any chance this could be a DIY project to build one of these (under 5K) ?

    I think this could be a revolutionary interface. Anyone interested in discussing going into business with these things?

    And to all those thinking this isn't a revolutionary interface, I have always believed that people are often quick to dimiss new iventions as not useful, and it's only when they are shown how it's useful that they start using it. Or more generally, you can't know how useful it is until you try it.

  63. More Evidence? by mfh · · Score: 1

    Is this discovery more evidence of how the pseudoscience of The Matrix trilogy was lacking? Perhaps. Anyway, I posted this story yesterday with the headline "A New Kind of Tinfoil Hat?" and yes, it was rejected! *gish*

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:More Evidence? by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Well thats OK it was already accepted twice last week.

      Trupe!

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  64. We need brain-implants by Gathers · · Score: 1

    This non-invasive brain-technology is no good.. We need brain implants, without them we will never master time traveling!
    Coincidentially, I am posting this from the year 2257.

  65. Thoughtcrime? by ajlitt · · Score: 1

    Gives a new meaning to the concept of thoughtcrime. On the other hand, biofeedback from TV viewers through some logging device (even if anonymizing as TiVo Inc claims) is an ad agency's wet dream.

  66. Jedi Knight or Jedi academy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most likely it will be very hard controlling a fps with this hat completly, but it would be fun if u could map atleast a few buttons in a fps. Star Wars Jedi knight series would be über cool if you would be able to do push, pull & lightning(forces) with your mind :)

  67. woohoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  68. Like the first episode of the original Star Trek by lintmint · · Score: 2, Informative

    I can't remember the original captains name but he was a quadrapalegic and could control 3 lights with using only his mind for communication. Life imitates art

  69. Well... by Blue-Footed+Boobie · · Score: 1
    Wired Magazine had an interesting article about this type of tech a long time ago.

    The really interesting part of the article was the "Basement Nerual Hackers" section (although, I think the author was taken for a ride by us geeks):

    -----------Article Follows------------

    Basement Neurohackers

    Perhaps more within the realm of science fiction than science fact, "neurohackers" are the new do-it-yourself brain tinkerers who have decided to take matters into their own heads. "There is quite an underground of neurohackers beaming just about every type of field imaginable into their heads to stimulate certain neurological structures (usually the pleasure centers )," a neurohacker wrote to me via e-mail. Several of these basement experimenters were willing to talk.

    Meet Zorn. I got his name (which has been changed) from another neurohacker who told me a wild tale about a device that Zorn had recently built. "It's got an electrode ring situated over the pleasure centers of the brain. I know someone who tried it and he said it was like having a continuous orgasm." My God, you mean this guy's invented the Orgasmatron ? I immediately called Zorn, but at the suggestion of the other hacker, I only talk to him generally about basement brain tech.

    Zorn's a psychologist by trade and a weekend electronics hobbyist. He tells me about several sound and vision devices (brain toys) he's built, similar to those now commercially available. He seems entirely sane; he's full of cautions. When I tell him about some of the other neurohacks I've heard about, he expresses deep concern. "If these people are going to mess with neuroelectric or neuromagnetic stimulation, they should build in more safety devices. There's a tremendous potential for harm: brain damage." When I ask him what he's been doing recently, he becomes quiet. "Well, it's something I'd rather not talk about. It's a device I built that could very easily be abused." (Hmmm... My mind flashes with perverse images of twitching orgasmo-junkies permanently jacked into the Zorn Device.)

    "Why would it be abused?" I ask.

    "I really can't say anything more about it. It would be a disaster if it got out into the world." Definitely an Orgasmatron...or perhaps just another piece of cybernetic mythology.

    David Cole of the non-profit group AquaThought is another independent researcher willing to explore the inside of his own cranium. Over the years, he's been working on several schemes to transfer EEG patterns from one person's brain to another. The patterns of recorded brain waves from the source subject are amplified many thousands of times and then transferred to a target subject (in this case, Cole himself). The first tests on this device, dubbed the Montage Amplifier, were done using conventional EEG electrodes placed on the scalp. The lab notes from one of the first sessions with the Amplifier report that the target (Cole) experienced visual effects, including a "hot spot" in the very location where the source subject's eyes were being illuminated with a flashlight. Cole experienced a general state of "nervousness, alarm, agitation, and flushed face" during the procedure. The results of these initial experiments made Cole skittish about attempting others using electrical stimulation. He has since done several sessions using deep magnetic stimulation via mounted solenoids built from conventional iron nails wrapped with 22-gauge wire. "The results are not as dramatic, but they are consistent enough to warrant more study," he says.

    Part of the danger of monkeying with one's brain, especially with little or no knowledge of neuroscience, is that most individuals do not have access to the sophisticated testing and feedback devices that are available to legitimate researchers. Through devices like the Mindset, a "desktop EEG," Cole and other researchers hope to change that (see Going Mental, page 106). "It is imperative that neuroscience research is not limited to large organizations with big budgets," insists Cole. The furthe

    --
    DAMN YOU OCTODOG! DAMN YOU TO HELL!
  70. Similar stuff at WorldExpo 2000 by grungeman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At the WorldExpo 2000 in Hannover/Germany, the Swedish booth showed something similar. Two contestants were wearing tin foil hats that measured their brain activity. The higher the brain activity, the lower the score, so the goal was to be more relaxed than the opponent.

    The great thing was that the most ambitious people had no chance, because their brain was too active in wanting the victory. Pretty cool, watching two guys relaxing the hell out of each other.

    --

    Signature deleted by lameness filter.
    1. Re:Similar stuff at WorldExpo 2000 by ehiris · · Score: 1

      You could just watch Golf. The less you think, the better you shoot.

    2. Re:Similar stuff at WorldExpo 2000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could just watch Golf. The less you think, the better you shoot

      I thought about your statement and I was unconcious for 5 hours

    3. Re:Similar stuff at WorldExpo 2000 by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      So, is this how the teamsters practice?

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  71. Argh! by REggert · · Score: 1

    I submitted the exact same story yesterday, but from a different source, and it was rejected. :-(

    --

    cp /dev/zero ~/signature.txt

  72. Old news... by rfischer · · Score: 1

    This type of work has been around for at least ten years.
    ...A few laboratories started developing these
    so-called brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) in
    the 1980s and have been refining them since
    then (Science, 29 October 1999, p. 888)...


    From : http://www.nicolelislab.net/NLNet/Load/Papers/Tapp ingtheMind.pdf

  73. invasive vs. non-invasive by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

    Unlike some previous efforts, this one doesn't require anything to be implanted in your brain.

    Yes, but it's not in colour. /monty python reference

  74. MRML by salvorHardin · · Score: 1

    Suddenly I find myself wondering if MRML is just a joke, or wether the author was truly ahead of his time...

  75. impressive by meatspray · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So they have calculations to read the impulses and move a cursor in the desired direction. Too bad the article is a little light on details. Wonder how long before they're able to decode simple thoughts, perhaps letters or even words. It's understandably a pretty long jump.

    If they could pick up the Medulla Oblongata's output and pass it along to electrodes the diaphram of a tetrapalegic, or from motor control to their arms to allow gross movement.

    Imagine typing at 400 words per minute. Of course this tech might suffer from the same class of problems as speech recognition but there's certainly hope.

    Would be interesting to be around to see the day that they fully understand what comes out and how to put stuff in to a brain. Those will be exciting. (and potentially dangerous times)

    1. Re:impressive by Blitzenn · · Score: 1

      It is bound to happen sooner or later. The translation of the 'thought' word. (or would that be 'Thunk'). The real problem is that each person's brian is wired individually and uniquely. Each person would have to 'learn' how to converse with the interface. Some would not be able to do this at all as their brains do not function in a manner that is compatable. I would offer autisitic individuals as an extreme example. Now there would be a relly cool project to build a device that WAS compatable with a savant level autistic person. Lawnmower man all over again!

    2. Re:impressive by meatspray · · Score: 1

      Yeah it seems to draw parallels to common Speech recognition problems. I could see the training moving at a much faster pace though. They could probably flash up pictures of things and read your reactions.

      Thoughts or words might be a chore, but I'm certain they'll be able to eventually tell your mood from a distance using this idea. Just imagine the targeted ads: A guy walks through the mall with his girl, on the wall two displays light up. One with a wedding ring and the other with a pack of condoms.

  76. It works.. (I think, therefore I "CPU" multitask) by stkpogo · · Score: 0

    I posted this story to /. yesterday,
    then I used my new 'thinking cap',
    to have /. reject it.
    Proof it works-)
    ~~you are under someones mind control~~

  77. reverse-racial memory by 10000000000000000000 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This gets me thinking of reverse-racial-memory - remember Arthur C Clarke's Childhoods end? Where people from the past "remember" events from the future. why not? after all, we only percive time as moving in one direction - it doesn't make a lot of sense that the highest dimension of time (classic Einstein - let's leave the other 7 out of this for now) is limited to the kind of directionality as the first.
    For ages people have imagined psycic abilities and wizards and the like.
    well, I think it is no coincidence that in this modern day we have computer "wizards" who use strange languages to concoct magical creations. Even the tomes which they use look like magical texts - big bulky and indecipherable to the uninitiated.
    then this skull cap (a wizards hat?). doesn't it just seem right? controlling a computer with mere though? I know every one of us has at one time just wanted to say "computer! wikipedia precipitation!" and have the computer - our daemon - respond immideiately.
    Telekenisis would simply be a memory of generations to come who work inside virtual worlds where they need not physically manipulate objects, but use mere thought.
    if this is true, perhaps one day, in the distant distant future, what has sprung from this mortal coil of mankind will ressurect us and this is the heaven and afterlife so vehemently taught and imagined for so long.
    after all, if 2 million years from now they get the technology to bring us all back, and if they are anything like your average consciable geek they will probably say, "well, it seems like a nice idea - let's bring everyone back why no?"
    or maybe not.

    1. Re:reverse-racial memory by spaceman375 · · Score: 1

      Spider Robinson has witten a book (okay, 2 or 3 books) with this idea in mind. They're pretty good. Read "Lifehouse" first, then "Deathkiller" if you want the details.

      --
      On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
    2. Re:reverse-racial memory by narcc · · Score: 1

      Now for something On Topic:

      This gets me thinking of reverse-racial-memory - remember Arthur C Clarke's Childhoods end?

      A better reference would be Arthur C Clarke's 3001: Final Odyssey -- Where Floyd is fitted with a "brain cap".

      What the hell does your "Childhoods End" analogy have to do with the article? I hope the overlords don't read this!

    3. Re:reverse-racial memory by 10000000000000000000 · · Score: 1


      What the hell does your "Childhoods End" analogy have to do with the article?


      hehe... hell. I GET IT! ;)

      It was just an observation really - in actuality I am most wowed by all the technical possibilities of this control device, of course.

      but as I was thinking I then realized that with this amazing technology people will be able to actually control things with just thoughts - and that we will have virtual worlds (already have some nascent ones now) in which a mere though could conjure up anything.

      and I realized that this has been a dream of mankind since the beginning of time.

      and then I got to thinking about how good we are at making our impossible dreams come true which led me to contemplate the fact that in the aforementioned book it was not a dream of humanity's that came true, but one of their nightmares.

      *light spoiler warning*

      I think the exact term "reverse racial memory" was not used in the book, but it was speculated at some part that perhaps humanity had stored the image of, literally, the red devil (overlords) in their subconscious.

      *end spoiler*

      After all, I think we only percive time in the way it is.

      I think it is just like the other dimensions. It's not limited to just forward (or backward). Things can be moved in many different directions.

      of course, it's not even really a seperate dimension, right? after all, it's not like in the real world we can just take time away - or the second dimension for that matter.

      I think alot :)
      I often also favor hypotheses over theories as they allow for more speculation - and I like spectacular things ;)

  78. Computer Technology, Brainwashing, and China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    This technology is disturbing because it could be used to brainwash or torture people. Transforming brainwaves into electrical signals is a step away from transforming electrical signals into brainwaves.

    Imagine "downloading" the thoughts of a Chinese torturer into the brain of a Tibetan nun. In short, we have brainwashing and zombies.

    Scary stuff.

    1. Re:Computer Technology, Brainwashing, and China by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 0
      Transforming brainwaves into electrical signals is a step away from transforming electrical signals into brainwaves.
      I'm working on a way to generate heat by making the mercury in a thermometer expand. That's when I've finished speaking into the headphones on my CD player and making a recording.
      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
    2. Re:Computer Technology, Brainwashing, and China by FLEB · · Score: 2, Informative

      Although, technically, you *can* speak into headphones (hooked into a mic jack) to make a recording.

      --
      Information wants to be free.
      Entertainment wants to be paid.
      You just want to be cheap.
    3. Re:Computer Technology, Brainwashing, and China by Jazu · · Score: 1

      Think of it as a hash of your brainwaves. No 64 elctrodes could record the entirety of the activity in your brain, or anywhere near enough of it to feed it back from the data. Any conceivable neuro-torture would be a very vauge mood alteration thing.

      --
      My joke got modded as Insightful and my insight got modded as Funny.
    4. Re:Computer Technology, Brainwashing, and China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Although, technically, you *can* speak into headphones (hooked into a mic jack) to make a recording.
      He said a CD (CD != CDR) in a CD CD player (player != recorder), you mongoloid. Whoever modded you insightful rims dogs.
  79. Re:A cruder version of this is used to treat ADD by spaceman375 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This obviates implications that go far beyond the simple control of gadgets. Helping to correct ADD with this approach illustrates the effect that the brain doesn't just adapt; it actually changes its physical structure as it learns this new behavior. Our brains have specialized uses for specific areas and groups of cells. What happens to someone who uses one of these frequently, with one or more of the electrodes placed over a spot that is involved in some unrelated function? How will it change you when you grow connections from voluntary motor functions right into your pituitary gland? You may inadvertently throw 50 or more hormone and endocrine systems WAY out of whack. OTOH, IF the designers of the sensor cap pay attention to the impact long term use will have, high resolution biofeedback tied to the reward system of a game can be powerful. It may be possible to enhance neural growth in valuable ways. When an adult is learning a new language, there is a point when they switch from mentally translating to/from a language they know to actually thinking in the new language. This is a discernible change in which sections of the brain are involved before and after this point of fluency has been attained. This sensor cap could help facilitate that change. Personally, I'd like it to teach me to hold the same brain patterns as a meditating Zen master. The best ones always look so happy.

    --
    On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
  80. I wouldn't worry... by cr0sh · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    As someone who only wished he were an artist, as well as someone who has seen what real artists are capable of (via wandering the playa at Burning Man), I don't think you need to worry.

    True artists are capable of thinking and bringing to life creations that are utterly astounding in scope, beauty, breadth and ultimately, thought. Their works make you stop, and stare, and wonder, dream and imagine. Sometimes, as in the case of David Best's "Temple of Stars" (Quicktime VR), words and pictures cannot even begin to do justice for the work - you have to have been there to truely appreciate it (I walked across it at night, a truely amazing experience). This is but one very recent example of art that is breathtaking to behold...

    There is much art of such beauty out there created by artists. This art can be found everywhere, from the truely large, to the intricately small and delicate. I cannot fathom how these people are able to think about, let alone bring to reality, their visions. Artists are truely on another level of thought, and through their works, one at minimum hopes to be able to touch those thoughts, and at best, learn or be imparted upon some modicum of wisdom to be able to think in kind.

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  81. The Holy Grail of Computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever since the dawn of the Computer Age, we've been in search of that special assembly language OP code:

    RPM

    Which stands for Read Programmers' Mind (and no, it has nothing to do with the RedHat Package Manager, thank you). It sounds like we may have finally achieved this!

    But alas, now that we're here, I do hope that we won't be disapointed. For what no one has considered is: What if we could read a programmers mind, and nothing was there?

    Hmmm.

  82. also an artist... by MenTaLguY · · Score: 1

    ...and I don't see what the big deal is. The biggest part of being an artist is in composition, not execution.

    Even if you completely remove the need for fiddly hand skills, everyone isn't going to magically get good taste in color, composition, use of negative space, or even necessarily be able to think of visual things in detail without the natural iconic abstractions we artists have to train ourselves to avoid, lest a realistically shaded model turn into a stick figure.

    Assuming a magic "mental image to picture" device ever came to exist, I don't think it would change the overall quality of people as artists much. Volume of output, maybe, but not quality.

    Perhaps even less quality, as most people probably wouldn't spend much time editing once the picture was "in the machine".

    In fact, it would be a lot like how email and instant messaging made everyone a writer.

    Hmm. That IS a bit scary...

    --

    DNA just wants to be free...
  83. I know these guys by noser · · Score: 4, Informative

    The work is pretty neat. They put a sock thing on your head and measure your brainwaves. Apparantly not everyone can be trained to use the system. There was a long screening process where they looked for people with brain patterns that they could read. I signed up for the screening but I was never called; I guess they got all the volunteers they needed. My friend went in for the screening; they make you wear the reader thing on your head while you concentrate on a dot moving through a very simple maze. Evenutally you get to try to control the dot; that's as far as my friend reached. I know that eventually they move you up to an actual "Armitron" toy that they wired up to the monitors. It is very cool research.

    This stuff isn't geared to replacing your keyboard and mouse. The hook is the promise of developing the technology for better artificial limbs; but think about it. If a disabled person can control their own artificial arm with brainwaves; why not a big crane? Why not a crane on a battleship or out in orbit?

    1. Re:I know these guys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      next home improvement project - watch xmen and learn how to build large spherical room where i can control everybody in the world.

  84. ObHomer by sharkey · · Score: 1
    Saw the headline and thought "Non-Invasive Brain Control Through Computers".

    Don't worry, head. The computer will do our thinking now.

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  85. Feh. Lossy both ways. by Mal-2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Getting electrical signals to OR from the brain through an intact skull is going to be a lossy process. In the case of getting signals out, this is apparently manageable. But as for getting signals IN, it's not going to work -- this way at least. This doesn't rule out some much more precise (and much more advanced) tech in the future, but this isn't going to work for making zombies.

    Besides, is drilling a hole in the head of your zombie really THAT bad?

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    1. Re:Feh. Lossy both ways. by XoloX · · Score: 0
      That's the best sig I've seen so far. Agreed. Couldn't have said it better
      ;)
      .
    2. Re:Feh. Lossy both ways. by f(Root) · · Score: 1

      Agreed. The only real way to get signals INTO the brain would be via someform of direct connection. The brain relies primarily on electrical impulses, so technically it should be possible.. Ironically to the subject, that's quite thought provoking..

      --
      Programmers never get old.. They just can't C as well.
    3. Re:Feh. Lossy both ways. by Slime-dogg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My eyes serve well enough as a signal interface, thank you very much.

      --
      You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
    4. Re:Feh. Lossy both ways. by MegaHyster · · Score: 1
      going to be a lossy process

      So we should use an OGG based format for better quality?

      --
      All good things...
  86. hrmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not too sure about this. I don't believe hand-eye coordination is the only issue between you and success in a FPS, although it is the first skill you must master and will continue to develop during play.

    The other big deciding factors which won't be removed by removing your mouse are reaction time or twitch response, *quick* smart decision making, and creativity. You might be able to make the smartest and most logical decision for the given situation, but if you make it after you're dead it didn't do you much good or even if you did it before death but it was too easy to predict it won't do you much good either.

    On top of this, learning to use these mind controlled devices to control your game seems just as difficult, if not more difficult, than using a mouse. There will be just as much of a difference between those who have mastered that skill and taken the time (hours/days/months) to refine it as there is between people now who play once in a while then blame their loss on things beyond their control (like lag or eye-hand coordination) and those who play every day (even with a shitty service provider).

  87. Commercialize It! NOW! by puzzled · · Score: 2, Interesting



    This looks like it isn't very complex nor very expensive - 64 electrical sensors in a cap and a PCI card with 64 inputs for A to D conversion- looks like less than $500 in volume, perhaps only $200.

    You can do infinite numbers of fun things, first one that comes to mind is a brain wave visualization plugin for XMMS.

    Lets hope someone picks this up and runs with it.

    --
    I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
    1. Re:Commercialize It! NOW! by INetEngineer · · Score: 1

      I submitted a request to Microsoft for a .NET Framework API library to this so-called "brain reading cap". They haven't gotten back to me.

      --
      --I smoked my sig.
  88. Big Deal by Jesus+2.0 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Besides spamming, this self-described school has, as another reader points out, "awarded an MBA to a cat owned by an undercover Pennsylvania deputy attorney general."

    So that makes the school somehow suspect? I mean, come on, Harvard is one of the most respected schools out there, and it awarded an MBA to George Bush.

  89. I'm blind but now I can see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The brain leaves no mass unused in "The astonishing hypothosys" (misspl) they point out the fact that as a blind child matures the portion of the brain that is dedicated to focusing on an object within a field of vision are instead utilized to perform a simmilar function for hearing. So if a person were blind for any length of time restoring 'sight input' whether through eye surgery or a 'brain cap' would likely not return them to any sort of functional sight.

  90. Two users is one too many by mdudzik · · Score: 1

    "this cap allowed two users to control a cursor ..." One user, one cursor is my motto. Or is this like a wireless Ouija board? Ok, I'll go RTFA.

  91. This applies to people in Comas by INetEngineer · · Score: 1

    Could we finally have an answer to discovering if people in comas really can hear you and control the thoughts of their brain?

    Perhaps this has already been done and I'm out of the loop on this one...

    So many applications for use, so little brain activity!

    --
    --I smoked my sig.
    1. Re:This applies to people in Comas by Blitzenn · · Score: 2, Funny

      But, .. You are in a coma and this is all a simulation. We have been testing on you for several years now. Does it not seem real to you? The slashdot forum is the only way we have found so far to communicate with you.
      Can you hear us?
      Hello!?

      (try to keep those dirty thoughts to yourself from now on, you really embarrased your mother last time she was here to visit you.)

  92. Mental cantenna by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    Think about it, electrical fields fall of at the square of the distance. This means that at normal conversational distances the already faint signals are going to be essentially undetectable.

    This is true for signals radiated in all directions, but why assume this is the case? You don't get a mile out of WiFi with a rubber ducky antenna. So long as it can be isolated from noise, intelligible data can be had from a very weak signal, and it's easier to isolate a highly directional signal. If ESP does exist and is transmitted by electromagnetic energy, that still doesn't mean it's sent everywhere. "Beaming" it would provide efficiency, clarity, and to a limited extent, security.

    Not that I'm saying ESP has anything to do with sharks with fricking laser beams on their heads or anything...

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  93. Something to consider by suso · · Score: 1

    Usually with anything new there is a time frame where it is tested and we can make sure that its use is predictable.

    But with this, as far as I know, the human brain has never been used to control anything besides its own body. So I would think that it will take a long time for this kind of technology to be tested enough and accepted as something that works and is well understood.

  94. Open Source It! NOW! by puzzled · · Score: 1


    Such toys already exist, but I don't see any FOSS stuff. Someone needs to produce EEG stuffs, interface card, and make the software free so we can all play.

    http://www.bio-medical.com/results.cfm?inventory __ igeneric=eeg

    --
    I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
    1. Re:Open Source It! NOW! by FleaPlus · · Score: 2, Informative
  95. Why does it have to be tactile? by aug24 · · Score: 1

    My microwave beeps. My phone vibrates when I get the ball in the hole on minigolf. No reason that you couldn't have some - any (modifiable) - feedback. Hell, you could even make it visible by changing the appearance of whatever it is you are interfacing with/to.

    J.

    --
    You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
  96. Good for music? by p0 · · Score: 1

    Hmm, I am waiting for the day these things would hook up with some music making software. To play the music in your head, and having it recorded.

    --
    This is my sig. There are thousands more, but this one is mine.
  97. Radio M-I-N-D by RM6f9 · · Score: 1

    Close-fitting antennae receiving brain output, connected to amplifying circuitry, mutual learning with positive feedback provided at sensory-available levels, outputs translated enough to be digitally useful at first, output translations expandable to additional desired digitally controllable functions - Gives ENTIRELY new meaning to the term "Neuro-Linguistic Programming"... It may take quantum computing to reach analog functionalities, and I'll leave the "Matrix" comparisons to those so inclined, but I *like* the possibilities I see.

    --
    Take the 90-Day Challenge! http://rwmurker.bodybyvi.com/
  98. configuration by dollargonzo · · Score: 1

    while these types of devices currently seem to require a lot of training to get the user to figure out what is necessary to move the cursor, in the future, the sensitivity of these devices will likely be such that configuring it will be like configuring controls for a game. "click here and think 'right'", etc.

    --
    BSD is for people who love UNIX. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft.
  99. Re:Blue tooth it! NOW! by Blitzenn · · Score: 1

    Yea! Mix a little bluetooth technology with this and you could do wonders walking down the street! But then, eventually, someone would hack your thinking cap and crash your 'brain' software. A REAL brain freeze!

  100. Stake it UK! by phyruxus · · Score: 1

    (iangbihfwa)

    --
    "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
    "d'Oh!" ~Homer
    1. Re:Stake it UK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iangbihfwa??

      The best I could do was I Am Not Gay But I Have Fun With Arses?

    2. Re:Stake it UK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      i am not gay but i have friends who are.

      You were close.. if only you'd tried a little harder.

  101. Now THIS I might use... by Xierox · · Score: 0

    Now this is something I might be comfortable using one day. Was the thought of having sensors planted IN your brain making anyone else nervous?

    --
    Xierox
  102. Dupe by Dachannien · · Score: 1

    Ahh, but you don't realize just how new it isn't.

  103. Re:Fire the damn missiles oh yeah, think Russian.. by thinkstoomuch · · Score: 1

    Brainstorm. It was okay.

  104. This is not at all new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    There's a company called Cybermind that has sold this device for awhile and there used to be one that you could purchase from the maker (or some association) of 3dtop that would also do that. I think it was about 1200$US.

    The basic premise of these were that they would play music and depending on the how you thought it would change the style. I know it's not exactly the same but it was the default app that came with the device. I think a lot of doctors use this type of device to help people with stress problems.

    I think it was Cybermind that also sold an add-on for a playstation though it's been many years since I've checked so I treat that info as non-checked.

    I saw a demo on Discovery as well that showed the Cybermind device in use on a full blown flight simulator. Another demo I saw on some channel was some university in the US that showed an older person moving a square around on the screen. I don't remember why they chose an older person.

    I wonder what the changes in the future generations of humans will be when control with their mind will become something normal and learned before puberty. From what I've read, I understand that for language, any language you learn before puberty gets placed into this one glump in the brain, no matter how many languages you learn. Learn any new languages after that and the brain creates a new glump beside it.

    I wonder if Basic (learned at 11) is part of my original Glump and C (learned at 15) is a separate one... and if it's the reason that I can't find a better word for it than glump :)

    ---
    Anonymous Coward? maybe.... Lazy bastard for not getting my login info on this unused computer? surely.

  105. Re:Blue tooth it! NOW! by puzzled · · Score: 1



    That is only a little funny, but I'm glad to see people considering the options.

    Would it be fun to ...

    have a wireless bluetooth adapter to an EEG cap? You could do various physical activities and check out what your brain was doing during the process. I'm thinking Vinyasa yoga, myself, but I'm sure you can imagine other activities that would be interesting to record and visualize later.

    --
    I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
  106. brain activity by whovian · · Score: 1

    Now it can be demonstrated that "You're not thinking hard enough" is real.

    /discrimination or declaration of a new disease ensues

    --
    To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
  107. All in one remote, hairclub for men by KrackHouse · · Score: 1

    I just setup a home theater system and bought the guy a $180 remote control. It can switch on his fireplace, lights, you name it. If this technology could somehow be stuck in our head via permanent, sub-dermatic plugs and the technology/firmware could be upgraded independent of said plugs, it'd make sense to make this permanent assuming it's a one way(out) deal. I have a security system at my office that allows you to manipulate the cameras via their web interface. Might be a good application for this tech.

    --
    What if Digg added local news and a Slashdot inspired comment karma system? ---
    http://houndwire.com
  108. User interfaces by pupeno · · Score: 1

    Do you imagine how user interfaces can be changed when controlled with a device like that ? I'd love to work on creating such a user interface.

    --
    Pupeno
  109. Brain Freeze by Blitzenn · · Score: 1

    Yea! and when your bidirectional helmet 'Locks up', we will call it a 'Brain Freeze'!

  110. Buy a cap? by Quixote · · Score: 1

    Where can I buy one of these caps?? I'm so interested in playing with it. This seems so fascinating.

  111. Re:this could boost use of animal labor in factori by mikael · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Back in the 1980's,a research project was funded to determine the best way for rescue helicopters to find survivors wearing orange life-belts floating in the North Sea. Several proposals for advanced optical systems were proposed; these included infra-red cameras and laser scanning. The other system was based on bio-technology: A handful of pigeons were kept in enclosed containers on each side of the helicopter. The containers were warmed by an electrical heater, and had a window kept clean by a windscreen wiper. Each pigeon was trained to peck an alarm button whenever they saw any red or orange dots; The maintenance costs were simple; grain and water.

    --
    Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  112. Clarke's 3000:Space Odissey Four? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think I read about something like that in a book...

  113. adware by seven+of+five · · Score: 1

    but in order to finance this development we must first download adware into your brain.

  114. Peer to Peer Thinking caps by Blitzenn · · Score: 1

    Yea! Peer to Peer Thinking cap porn networks. Now that would give a whole new meaning to Sexually Transmitted Diseases.

  115. When Can I get One? by Rand310 · · Score: 1

    Seriously, When can I get one?

    I really would like to get one - this would be aweseme. I'd pay too...

  116. important research by roman_mir · · Score: 1

    It is a very important research, we need to know who does not produce the brain waves since in the year 3000, when the gigantic brains will invade the Earth it will be up to someone with no brain activity to save us.

    1. Re:important research by tfulton2 · · Score: 1

      We in the US have these in abundance. They are called conservative Republicans, and they have one of their own installed as Emporer.

  117. Read ONLY? by GonerDoug · · Score: 1

    So, um.. Can we get this interface in a Read-WRITE mode? I'd be interested to see how much free space there is available in various people's brains...

  118. I wonder if... by Remillard · · Score: 1

    ...I could justify professional scalp massage as an antidote to brain-related RSI.

  119. But will it work through a tin foil hat? by Tired+and+Emotional · · Score: 1

    I'm calling my broker and stocking up on tin foil futures.

    --
    Squirrel!
  120. Now I can finish building Skylark of Valeron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This was the last component that I needed.
    Thanks, guys!

  121. Purpose and means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahem, aren't you guys both correct? The gp described our purpose for the scientific method. The parent then claimed to refute that by describing how the scientific method is performed claiming to contradict the explanation of why we do it.

    The word 'is' can truly be tricky. 'Is for' and 'is to' likely pertain to different aspects of the same thing.

  122. Obligatory Gibson reference by theolein · · Score: 1

    When I read about this a couple of days ago on the BBC site, my first thought was, "Wow, Gibson had it so right". This is exactly how Gibson envisaged "Jacking in" with the "Trodes" in Neuromancer all those years ago (1983). On the one hand I find it amusing that Gibson completely missed the wireless revolution, and on the other I find it perhaps telling that I find it amusing, perhaps a measure of how much Gibson did get right.

    I wonder how long and how many years it will take before the resolution of these trodes becomes high enough for any user to control implements and for sensors to be able to read images and thoughts directly from the brain, and VICE VERSA, i.e. how long it will be before high resolution images, video and perhaps even holograms can be sent directly to the brain, bypassing eyes etc?

    1. Re:Obligatory Gibson reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry about it. It won't happen in your lifetime.

  123. Thank goodness! by jvollmer · · Score: 1
    Unlike some previous efforts, this one doesn't require anything to be implanted in your brain.

    What a relief! Lemme tell you, those suckers itch!

    If it's not Consolidated Lint, it's just fuzz!

  124. Mm... Veritechs by .milfox · · Score: 1

    So when can I use one to pilot my UN SPACY VF-1A? Huuuh?

  125. Another Analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will people stop harping on "2+2=5"...you are like the fifth post. It is a general statement - I am not a mathematician so I have no idea how to add. 2+2=5 is good enough. ...

  126. Re:this could boost use of animal labor in factori by A.Chwunbee · · Score: 1
    The maintenance costs were simple; grain and water.
    Is this origin of phrase "costs chickenfeed"?
    --
    select * from base where originalOwner = 'you' and currentOwner != 'us'.
    0 rows returned.
  127. Ah, 1970's technology... by Mokumecho · · Score: 1

    There was an article in a magazine... Maybe Time Magazine in 1975, or 1974, about a pair of scientists who used a set of electrodes on the scalp to make a curser move on a computer screen. I really hope this go around actually produces some good products.

  128. Nobody knows what they are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody knows what they are talking about when they say they experience something.

    Daniel dennet wrote a paper on this
    http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/papers/quinqual.htm/

    How do you know that the green color is green? When you were a kid, an object of green color was shown to you and you were taught that it's green.

    Does that mean when you see green, your brain reacts (fire the same neurons or generate the same waves or whatever) the same as when you see green?
    No.

    Is it necessary that the same thing should happen in your brain and mine when we see green for both of us to agree that its green?
    No.

    Joe

  129. So short Sighted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This means so much more then what you short sighted idiot's are describing, who cares about CS or hl... fucking moron's.

    Look at the applications for people that are fully paralized suddenly to have mobility again, and be able to interact with an enviroment.

    Counter Strike!? Fuck off you morons. Get the hell off this site.

  130. Re:Like the first episode of the original Star Tre by jvollmer · · Score: 1
    I can't remember the original captains name

    Captain Christopher Pike.

    If it's not Consolidated Lint, it's just fuzz!

  131. At LAST! by GomezAdams · · Score: 1
    A chance to put on a helmet and have sex with Sandra Bullock! YES! Not that I need a helmet. I have sex with her in my mind, and several others every day now

    --
    Too lazy to create a sig...
  132. open source EEG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    At openeeg.sourceforge.net they're working on hardware designs for cheap, safe electroencephalographs, and open source software to use the input.

  133. On the other hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the other hand, if it was Non-Invasive Brainwave Control Through Computers, I'm sure our overlords in the U.S. Administration, the RIAA, and the MPAA would be all over it.

    Hmm . . . looking at the past U.S. election and the "red" states, maybe it's too late. Perhaps the presence of salt water in the air negates the effect, thus explaining the "blue" states?

  134. I want the other kind of mind control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Enough with receiving brainwaves, can it beam some in?

  135. And to move down... Re:Directional Bias? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You just think of Monica....

    and Bob Dole to get it back up?

  136. Thought Controlled Cursors... by RiddleofSteel · · Score: 1

    So when can I pick up my copy of Thought Pong!

  137. Good but outdated. by xtracto · · Score: 1

    Hi, I have not RTFA but sometime ago I saw this in the IJCAI conference, here is the link for the article abstract.
    This article was presented in the conference back in 2003 summer.

    Anyway, interesting things you can do.
    One thing I remember about the talk, was someone saying that he "did not find any utility to moving a robot inside a box" (can you beleive it?)... and this is one of the top researchers.

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  138. We're one step closer... by losinggeneration · · Score: 1

    In a matter of ten years I'd say we'll accomplish this. Oh happy days.

  139. Brain and thinking is a prerequisite by alexo · · Score: 1


    > U.S. scientists have managed to develop a 'thinking cap' which allows a computer to receive commands from the electrical activity of a person's brain alone.

    Is there something that will fork for managers?

  140. Brainfox by Requiem18th · · Score: 0

    You should install Brainfox, it has integrated thought-blocking and some cool extensions in it's site

    --
    But... the future refused to change.
  141. Spare parts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn, it took them long enough to figure out those thought-controlled systems from that stolen Soviet "Firefox" fighter jet...

  142. This isn't new!! by Jerrod+K · · Score: 1

    There have been biofeedback systems like this for many years. I remember at least 10 or 15 years ago they had a system that allowed you to play pac man, controling his movement with your thoughts alone. It is used as therapy to help control various brain functions like focus and attention. The device would be laid over your head, receiving signals from regions of your brain, just like this system.

    1. Re:This isn't new!! by f05t3k · · Score: 1

      They also had a little ball that plugged into your Atari 2600 that you held in the palm of your hand and functioned as a joystick by thinking up,down,right,or left!! I wish I had bought one while they were available.

  143. Neurons, patterns, and nub talk :) by Lili+Queen+of+Darkne · · Score: 1

    Hey, again speculations... 'It seems to me that if we want true noninvasive thought reading, we're going to need to use some kind of stimulated emission scanning method to determine firing states of individual neurons. Of course, that's easier said than done.' Nub talking, any idea of how much neurons are up there? lol! So, quite obviously, what is interresting here is 'how in hell' are they succesfully associating 'brain waves' patterns with specific concepts like 'move that cursor there'. I mean, this is pretty neat, sure, but HOW? Empiric measurements, obviously, like having someone move the cursor and measure brain waves. Hum, am i right? Wich leads me to ask : how are brain waves caracterized? Orientation? Intensity/flux density? Dominant source origin? Surely there must be more factors here... Oh, then again, i'm still wondering about average brain emissions intensity here. Anybody has a few technical urls about this? I mean research groups are such * when it comes to sharing their results freely these times.

  144. no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    High school physics cannot save you now!

  145. nOT NEWS...BEEN THERE DONE THAT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the 90's, without implants...do the research before writing the blurb or STFU.

  146. Anyone seen Robotech? by PakProtector · · Score: 1

    In the Anime Series Robotech the pilots of the Veritechs and Destroids (Veritechs were the planes that transformed, Destroids were the non-transformable weaponry) used an oversized helmet called a 'Thinking Cap' to partially control their vehicle. For example, a pilot in a Veritech could manually issue commands to the plane, such as 'fire,' by pulling the trigger. And when they sudden saw an enemy 'pod pop up right infront of them they could issue a similar command, namely 'fire the goddamn gun before I get shot to hell,' via the thinking cap. The cap was also used to control various flight aspects, and the pilot also had to 'think' the plane through the complex transformation processes. So, am I the only one who awaits are newer, better, thought controlled generation of killing machines? Those Giant Frickin' Robots (GFRs) I am seemingly the world's only Living Expert on seem a step closer. (Living as most of the others died in the line of experimentation.)

    --

    Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
    man: no entry for woman in the manual.
    "Qua!?"

  147. Re:Ironically, you may have just found a solution. by tchalvak · · Score: 1

    ...to the reading/detecting helmet, at least. 'cause I doubt it'd be strong enough to read your brain waves through the tin-foil interference.
    But then, why are you putting it on over your tin-foil hat anyway? Maybe you're already under "their" control.

    When the mind control version comes out, you may have to upgrade your "mind-virus" protection to "iron foil" Service Pack 1.

  148. Re:Fire the damn missiles oh yeah, think Russian.. by The+Bandit · · Score: 1

    Also FireFox.

  149. PC by RedLaggedTeut · · Score: 1
    Why does my computer keep going to gay porn sites now that I hooked up this brain control device? I'm not gay.

    You did know that PC stands for "political correctness" when you bought your PC, didn't you?

    You can configure your PC level under extras/internet options/contents/content advisor..

    --
    I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
  150. Battlearmor!!!! by BrainstormOC · · Score: 1

    Ready for thought controlled titanium exoskeleton battlearmor?!!? :)

  151. Eh, ehhh? by http101 · · Score: 1

    So what's to keep them from putting things into your brain? If we can 'read' the 'volume', who's going to stop them from 'writing' to the 'volume'?

    --
    -- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!