Slashdot Mirror


Patients get Solar Implants in Eyes

Ben Sullivan writes "As reported at Science Blog, ophthalmologists have implanted Artificial Silicon Retina microchips in the eyes of five patients to treat vision loss caused by retinitis pigmentosa. The implant is a 2mm chip that contains about 5,000 microscopic solar cells that convert light into electrical impulses. Already some patients have experienced improvements such as not bumping into objects around the house, and being able to read the time on a clock."

286 comments

  1. Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not a Steve Austin thing, yet, but with people in my family who can't see a hand in front of their faces, that rules.

  2. What about cloudy days? by GatesGhost · · Score: 0

    The title made it sound like they were implanting some sort of solar powered device. darn, now i cant make a solar powered joke.

  3. Quality by sanosuke001 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How do the doctors know what kinds of electrical signals the brain needs in order to see what they;re supposed to see?

    Also, if they do figure out how to make this like our vision, don't solar cells "see" in higher wavelengths than our eyes do? Wouldn't people not see blue and purple but instead get UV and the like?

    --
    -SaNo
    1. Re:Quality by roman_mir · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They don't have to know anything like that. All they need to do is to provide voltage that is within parameters of the cell resistance (just enough but not to burn the cells.) The brain takes care of mapping electrical signals to the visual part of cortex. I suppose this will only produce shadows of gray and not color. To produce color they will have to do more than a single electrical signal, but for shadows of one color (gray?) voltage difference will be enough.

      I wonder what is the life of the solar cells? Will they have to be replaced time to time?

    2. Re:Quality by tepples · · Score: 1

      But, since they don't do any physical work, they might last long enough.

      True, the implants have no macroscopic moving parts, but pushing photons and electrons around is still physical work.

    3. Re:Quality by madprogrammer · · Score: 2, Funny

      > but instead get UV and the like?

      If so, then sign us up. You will be assimilated.

    4. Re:Quality by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      There has been a lot of study, both in humans and lower animals, to find out what nerve impulses are created by visual stimulation.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    5. Re:Quality by Suidae · · Score: 2, Informative

      Discover magazine had an article about the first successful experimental implant of this type a couple years ago. The sensor was a narrow strip, tall and skinny. It provided the user with a dim, low-resolution strip of vision from one eye. This was enough to allow the user to much more effectively navigate with a cane.

    6. Re:Quality by arose · · Score: 1, Funny

      You mean I'm working now!? o_O

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    7. Re:Quality by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is basically the the cochlear implant for the eye.

      The brain is dynamic enough to remap the signals into something coherent.

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    8. Re:Quality by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think to produce color, there will be a need to setup color filters (just like color pixels you have on your computer monitor,) and do something with outputs from different color filters, maybe use different electrical frequencies for different colors or apply different voltages to cells that are very close to simulate color additions. The filters will only let specific light frequencies through, and will produce different voltage depending on the intensity of its own wavelength, so maybe multiples of the wavelengths can be used as electrical frequencies to represent specific colors?

    9. Re:Quality by bcmm · · Score: 2, Funny

      They read the RFCs for the human nervous sytem's protocols, of course!

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
    10. Re:Quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple. It turns out that the brain is DESIGNED (as such) to make sense out of signals, whether impulses on your optical nerve, or in your ear, or even on your tongue! It will find the patterns and you will learn (rather quickly) to make sense of them.

    11. Re:Quality by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      As I understand it, the device will trigger both rods and cones in the retina in the retina by random, if they are only close enough to the individual micro-solar cell.
      The result might be that you get some sort of "colorful greyscale map", with local RGB noise but overall recognizable shapes. Still, beats seeing nothing.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    12. Re:Quality by humina · · Score: 2, Interesting
      In order to stimulate the millions of rods and cones individually in order to produce color, the implants would need to be significantly smaller. Currently these implants stimulate large groups of rods and cones. It is currently impossible to individually select the rods and cones for stimulus with this approach. Stanford has a research project to use chemical stimulus to stimulate individual rods and cones.

      The problem with using solar cells is in order to make enough power, you want the solar cell to be bigger in order to absorb the most light. You also want the solar cells to be small in order to increase the resolution. The research here is increasing efficiency like crazy.

      The problem with Stanford's research is releasing and recapturing the chemicals needed for stimulus. And the chemical approach is behind the electrical approach. The electrical approach already has had success with patients.

      --
      check out the best blog ever:
      http://oehlberg.com
    13. Re:Quality by InvalidError · · Score: 1

      After today's >5MP digital color camera we get 5kP analog monochrome sight, wonderful.

      I think I will stick to organic electrochemical analog sight for a few more decades.

      Of course, being able to see anything is still considerably better than being completely blind. For those who want/need this technology ASAP, I hope it will exceed >50kP soon... and at least 2MP by the time my turn is up if it ever does.

    14. Re:Quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You mean I'm working now!? o_O

      No, you are posting on slashdot...

    15. Re:Quality by tim1724 · · Score: 2, Funny
      They read the RFCs for the human nervous sytem's protocols, of course!

      Yeah, and then find out the hard way that 90% of humans don't implement the protocols according to the spec.

      --
      -- Tim Buchheim
    16. Re:Quality by BigDogCH · · Score: 1

      The brain is amazing. It will figure out how to interpret the signal. Heck, you can put on glasses the flip everything in the world upside down, and your brain will switch it so it looks normally (though the last study I read about, it took a few days, and the people were a bit dizzy at times). Still amazing stuff.

    17. Re:Quality by bbrack · · Score: 1

      Since the there is no structural change to the semiconductor during the photovoltaic process, the lifetime of the parts should basically be limitless - the thing that I would worry about more than the cell failing is that the installation method would lend itself to wear-our

    18. Re:Quality by Dabido · · Score: 1

      I can't wait for the models which also come with surround sound! :-)

      --
      Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)
  4. Article Text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ophthalmologists at Rush University Medical Center implanted Artificial Silicon Retina (ASR) microchips in the eyes of five patients to treat vision loss caused by retinitis pigmentosa (RP). The implant is a silicon microchip 2mm in diameter and one-thousandth of an inch thick, less than the thickness of a human hair. Four patients had surgery Tuesday, January 25. The fifth patient is scheduled for a later date.

    Rush principal investigator Dr. John Pollack performed the surgeries with Dr. Kirk Packo, Dr. Pauline Merrill, Dr. Mathew MacCumber, and Dr. Jack Cohen. All are members of Illinois Retina Associates, S.C., a private practice group and are on the Rush faculty. Patients leave the hospital the same day and will be followed for two years as part of the study, and then indefinitely.

    The patients were recruited from a pool of about 5,000 applicants.

    The implants are designed for people with retinal diseases such as macular degeneration and retinitis pigmentosa, which cause blindness and vision impairment in about 10 million Americans. More than one million of these people are legally blind.

    "As is commonly seen in with retinitis pigmentosa, these patients all have severe narrowing of their visual fields down to a very small central circle, and all patients in the study are legally blind," says Pollack.

    The Artificial Silicon RetinaTM (ASR) was invented by Dr. Alan Chow, pediatric ophthalmologist and Rush faculty member, who developed the chip and founded Optobionics, with his brother Vincent, vice president of engineering. Optobionics is located in Naperville, Illinois.

    "This is an expansion of the study of the first 10 patients completed in 2002," says study investigator Dr. Kirk Packo, who oversees the three participating sites. The sites are Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Emory University School of Medicine/Atlanta VA Medical Center and Rush.

    Pollack says the current protocol has been modified to reduce the likelihood of inadvertant scientific bias. "We operated on the right eye of each of the initial 10 patients. For the next 20 patients we will randomly select which eye will receive the ASR chip. In addition, post-operative vision testers will be masked as to which eye received the ASR chip implant. The current study is being performed at these study centers in order to independently validate previous studies performed by Optobionics."

    The first 10 patients all reported some degree of improvement in visual function, says Pollack. "Improvement in visual function was variable and included the ability to read letters, improvement in color vision, and expansion of their visual field. Some patients gained new ability to recognize facial features -- something that they were unable to do before ASR chip implantation. Some patients have experienced improvement in activities of daily living such as improved ambulation-not bumping into objects around the house, and reading the time on a clock."

    Still in Phase II clinical trials, Pollack cautions it is still too early to determine what percentage of patients might experience improvement in vision and what resolution capability these patients might eventually have. "Although we hope that all patients receiving the chip will experience some improvement in visual function, we can't say for sure how these patients will respond to this new treatment since this is still an experimental trial. If this study and future studies show safety and efficacy of the chip and it's approved by the FDA, it could be as soon as three to five years that this technology would be available to others."

    Surgical Information
    The ASR chip contains approximately 5,000 microscopic solar cells that convert light into electrical impulses. The purpose of the chip is to replace damaged photoreceptors, the "light-sensing" cells of the eye, which normally convert light into electrical signals within the retina. Loss of photoreceptor cells occurs in persons with retinitis pigmentosa (RP) and other retinal diseases.

    1. Re:Article Text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we can't say for sure how these patients will respond to this new treatment

      It's not a treatment, it's an upgrade!

    2. Re:Article Text by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why you bothered to repost the text. Either way, it'll take only one click to get to the entire article: the article link or the "read more" link.

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
  5. retinas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've described my mornings.

  6. Orson Scott Card by 1010011010 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sounds like we're on the road to the artificial eye one of OSC's characters had in the Ender's Game series. One of its cool features was that you could pull pictures and video off of it, as well as see through it. It was an in-skull camera.

    --
    Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    1. Re:Orson Scott Card by NoTheory · · Score: 1

      yeah... this is just trying to replicate how the human eye cells work. To get to OSC's device you'd still need an I/O interface, which you'll note is conspicuously lacking. (and as i recall Ohaldo's left eye was the i/o socket or some such? it's been a while since i read the books)

      --
      There are lives at stake here!
    2. Re:Orson Scott Card by island_earth · · Score: 1

      How sad the world has become when an artificially-enhanced eye produces references to Speaker for the Dead instead of the much earlier Six Million Dollar Man...

      Don't you recall that the eye was the "better" part of the "better, faster, stronger" improvements they gave Steve Austin, a man barely alive? And you with such a low Slashdot ID, too... tsk, tsk.

    3. Re:Orson Scott Card by jd142 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Heh, G'Kar was able to remove his eyeball and use it as a spy cam to watch what others were doing.

    4. Re:Orson Scott Card by geoffspear · · Score: 1
      You do realize that slashdot (and, for that matter, the web) came into existance long after the Six Million Dollar Man was on TV, and also long after Speaker For the Dead?

      It would hardly be difficult for someone with a low ID to have been born after the TV show went off the air.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    5. Re:Orson Scott Card by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      oh yeah, well Kryten can make a robot spider remote using a severed hand and his eyeball. beat that!

  7. Improvements by Harald74 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Night vision, anyone?

    --
    A)bort, R)etry or S)elf-destruct?
    1. Re:Improvements by phyruxus · · Score: 3, Funny
      It wouldn't help me see, but I'd kind of like to have some red led's in mine, terminator style.

      That's assuming of course that I can't get frikken lasers (I have a feeling an in-eye laser wouldn't be so great on the cornea)

      --
      "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
      "d'Oh!" ~Homer
    2. Re:Improvements by Space_Soldier · · Score: 2, Funny

      Soon, we will all be able to switch between vision types like the Predator. Love it mate, love it!

    3. Re:Improvements by Vinnie_333 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Cool, just like Night Man! ... O, I mean ... not so cool ... I mean ...I've never seen the show ... just commercials ....

      --

      "We shall party like the Greeks of old! You know the ones I mean." - HedonismBot
    4. Re:Improvements by Haydn+Fenton · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well maybe not "we" as a whole, but "we" as in one of the human race, already can.. There is a Russian girl whom posses some kind of x-ray type vision. She claims she can swap between normal vision, or the x-ray type vision at will.
      Yes, you don't have to believe it if you don't want, for all those sceptics, I'll agree it seems a pretty outrageous claim, but despite efforts of scientists, they have been unable to disprove her claims. She has successfully seen into people's bodies and correct one claim that a pateint had cancer, when in fact it was just a cyst. She's going to study medical.

      Anyway, back to the article.. this seems like a very very very useful piece of technology, surely it could be ported to other things than eyes, eventually enabling a vast amount of disfunctions to be rectified. And I don't see why it couldn't be modified, as the parent says, to be able to have nightvision, infra-red vision, etc.

    5. Re:Improvements by Mafiew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well considering that the website refers to an article in Russia's Pravda, which has stories called "Boriska-boy from Mars" , "Humans Learn to Fly" , "Soviet Army Fought UFOs" etc. I wouldn't lend too much credence to this.

      Or who knows maybe years of exposure to radiation from atomic bomb testing has given Russians superpowers.

    6. Re:Improvements by digitalchinky · · Score: 5, Informative

      That russian girl was flown to the US for further testing - this was on nat-geo or discovery not long ago. This is all from memory so I may be wrong...

      She had to specify the problems of 7 or 9 patients (can't remember exactly) - she did score quite high, but not high enough for it to be any more believable than educated guess work. Threw a bit of a tantrum when she found out she would not be able to view the bodies of the patients before making her decision.

      She took far longer to make a diagnosis under test conditions than the the scratchy home video's from Russia.

      She had been hanging around hospitals back home, so this is not at all suprising. All the evidence points toward her 'not' having any magical powers.

    7. Re:Improvements by Foundryman · · Score: 1

      Uh...am I the only one who sees a problem with trying to get night vision using *solar* implants???

    8. Re:Improvements by AllUsernamesAreGone · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It was 7 patients and she correctly diagnosed 4 of them. Each patient had a different condition and they were things like removed appendix, lower aesophagus or lung section, metal staples left in the chest after surgery, an artificial hip and a metal plate in the skull while the 7th had nothing wrong.

      It was also hardly a fair test - she had been seperated from her mother and interpreter, the CSICOP AND CSMMH testers had set the minimum match threshold higher than the standard probability of 1 in 20 in pscyhology tests and there were no independent observers. They also conceled the fact that she achieved higher than 50 to 1 odds to reach the correct matches by shouting about he missing the 5 matches they required he to get to pass their test.

    9. Re:Improvements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      She not only failed to get a better than chance success ratio - she failed to find a *metal plate* in the skull of one of the subjects.

      Fraud or wishful thinking, nothing more.

      THere is some covnerage of this on http://www.skepdic.com/

    10. Re:Improvements by Illserve · · Score: 2, Funny

      How is it that things like this get modded to 4?

    11. Re:Improvements by KontinMonet · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, very believable:

      "Natasha [Demkina] first demonstrated her extraordinary ability at the age of ten, when she told her stunned mum Tatyana she could see "two beans", "a tomato" and a "vacuum cleaner" inside her."

      --
      Did he inhale?
    12. Re:Improvements by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 0

      But the real clue? Her spandex bodysuit.

    13. Re:Improvements by Illserve · · Score: 1

      How is it that things like this get modded to 3?

    14. Re:Improvements by Poseidon88 · · Score: 2, Informative
      The required hit rate was 5 out of 7 because she was told ahead of time what to look for. She just had to match each problem with the proper patient. If the claims about her powers are true (that she can see things at a cellular level, and her diagnosis accuracy is 100%), then she should have had no problem with this.

      But, instead, she mis-diagnosed some of the more obvious problems, including the patient who had a missing section of skull covered by a metal plate. The fact that she got 4 out of 7 right can be laid down to luck and a little knowledge of medicine. The fact that she actually broke several of the agreed-upon rules during the study (talking to her teenage friend and an unknown person on the other end of a cell phone) doesn't help her case any.

    15. Re:Improvements by RichardX · · Score: 1

      How is it.. Oh, never mind. Just take my damn karma already

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    16. Re:Improvements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't mind if I do.

      Yoink!!

    17. Re:Improvements by RedBear · · Score: 1

      Threw a bit of a tantrum when she found out she would not be able to view the bodies of the patients before making her decision.

      This person allegedly has the power to see problems inside your body just by looking at you, and the way we are going to test this person is by not allowing her to view the test patients' bodies? I'm all for disproving bogus claims but something about that alleged testing you describe doesn't sound quite right.

      Besides which, I can find no reference to Natalya Demkina that matches either National Geographic or the Discovery Channel. Can I also have my bogus +5, Informative now?

      Being skeptical means not automatically believing unlikely things without seeing solid unbiased evidence. It also means not automatically believing that something has been disproved without seeing solid unbiased evidence.

    18. Re:Improvements by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking you are just shooting off at the mouth without any search effort what-so-ever.

      http://www.discoverychannelasia.com/beyondhuman/
      (there's a picture of her as well!)

      Try the search option at the discovery website - simply type 'xray' and you'll get it. (do I need to spell out the obvious? :-)

      The patients were wearing clothing - it's not like she couldn't see them at all, just not their 'skin beneath the clothing'

      I don't ever ask for positive moderation, I don't even think about it - I do try to be honest, informative, or jovial in everything I post. Why troll when you might just make a few friends and expand your mind.

    19. Re:Improvements by RedBear · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking that I tried Google and also went to discoverychannel.com and nationalgeographic.com and found nothing when looking for her name on either website, or Google. So sue me. I don't know why you would expect someone to know to search for "xray" to find "Natalya Demkina", aka Natasha. With the kind of search engines on most websites you're lucky to find anything, no less to find "X-Ray" when you search for "xray". Nothing simple about it. I didn't feel like mucking with it for more than a few minutes.

      Anyway, next time provide the link in the first place, which I notice says the same thing every other website said: "doctors have yet to disprove her amazing abilities". So I still don't see any direct evidence that she's a fake, as you seemed to state. I will continue to be skeptical in both directions until I see some incontrovertible evidence.

      My comments about ratings are always to the mods. What I saw in your original post was an offhand comment with no backup dismissing the girl's alleged powers, and a minimum of 5 moderators agreeing with you. I perceived this as demonstrating the typical bias toward immediate dismissal of anything that doesn't fit the normal person's worldview, regardless of evidence. My mind is quite open, thank you. I was trying to open some others by pointing out that nothing should be dismissed unless evidence is given.

      My comments, and irritation, were mostly aimed at the mods.

    20. Re:Improvements by Artraze · · Score: 1

      I would point out that she couldn't possibly have x-ray vision simply because there are not enough x-rays floating around to be seen. If there were, we wouldn't be having many children, or even living very that long for that matter. Now, I guess it's possible she could be using a more ubiquidous part of the spectrum like terahertz, but that's another issue really.

  8. excellent by St.+Arbirix · · Score: 1

    Riddick, you're days are numbered!
    Soon, I too will have night-vision.
    Bwahahahaha...

    Any word yet on those muscular implants?

    --
    Direct away from face when opening.
    1. Re:excellent by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Any word yet on those muscular implants?

      I guess so...

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  9. Silicon implants make the world a better place. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Especially when installed in pairs.

    1. Re:Silicon implants make the world a better place. by kurosawdust · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but a fair maiden with only a singleton combined with a patch covering the unenhanced side can walk my plank any day. Arr!

    2. Re:Silicon implants make the world a better place. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Silicon implants do more for the world, but I personally prefer Silicone implants... at least, on video. A woman with silicon where we put silicone would be no fun at all.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Silicon implants make the world a better place. by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      Silicone sucks. I like natural.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    4. Re:Silicon implants make the world a better place. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      From a distance, especially when I will never put my face between them, the difference is largely irrelevant to me - except when it makes a large difference, IYKWIM, AITYD*.

      * If You Know What I Mean, And I Think You Do.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Silicon implants make the world a better place. by xant · · Score: 1

      She'd have to be sure to keep them exposed to absorb the maximum sunlight.

      --
      It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
  10. Stevie Wonder... by cswiii · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Isn't this what Stevie Wonder has, w/r/t the pigmentosa? Furthermore, I seem to remember them talking about the possibility a couple of years ago that he would be a candidate for something similar, with a microchip.

    I'd imagine that his condition has degenerated far too much along to be aided by this, but if I recall correctly, they nonetheless said he might be a candidate for something similar. I don't think they ended up using him, however.

    1. Re:Stevie Wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IF Stevie has RP, then he would be a candidate. RP is a loss of photoreceptors. This procedure bypasses photoreceptors, so it doesn't matter how long you've had the disease.

    2. Re:Stevie Wonder... by nine-times · · Score: 1

      This guy in my biology class said that if Ferris dies, he's giving his eyes to Stevie Wonder.

    3. Re:Stevie Wonder... by Black+Perl · · Score: 2, Informative

      IF Stevie has RP, then he would be a candidate. RP is a loss of photoreceptors. This procedure bypasses photoreceptors, so it doesn't matter how long you've had the disease.

      I doubt this is true. There's also a part of the brain that "shuts off" (sorry don't know the medical term). A friend of mine had misaligned eyes when I met him. When he was little he could see out of either one. Of course, using both at the same time resulted in double vision, so he had to use only one at a time. Eventually, he favored one and his brain shut the other one off. He migrated as a young adult to the USA with his family and had surgery to straighten his eyes. He will not regain vision in his "bad" eye, even though there's nothing physically wrong with it. The doctors told him that if he had surgery much earlier, he'd still have vision in both eyes.

      --
      bp
    4. Re:Stevie Wonder... by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      That part of his brain either atrophied, or (and this is the cool part) potentially was reassigned to other tasks.

    5. Re:Stevie Wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The disorder you're looking for would be Retinis Pigmentosa.

    6. Re:Stevie Wonder... by Scorchio · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Due to an apparently pre-natal injury, I have damage to the lens in my right eye. It looks perfectly fine, but optically I'm very, very, very long sighted in that eye. As a result, my brain generally ignores what my right eye sees if I'm using both eyes.

      I've been wondering if laser treatment or a lens implant would help - as the eye is already damaged, there's not much to lose. However, it may be pointless if now that I'm in my early 30s, my brain is too old to adapt.

  11. Re:But wouldn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A visor? For peole who can't see WTF?

  12. in time.. by hielenlikker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    i wonder what will be first: - a human of whom all parts are subsituted by technology - a robot which will have a real human soul

    1. Re:in time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the difference?

    2. Re:in time.. by operagost · · Score: 1

      EX-TER-MIN-ATE!

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    3. Re:in time.. by Horse+Rotorvator+JAD · · Score: 1

      a robot which will have a real human soul

      Yeah. A soul (rolls eyes). I cannot believe that in 2005 in an industrialized first world country such as ours that the majority of the population still believes in things like; souls, angels, heaven, hell, gods and demons.

    4. Re:in time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " What's the difference?"

      From a religion/scriptural standpoint, all things that have life have a soul. Only humans have a spirit, which constitutes the life-force in the body, thus making the human soul unique. The soul dies with the body. The spirit is eternal.

    5. Re:in time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is the difference between the two?

    6. Re:in time.. by hansiboy · · Score: 1

      A soul doesent neccesary have to refer to something religious or supernatural.

    7. Re:in time.. by Haydn+Fenton · · Score: 1

      Well, my bet's on the robot with a soul.
      But what's the (end result) difference between a human whose parts are substituted by technology and a robot that thinks and acts like a human (I'm assuming that's what you mean by soul)? Surely they're exactly the same thing.

    8. Re:in time.. by EvilNight · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pshaw. Five seconds of thought about the problem provides you with a proper 21st century definition of a soul.

      If your brain is hardware, your soul is the software.

      Next question.

      --
      Hell is being intelligent in a world full of idiots.
    9. Re:in time.. by MrWim · · Score: 1

      Surely your mind is the software

    10. Re:in time.. by Broiler · · Score: 1

      It is much easier to swap parts on a human than it it is to give something a soul.
      There are plenty of Humans that do not have souls; they are lost, sold or stolen.

      --
      My sigs offend the max # of people all over the world, regardless of race, religion, color, sex or creed. It's a gift.
    11. Re:in time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your brain is hardware, your soul is the software.

      Almost, but not quite. Your soul is conscious energy and your body is a transducer responding to the signals.

      You don't really believe that everything you see
      on TV is coming from the TV, do you? Or everything on slashdot coming from your PC?

      Yea, I know it's hard to believe for those completely focused on the material, and you probably think I'm nuts. Just planting seeds and someday you will appreciate this way of looking at the world. Or not... it's up to you.

    12. Re:in time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What religion and what scripture? Are you speaking for all religions?

    13. Re:in time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since you are obviously more enlightened than the majority of the world population and, I'm sure, have experienced everything there is to experience. It is easy for you to rule out the existance of God(s), souls, angels, demons, heaven and hell.

      I guess the rest of us will have to keep an open mind until we complete our journey.

    14. Re:in time.. by Kehvarl · · Score: 1

      So, you're saying there's a difference?

    15. Re:in time.. by Kehvarl · · Score: 1

      please define the term "conscious energy". Also, Dualism doesn't asnwer any of the questions that Monism can' answer, all it does is say "these two are seperate, so that's how it works".

    16. Re:in time.. by ultramk · · Score: 1

      To be more accurate, 5 seconds of thought provided you with a completely wrong answer.

      People try to separate mind and brain into software/hardware roles, but it's not possible. Human minds and thought patterns are incredibly deeply linked to the physical structures that comprise the brain. It's impossible at this time to say what's a function of physical structure, and what isn't. However, we do know that even seemingly minor physical damage to the brain is often accompanied by profound personality changes.

      It's impossible to say where the brain ends and the mind begins. I posit that it's a false distinction, and many neuroscientists agree with me.

      Besides, you seem to be confusing "mind" and "soul". Another false distinction?

      m-

      --
      You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
    17. Re:in time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm. Tricky question.

      I guess the best that I would say in this context is "self-aware energy" or energy that organized such that it has a concept of self, and experiences individuality, as in a soul. This "soul" can carry experience beyond the lifetime of a body.

      I thank you for pointing out that I may be slanting my thinking in an unbalanced way torwards dualism, that did not occur to me. I actually believe in both dualism or monism depending on the context. But I am wondering, what was behind your intention to dualistically separate my thoughts between dualism and monism? ;-)

    18. Re:in time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two questions:

      Why would a robot have a "human soul" (i.e.,why not a "robot soul")?

      How would one determine the presence of a soul (robot, human, or otherwise)?

    19. Re:in time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up hippie!

    20. Re:in time.. by TheZeusJuice · · Score: 1

      Ahh, but does it run linux?...

    21. Re:in time.. by Kehvarl · · Score: 1

      ...But I am wondering, what was behind your intention to dualistically separate my thoughts between dualism and monism?

      Why, everything at all. Isn't that the point of philosophical comments?

    22. Re:in time.. by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that dogs don't go to heaven? It won't be heaven without dogs!

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  13. But by SimianOverlord · · Score: 0, Troll

    Retinitis Pigmentosa only affects peripheral and night vision. Which makes the article summary somewhat suspect. Two seconds of google to check up on it, Taco. Another three seconds to actually "being able to reading" the thing to edit it properly. Is this so difficult?

    --
    Meine Schwester ist sehr, sehr reizvoll - Nietzsche
    1. Re:But by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Retinitis pigmentosa is a term that refers to group of hereditary disorders that affect the retina's ability to respond to light. It primarily affects rod cells, the photoreceptor cell that is responsible for night vision, seeing in dim light, and peripheral vision. Cone cells, which are responsible for color vision and seeing in bright light, may also be affected as the disease progresses.

    2. Re:But by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I work on RP. It CAN and DOES cause blindness. Its more of a group of diseases as opposed to one monolithic disease. From emedicine:

      52% had 20/40 or better vision in at least one eye, 25% had 20/200 or worse vision, and 0.5% had no light perception

      So, in conclusion, don't be a cock. Seriously, tell those people they aren't blind.

    3. Re:But by jocks · · Score: 5, Informative

      My wife has early onset RP and it does far more than affect night vision and peripheral vision - it ultimately causes all vision to be lost, from the outside in. In the past few months my wifes central vision in her right eye has started to fail dramatically.

      Normally RP is diagnosed later on in life so the full effects of the disease are not normally experienced, however many suffer from childhood and it is those people that will benefit from this type of technology.

      In tandem with this research there has also been progress made in retinal transplants using stem cell growth mediums to allow the cells to function normally.

      Its nice to see some hope, particularly for my wife who has been told that she would be blind by the time she was ten. That was 23 years ago.

    4. Re:But by firew0lfz · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up. I'm a bit confused myself.

      A quick search on google brings up this page. Also on Wikipedia.

      Any med geeks out there who could shed light on this?

      --
      Try not to let life get in the way of living.
    5. Re:But by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RP can cause blindness. It's heterogenous. Mod Grandparent way down for being an insensitive cock.

    6. Re:But by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Another three seconds to actually "being able to reading" the thing to edit it properly. Is this so difficult?
      It is when you try to use them solar cell eye implants in the dark!
    7. Re:But by LostSinner · · Score: 1

      My mother has RP. She was born with vision problems which have worsened over time. You are correct in saying that RP affects peripheral and night vision, however, over time RP degrades vision to complete blindness. My mother used to be able to see some color differences and some general shapes (before I was born). Since my birth, however, her vision has worsened considerably; from being able to see only extreme differences in light to almost 100% blindness. So yes, the indicators of RP are loss of peripheral and night vision, but they are by no means the only result of the disease.

    8. Re:But by chinakow · · Score: 1

      thats funny. My Doctor told me I could go blind in 3 years or 30 years, that sounds like a far cry from reduced night vision and reduced peripheral vision, anyway he did mention that RP in my case is calcium deposits surrounding the rods and cones in my eyes, so basically the receptors are not damaged, just obscured, a chip with some pins on it should be able to reach the back of the eye and provide substitute electrical signals for my brain.

      This would be rad, I would love to be able to do things in low light situations, like not running over waitresses in almost every restaurant in the country or go to clubs or even, dare I say it, Drive at night, oh the rapture.

    9. Re:But by ifwm · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should have taken 5 seconds to get your facts correct.

    10. Re:But by ak3ldama · · Score: 2, Informative

      I would like to chip in on this conversation, as I have RP, as does my father, two of my sisters, and my grandmother (mother of my dad). This disease does indeed have early symptoms, primarily of impaired night vision. Since this has been in our family, we have known about it early and therefore we are very interested as such things as the electron possibility. But these tests have so far had limited results. There is also another solution which helps a little, and that is daily taking Vitamin A Palmitate, at a dosage level of 15,000 IU. Taking this fairly high dosage, the affects of RP have been known to have 20% less impact per year.

      These solutions do not truly fix the problem, but hopefully over time a solution will be found. Retinitis Pigmentosa has serious effects, it is quite scary seeing your family members go blind, and knowing you will too.

      --
      "but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
    11. Re:But by humina · · Score: 1
      Since I found Retinitis Pigmentosa on the foundation fighting blindness webpage I find your post highly suspect. (Please see the Can RP Lead to Total Blindness? question)

      A quick google search proves this to be the case:
      (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&clien t=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=retin al+pigmentosa+blindness&spell=1/) Two seconds of google to check up on it, SimianOverlord. Another three seconds to actually read the google results. Is that so difficult?

      --
      check out the best blog ever:
      http://oehlberg.com
    12. Re:But by Skilgannon · · Score: 1

      There are three types of RP, X-Linked effects night vision and peripheral vision. the other two can lead to blindness.

  14. Bionics by ArsonSmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When will we get the ability to enhance current senses and strength. This kind of tech is always the most fun.

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    1. Re:Bionics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get back at the end of the line behind the sick people.

    2. Re:Bionics by asr_man · · Score: 1

      I think brain implants that enhance empathy, social awareness, and self-control would be of far more use to us all.

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

      In Korea, only old people need electronics to aid their sight.

    4. Re:Bionics by Haydn+Fenton · · Score: 1

      Never is my guess. This kind of thing may be used for medical purposes, and only to rectify the problem, but I don't think we'll see (well not in our lifetimes anyway) it being used on people who are fine to begin with, no matter how rich they are.

      I think the governments wouldn't dare let it happen, could you imagine what it would be like if people get the ability to see at night and through walls, can punch through bank vaults or jump over 10 foot fences, etc. Far too much risk. Heck, just look at some of the things we can do at the moment, cloning, stem cell stuff, etc. and just how many of those have been deemed to never be used for the average guy n gal. Well.. thinking about it, maybe people in the army, secret service and other things would be given certain kinds of this tech to fight terrorism, listen to convos from afar, chase down cars by foot and whatnot.

    5. Re:Bionics by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      In theory, solar cells sensitive to infrared light could be used to give you night vision. You'd have to come up with a way to space them out so that they wouldn't interfere with normal vision, though. OLED contact lenses with PV cells on the outside might be better.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Bionics by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      or how about switchable. Perhaps some type of radio switch that tells them to switch on or off depending on if you want normal light, infravision, ultraviolot vision etc...

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    7. Re:Bionics by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Maybe they could approve Bionics 1.0 for normal people, but the police would be equipped with Bionics 2.0.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    8. Re:Bionics by Erwos · · Score: 1

      Mind control implants, eh? I'm sure it'd appeal to people who already are mind controlled by their environment and associates.

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    9. Re:Bionics by Surt · · Score: 1

      That would be everyone. Most psychologists would include associates in the environment though, so specifying the associates is redundant.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    10. Re:Bionics by asr_man · · Score: 1

      In particular, sufferers of mild paranoia might enjoy the change of pace.

      Anyway...what Surt said.

    11. Re:Bionics by zolaar · · Score: 1

      There was a film released not too long ago called Code 46 that, among MANY other things, involved a guy (played by Tim Robbins) who took what was called an 'empathy virus'. It was basically a pill that he took that altered his brain chemistry such that his sense of empathy was temporarily enhanced. Not in that Counsellor Troi way of "Captain, I sense... FEAR!", mind you.

      He essentially used it to determine if another character (played by Samantha Morton) was stealing from a company. (he was a consultant or something). He did so by asking her and other potential theives to tell him something unique about themselves. I'm assuming that, in having to think about one's self, it opened up the person's mind enough to allow Robbins's character to "get in there". For instance, he used that technique a couple of times in the film to guess a person's password (or 'palabra', as it was called in the film).

      Overall, I wouldn't say that the film was very good (being the ever-so descerning film critic that I am...), but it was definately an interesting movie in that it introduced scientific and societal possibilities for a future 50 years or so from now.

      Assuming this sort of thing is even possible, would this be an acceptable use of your 'empathy implant'? This is not meant as a troll/flame; I'm honestly asking you (and myself, actually):

      Would this kind of use of a seemingly humanitarian technology be acceptable?

      --
      One man's constant is another man's variable.
    12. Re:Bionics by asr_man · · Score: 1

      My original post was rhetorical, but I find it interesting that you ask such a question.

      Except in movies, empathy is not a kind of talent that one might arbitrarily apply for its fact finding power. Empathy is the power to feel what someone else feels in a way that defeats our own selfishness. To me it is an intrinsically positive quality, something that can only enable one to act more ethically, or at least less unethically. It isn't empathy that enables one to make intelligent guesses of passwords, just shrewd insight into someone else's character. IMO calling such a quality "empathy" is just the entertainment industry talking.

  15. I want the implant that converts... by quokkapox · · Score: 3, Funny

    TCP/IP into neurostimulation. Preferably allowing two-way communication. Then I can finally assimilate Google.

    --
    it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
    1. Re:I want the implant that converts... by operagost · · Score: 2, Funny
      "...Create a standard alphanumeric console positioned for the left hand. Now, an iconic display console positioned for the right hand. Tie both consoles into the Enterprise main computer core utilizing a neural scan interface."

      "There is no such device on file."

      [looking mildly annoyed] "No problem--here's how you BUILD it..."

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    2. Re:I want the implant that converts... by zootm · · Score: 1

      Something tells me that the result would be similar to this comic...

    3. Re:I want the implant that converts... by PornMaster · · Score: 1

      Yeah, man... and now you could have Google Maps on your heads-up neurally-connected "display".

    4. Re:I want the implant that converts... by TimeTrav · · Score: 1

      Sure... Google... right... THATS what you'd be browsing...

      I can see it now:
      "Oooooh! Streaming boobies directly to my optical implants!"
      [BSOD]
      [quokkapox goes into convulsions]

      --
      [sig]you really dont want the answers, trust me[/sig]
    5. Re:I want the implant that converts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The question is: did you write that down without looking it up...?

    6. Re:I want the implant that converts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you better hope that's not a MS TCP/IP stack...

      ghost hacked humans are so pathetic.

    7. Re:I want the implant that converts... by statusbar · · Score: 1

      And then you will see:

      Buffering...

      Every 10 seconds!

      --jeff++

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    8. Re:I want the implant that converts... by operagost · · Score: 1

      Heck no, I'm not that nerdy! I stole it shamelessly from some guy on the Internet!

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  16. not exactly "solar" by xtermin8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess it sounds more exciting to call them "solar cells," but obviously they're light sensors. If they were originally developed for use in solar electricity production, that should be in article, not the headline. "Matters for Nerds. Stuff that News!"

    1. Re:not exactly "solar" by coolcold · · Score: 2, Informative

      solar cells are more or less like light sensors apart from the sense that solar cells don't need power to operate while light sensors does (for amplification).

      Correct me if I am wrong

      --
      I am harvesting funny/good quotes. Please help by putting them in your sigs :)
    2. Re:not exactly "solar" by TFGeditor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They must be photovoltaic cells, which convert light into electricity, and thus need no power supply. Imagine an inter-retinal power supply meltdown!

      --
      Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
    3. Re:not exactly "solar" by Peldor · · Score: 1

      The real question is do they come with the warning "Do not stare directly at the sun."?

    4. Re:not exactly "solar" by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1, Funny

      Imagine an inter-retinal power supply meltdown!

      I came here to correct the use of 'solar' but that's been done so I'll settle with you. :-P

      Inter means between two. Intra-retinal is what you were looking for. Intra-ocular might even be better.

      There. I'm feeling better already. :)

    5. Re:not exactly "solar" by TFGeditor · · Score: 1

      You are, of course, quite correct.

      You probably will scoff when I say I know the difference and realized my error AFTER I hit the submit button, but figured it wasn't worth the trouble to re-post to make the correction. Besides, I knew it would make some Slashdotter's day to pounce on it. ;)

      --
      Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
    6. Re:not exactly "solar" by jcl5m · · Score: 1

      They are "solar cells" or rather photovoltaic cells. Traditional light sensors would require a seperate power supply thus making a feasible implant impossible. These generate the electricity for stimulation directly from the light coming into the eye, which I would consider one of the more ingenius decisions about this approach.

    7. Re:not exactly "solar" by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      You're too kind :)

      /scoff

      ;-P

    8. Re:not exactly "solar" by microwave_EE · · Score: 1

      Yes, but even traditional light sensors (e.g. a standard visible-senstive photodiode) can be operated in a photovoltaic mode, without the aid of a biasing current. The output voltages aren't very impressive, of course. I don't recall much of Silicon band-gaps and electron mobilities from my materials courses, but it can be done nonetheless.

      --
      I'll take you to the ball, Barbara Manitee!!!
    9. Re:not exactly "solar" by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      Yummy nummy nummy bacon. What does it say?!

      I CAN'T READ!

    10. Re:not exactly "solar" by xtermin8 · · Score: 1

      http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/en try?id=s0543300 solar (slr) ADJECTIVE: 1. Of, relating to, or proceeding from the sun: solar rays; solar physics. 2. Using or operated by energy derived from the sun: a solar heating system. 3. Determined or measured in reference to the sun: the solar year. I thought this might aggrevate, er... entertain you! ;-)

    11. Re:not exactly "solar" by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      solar (slr) ADJECTIVE: 1. Of, relating to, or proceeding from the sun: solar rays; solar physics. 2. Using or operated by energy derived from the sun: a solar heating system. 3. Determined or measured in reference to the sun: the solar year.

      The only time these ocular implants will be using energy derived from Sol (our star/sun) is when the bearers are looking directly at the sun. Otherwise, according to quantum physics, everything that the person 'sees' is, in actuality, absorbing a photon from whichever light source is present (solar or artificial), and re-emitting a photon of reduced power and a wavelength dependent on the properties of that material which is doing the 'reflecting'.

      Therefore, while it is possible that these implants will from time to time use solar energy, they are in no way whatsoever strictly 'solar'.

      Tastes so good, dog's won't know it's not bacon!

    12. Re:not exactly "solar" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG!!!!!!!!

      WHERE DID THAT APOSTROPHE COME FROM?!!!

      I just woke up. I swear. First post of the day.

      Please dont tell anyone.

  17. Solar? Implants... by L3on · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The article really doesn't explain why the chips are reffered to as "solar" cell implants. Are these people only going to be able to see light from the sun (I doubt it). I guess they just lacked a better word for the cells, any other suggestions as to why this is?

    1. Re:Solar? Implants... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just sloppy language.
      They are photovoltaic cells, light comes in, makes electrical signals, like a healthy retina in theory. Most photovoltaic cells have been dveloped for solar energy uses. Of couse these would be solar cells if you were outside during the day.

    2. Re:Solar? Implants... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I understand (I haven't RTFA) these implants change light into electrical impulses, in a grid pattern on the retina. RP patients lack photoreceptors, but NOT the other cells that carry the electrical signal to the brain, so if you transduce the signal for them, it's all good. In theory anyway.

    3. Re:Solar? Implants... by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking in a weird way solar is an apt word (also a stupid choice in this case) - solar panels generate electricity from light, I have no idea how this thing works, though I imagine it too generates electrical pulses from light.

      I saw somewhere on TV, a woman had a plastic looking panel implanted into her brain, with a huge bundle of wires sticking out the side of her skull. These wires were plugged into a computer/camera arrangement in such a way as the outlines of objects would be interpreted as a series of dots.

      I don't really remember the outcome, though I do recall she bitched constantly that she couldn't see like she used to (even after the medical staff explained this little detail to her several times before the operation)

  18. Two for one... by Vague+but+True · · Score: 2, Funny
    Depends on how you look at it. I think that when we achieve one, we will also have achieved the other.

    So my answer is...yes

    --

    I'm not a doctor, but I play one in bed.

  19. Incrediably important by UlfGabe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This development is very very^H^H^H^H^H important. I have been reading the material on this stuff and it looks as if it is possible to give people devoid of sight, some sight back.

    THE REAL treasure here is knowing the brain can adapt. Think about it, they were deprived of sight, and then their brain was able to REORGANIZE itself to understand totally FOREIGN signals and use them as input.

    It demonstrates how our wetware is more adaptable than any hardware.

    --
    Check journal for info on Anti-TextBook, an idea by me.
    1. Re:Incrediably important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It demonstrates how our wetware is more adaptable than any hardware.


      They don't have a common ancestor... :-)

    2. Re:Incrediably important by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      THE REAL treasure here is knowing the brain can adapt. Think about it, they were deprived of sight, and then their brain was able to REORGANIZE itself to understand totally FOREIGN signals and use them as input.

      Haven't we known that for a while? That's why surgical scars feel weird for a bit, then settle down - the nerve pattern got messed up.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    3. Re:Incrediably important by cnettel · · Score: 1

      OTOH, it's well-known that hearing implants on from-birth deaf children are more successful if put in place early on. The real test of adapting to random data would be putting a microphone in the eye and start sending away Fourier transformed sound data and watch if any patient developed hearing through that thing. I really doubt it.

    4. Re:Incrediably important by sowdog81 · · Score: 1

      Isn't it a problem explaining to them what their seeing? A person who was born blind won't understand what they're seeing right?

    5. Re:Incrediably important by Jahz · · Score: 1
      "...very^H^H^H^H^H important...."

      Hmm... try
      stty erase "^H"
      to get rid of those pesky ^H's when you hit backspace/del. Assuming you were hitting backspace.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
    6. Re:Incrediably important by Illserve · · Score: 1

      What's also amazing is that the eye can take this kind of punishment and heal up. It's structurally very delicate and complicated, and you'd think it would be one of those body parts that, like the brain, isn't very good at regenerating from damage.

      But no, suck out the juice, pump it full of saline, inject some air, detatch the retina, etc etc...

      wow

    7. Re:Incrediably important by PMuse · · Score: 3, Funny

      THE REAL treasure here is knowing the brain can adapt. ... It demonstrates how our wetware is more adaptable than any hardware.

      Yeah, just wait until we're able to reflash the firmware directly.

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
    8. Re:Incrediably important by evilmousse · · Score: 1
      It demonstrates how our wetware is more adaptable than any hardware.

      pshh, my old 386 was much more adaptable to replace that missing basement step than my brother's head ever was.
    9. Re:Incrediably important by jci · · Score: 1
    10. Re:Incrediably important by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      hink about it, they were deprived of sight, and then their brain was able to REORGANIZE itself to understand totally FOREIGN signals and use them as input.

      Umm, if I'm reading the article right, this technology is being used to treat people with degenerative disorders. IOW, these are diseases which progress *after* birth, and as such, the patients had vision, then lost it. So, these signals are far from "foreign", in that their visual cortex is trained to respond to simulae from the retina. Although, it is impressive that they were able to stimulate the optic nerve correctly to simulate a coarse retina.

      Your point would be far more interesting had these patients never had vision, in which case the brain would really be receiving signals that were completely foreign to it. And, in fact, I thought there were studies in this area (ie, people with congenital vision defects that were corrected), where the brain of the individual was, in fact, unable to correctly interpret the signals from their eyes. Unfortunately, I can't find references, so don't quote me. :)

    11. Re:Incrediably important by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      Hmm... try
      stty erase "^H" to get rid of those pesky ^H's when you hit backspace/del


      Jeepers. Another n00by l@m3r who doesn't know squat about Unix editors. Learn from us Masters!
      ZZ
      .
      ^C
      Q!
      [ESC]
      dammit.... oh, never mind

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    12. Re:Incrediably important by UlfGabe · · Score: 1

      'scuse me. But getting signals from a silicone chip, implanted on the eye, and not part of a persons natural makeup qualifies as Foreign object to me.

      Just like how contact lenses are foreign, braces.

      It would be my opinion that any sufficiently advanced brain can automatically organize structured data(from external vectors)in an efficient way, therefore think about this....

      Say you want to know the weather at a whole bunch of different locations on the globe, and people are uploading the numerical data for these sites. You plug in your brainstem into this data, d/l, and lo and behold, your brain can interpret this data to form an idea about how the world is without experiencing part of it.

      The same works with weather reports, but here im talking direct brain to brain connections.

      --
      Check journal for info on Anti-TextBook, an idea by me.
    13. Re:Incrediably important by Remlik · · Score: 1

      One catch is that proceedures like these only work on people who could see for at least a few years of thier lives. People born blind do not develop the necessary linkage in the brain to decode these signals later in life. Their brains literally do not know how to see.

      --
      Apple free since 1990!
    14. Re:Incrediably important by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      'scuse me. But getting signals from a silicone chip, implanted on the eye, and not part of a persons natural makeup qualifies as Foreign object to me.

      Except, of course, that you suggested that "their brain was able to REORGANIZE itself", which is patently false. The electronics that were installed mimic the stimulus from the retina. Thus, the brain works just as it did before. The impressive part is that they were able to mimic the retina in the first place, and as a result the brain is able to correctly interpret those signals.

      Put more succinctly, this article demonstrates *nothing* about how adaptable our brains are, because it's the electronics adapting to the brain, not the brain adapting to the electronics.

    15. Re:Incrediably important by Jahz · · Score: 1

      From the original text, I dont think he was using it in the /. nerd way.

      Thanks for the link though.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
    16. Re:Incrediably important by Jahz · · Score: 1

      Are you talking about me? I posted because I am a wise-ass. ...You quoted me, but I hope you were referring to the super-post. I think I know plenty about "UNIX editors." I exclusively use Vi(m) while programming at work. Besides, he wasnt using an editor to post. Vim cant render /. afaik

      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
  20. Dune? by kc01 · · Score: 0
    Sounds like the artificial eyes described in the "Dune" series are becoming possible...

    I must say it's always gratifying when technology becomes possible that had only been considered "science fiction."

    1. Re:Dune? by ytsejam-ppc · · Score: 1

      That's the first thing I thought. Well, I cursed the dirty Tleilaxu first, then I thought of their damn eyes.

    2. Re:Dune? by Dorothy+86 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Who needs eyes? I navigate by looking into the twists and turns of the future! -KH

  21. Re:But wouldn't by operagost · · Score: 2, Funny

    The prop department was all out of hair clips.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  22. Resolution by tsa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The ASR chip contains approximately 5,000 microscopic solar cells that convert light into electrical impulses.

    5000 cells, that's an area of 70x70 cells. Is that enough to see with or am I missing something?

    --

    -- Cheers!

    1. Re:Resolution by wulfhound · · Score: 2, Insightful

      70x70 is enough vision to be useful - more than enough to see doorways, furniture and suchlike, and not far off what you'd need to read large print (street signs and suchlike).

    2. Re:Resolution by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      It is a beginning. You are right, it isn't the greatest resolution, but even the article text refers to the minimal improvement (not bumping into things).

      No, these folks won't be driving cars (I hope), but if this article is true, we should see improvements over the years. I wouldnn't doubt if by the ened of this century, we see the option to upgrade eyes ar beyond what we have today.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    3. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a lot better than what they used to use. I saw some of the old animal experiments that were 2x2 or 4x4.

    4. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can arrange them in a spiral formation as matrix (square) of detectors may not be the best way of arranging the detectors

      just my thought
      ~omi

    5. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When choosing betweek 0 x 0 and 70 x 70 which would you choose?
      The previous tests that I heard about were about half that resolution, so 5000 cells is a big deal. You could also potentially have more than 1 chip, but that is way down the road. Hopefully advances in this research will continue fast than my loss of vision due to retinitis pigmentosa.

    6. Re:Resolution by chiphart · · Score: 1

      We just have to wait for nVidia and ATI to get in on this action to help drive features. I can see it now, 2025: thousands of ATI Eyeball users wait anxiously for the new Linux drivers so they can stop running green, er, RED lights.

      --

      ...if I wanted to read garbage like that, I'd go to \.
    7. Re:Resolution by tepples · · Score: 1

      that's an area of 70x70 cells. Is that enough to see with or am I missing something?

      Backgrounds in Atari 2600 video games often had even fewer cells.

    8. Re:Resolution by MattyDK23 · · Score: 0

      If RP only affects peripheral vision, then I would think so; it just provides a broad picture of your environment. You'd notice the loss of detail/resolution more with center of field vision.

    9. Re:Resolution by TomorrowPlusX · · Score: 2, Informative

      Also, keep in mind that our natural eyes are actually pretty shitty cameras ( at least, from the standpoint of what we expect from a CCD ). It turns out our brains are interpolating an awful lot from the spotty signals coming in from our eyes.

      --

      lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet
    10. Re:Resolution by tsa · · Score: 1

      I have no idea what the resolution of a human eye is. My doctor told me I have good retina's, which means I can see an aful lot of detail, but how many receptor cells I use for that, I have no idea.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    11. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My doctor told me I have good retina's

      What resolution does it take to spot a superfluous apostrophe?

  23. the future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see a future where artificial eyes are even better than the natural ones. Then we could zoom in on objects, have improved filters so we can look at the sun, say, and why not even the ability to see more wavelengths than we can now. Together with brain implnts we can have our builtin camera, and maybe even telepathy. Coolness.

  24. Its about time.... by bjk002 · · Score: 1

    The porn industry has been waiting for this....

    --
    Opinion:=TMyOpinion.Create(Me);
  25. I'm excited! by plalonde2 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    As someone who has been losing central vision from a pesky bleeding blood vessel under my retina, this news really excites me.

    On friday I'm going in for essentially the same surgery, only instead of inserting a chip, they try to deal with the bad blood vessel. Then, after a week of lying face down, and a month of no flying (which kills my easy work commute and turns it into a 5 hour ordeal), I get to find out how much damage was done to my retinal pigments by the blood that has been pooling there for half a year.

    Damage that *used* to be un-repairable. With this technology now deployed there's a good chance it will be routine for people like me in 10-15 years.

    And given that the likelyhood of diagnosis in the second (currently good) eye is about 1 in 50 per year from now on, the stats give me 15-25 years before I start worrying about getting an artificial retina.

    Hooray for bionics!

    1. Re:I'm excited! by La+Gris · · Score: 1

      I am happy to read about technologies advances that can help and cure disabilities.

      Retina dammanges, illness or birth defects, stayed with no cure and quite few knoledge until recently.

      Microchips as optical prothesis are a very new. As it bring some hope for those with no vision at all or very low sight, it is not a suitable choice if you still have some usable sight.

      Eye surgery tend to let some scares that may compromise the use of further more advanced treatments. Once you get that chip inside, you may loose any forthcomping hope of getting it bettor.

      If you start from nothing, it may be good for you and medical advance to volunter as a gunea pig. Otherwise it may be better to wait for a more appropriate cure to be discovered.

      --
      Léa Gris
    2. Re:I'm excited! by plalonde2 · · Score: 1
      That's what excites me - my right eye vision has fallen to under 20/400, which is to say I can't make out the E at the top of an eye chart. It's very localized, but bang on the spot I need to read. I'm lucky, so to speak, because I retain my periferal vision in that eye. And with luck, some months after surgery, I'll be able to fuse binocular images again.

      But my fear is that it spreads to the other eye (which is highly likely over the course of my hopefully long life to come) and leaves me unable to read. One thing we do seem to know about this condition is that it's an ongoing thing, not just a one-off.

      Hope comes in all sorts of forms, even early experiments in optical cybernetics :-)

    3. Re:I'm excited! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I totally hear that. I'm currently at risk for glaucoma (though my ocular hypertension is thankfully under control), and any progress in these fields is pretty darn exciting.

      I'd just resigned myself to some kind of sonar prosthetics, but hey, direct visual interfaces would be even better.

    4. Re:I'm excited! by nharmon · · Score: 1

      [i]Then, after a week of lying face down, and a month of no flying (which kills my easy work commute and turns it into a 5 hour ordeal)[/i]

      Tell me more about this flying thing and how it makes your commute easier.

    5. Re:I'm excited! by mattkime · · Score: 1

      and a month of no flying (which kills my easy work commute and turns it into a 5 hour ordeal)

      Steve Jobs is going blind! The lickable interface is sure to become gropetastic!

      --
      Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
    6. Re:I'm excited! by magarity · · Score: 1

      and a month of no flying

      This is inside-the-box thinking. All you need to do is fly just above the treetops. Glad I could help.

    7. Re:I'm excited! by plalonde2 · · Score: 1

      Simple. I live on an island. I overnight two nights a week in the big city, working 3 days there, and two days a week from home. The 35 minute float plane flight is cost-effective and lets be be in the office at 8:00am on Tuesdays and back home by 8:00pm on Thursdays. No flying turns it into a 4-5 hour drive with ferries. Not so cost effective anymore.

  26. hmm... by Ricken · · Score: 1

    So when will we see those eye-chips with laser? I'd buy it.

  27. Next wave of spam by mishehu · · Score: 1

    I can see it now...

    Subject: 3nh4nce your v1si\on impl4nts lklkr 23iou

    Hi Jan Dopplemeyer,

    Our n3w onl1ne pharmac`y has all new optIcal impl4nts to give you b3tter p3rform`4nce.

    http://some.crap.site

    G.W. Bush read his inaugaration speech with a gaggle of goats eating barley and malt at the local tavern. A mouse steps in to talk to Cheney about poker. We put this line here because we think we can fool your spam filter, unless you use DSPAM.

  28. Hows the glare? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wouldnt this create way too much glare while driving, and then wearing sunglasses it seems would neutralize the whole situation. Yes, i understand these people probably cannot drive.

  29. Humanoid Robot Vision? by Mentifex · · Score: 1, Informative


    Humanoid robots might also have uses for these artificial silicon retina microchips.
    Robots with a sense of vision could use them to acquire humanoid eyeballs.
    Artificial General Intelligence is a lot closer than many people realize.

  30. This kind of Tech... by Tavor · · Score: 0

    ... always exictes me. Technology seems to be on the edge of limitless applications. I'm sure that in fifteen years, there will be new applications for microtechnology that none of us have even though of yet. Sorry for the geek factor here, but can you imagine when human implants and prosthethis reach the level of sophistication depected in Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex?

    --
    Windows has detected an undetectable error.
    1. Re:This kind of Tech... by deimtee · · Score: 1

      There is an interesting depiction of implant technology in the book "The Opoponax Invasion" by John Brosnan.
      It's been a while since I read it, but I seem to remember being a lot more impressed with the ideas in it than the story itself. It was still an entertaining enough read though.

      --
      I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
  31. Implant them in every /. editors! by alephnull42 · · Score: 1

    some patients have experienced improvements such as not bumping into objects around the house, and being able to read the time on a clock.

    I say these should be mandatory for /. editors. Maybe it will help them spot duplicate stories better.

    *ducks*

    --
    Not confused enough? http://translate.google.com/translate?u=www.slashdot.jp&hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=ja&tl=en
  32. Probably by maroberts · · Score: 1

    I've read somewhere that our visual input is pretty crappy and our brain learns to tidy the signal a lot. If you have no vision beforehand, 70x70 is a big deal.

    Myself, I'll still wait till we get 1MegaPixel versions though.....

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

    1. Re:Probably by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Not only does the brain do a huge amount of signal processing at a variety of levels, but it also controls the eye muscles - there are tiny twitches called "saccades" that we are ordinarily not even aware of that our brain uses to twitch our eyes around in order to get visual data needed to fill in for deficiencies in our eyes. People who have spent a lot of time soldering tend to have twitchy eyes because their brain is compensating for solder burns...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Probably by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      People who have spent a lot of time soldering tend to have twitchy eyes because their brain is compensating for solder burns...

      One wonders if the fumes might be contributing to that.

  33. Great News, Little to do With Solar by changos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is great news. I've been following these procedures for quite some time. Retinitis Pigmentosa runs in our family.

    One thing to point out is that this disease is a degeneration of the retina. It's called pigmentosa due to the fact that as the retinal cells die, small spots appear on the retina. The degenerations starts on the outside, and moves inward, creating a tunnel-like feeling for the patient.

    My uncle had surgery in Cuba (We live in Guatemala, so let's just skip the whole Cuba-American posts) where they operated his retina, and treated it with oxygen and Ozone therapies. This type of operation is not intended to cure it, but to stop it. This was about 5 years ago, and his retinitis pigmentosa has not spread, but it's still a bit early to know for sure.

    If you have more questions there is tons of information on the web

    --------------------
    Arturo Mijangos

    1. Re:Great News, Little to do With Solar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like Cuba has decent healthcare and just the other day they banned smoking in publici as well. Is Cuba out-pacing the United States in caring for her citizens?

      Pretty soon we'll be begging Cuba to trade with us and let us back in.

    2. Re:Great News, Little to do With Solar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *rolls eyes*. Even if Cuba had the best health-care in the world, how the hell would that affect US posistion on cuba?

  34. FLAMEBAIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FLAMEBAIT

  35. visual cortex is still stimulated by interactive_civilian · · Score: 1
    There was an article on Fark the other day (sorry, can't find the link...someone help me out) about a blind artist who could draw objects that were described to him. When told to draw from a different perspective, he could imagine it and do it.

    When hooked up to sensors it was realized that the same parts of his brain were stimulated that us sighted folks use to remember things we have seen. So, I imagine that the signals are not FOREIGN to the brain and there isn't much REORGANIZing going on. The "circuitry" is there and can still be used even without the constant stimuli.

    Very impressive article. Perhaps helps to explain people can regain some sight with these improvements. Perhaps all one has to do is get a signal there and the brain will take care of the rest.

    --
    "Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
    1. Re:visual cortex is still stimulated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The grandparent did not mean the same kind of foreigness you do.

      He meant that the implants are not "designed" to send the same kind of signals that real eyes do. It is incredible how the brain learns to decode these signals and transform them into a visual map (or any other stimuli)

    2. Re:visual cortex is still stimulated by arekq · · Score: 1

      Yes. Imagine sending a signal from your DVD player directly to your "eye".
      Ohh... Yes!

  36. It's advancements like these... by RootsLINUX · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...that make me wish I studied life science instead of computer engineering. I'd love to say I contributed to a great advancement like this, and the biomedical field really interests me. In computer architecture if I were to say "I invented a new branch predictor that's 100% accurate and only consumes 20% of the normal die area", about 19/20 people wouldn't know what the hell I was talking about. Are we forever to be unsung heroes? >_>

    --
    Hero of Allacrost, a FOSS RPG for *NIX/*BSD/OS X/Win
    1. Re:It's advancements like these... by brian.glanz · · Score: 1
    2. Re:It's advancements like these... by aug24 · · Score: 1

      I'm one of the 19 ;-) but I know that advancements in computing and algorithms are useful to the world at large. Imagine if this biomedical team had not had computers to design their implant?

      Do what you can. Do it well. Don't worry that you can't do everything. Don't worry about being unsung, so long as you know you did what you could.

      Justin.
      PS Oh, and slander Microsoft/SCO every chance you get.

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    3. Re:It's advancements like these... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      "about 19/20 people "
      I think that is highly optimistic. My guess would be closer to 1 out 1000 people. Most people in most fields are forever to be unsung heroes. Sure the doctor that implanted was important but what about the scientist that developed the method of making the sensor? Or the guy that wrote the OS that the designer of the sensor used. Or the person that wrote the cad program. It all adds up.
      Now if you did invent a new branch predictor that was 100% accurate and only consumed 20% of the normal die area that would be cool :)

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    4. Re:It's advancements like these... by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      I see your point, but you're example is a little flawed I think. Not many would care about, or at least understand, this eye enhancement if it was defined in terms of technology, similar to what your example was. The lay person cares about the application of the innovation, so in your example if you showed how the improved branch predictor reduced the cost and power consumption of the microprocessors which enabled the sub-$100 laptop which in turn gave 3rd world doctors the ability to save thousand of lives... then people would get it. And if you do develo this, and the people do get it... demand a parade!

  37. The brain learns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When surgeons re-attach a severed limb they don't worry about getting all the neurons connected correctly. They connect them randomly, and the brain learns the new mapping.

    Physically therapy takes care of the learning, but it is a side effect, the brain is good at learning new mappings. The body generally has many more problems making everything work, in ways that are not related to incorrectly attached neurons.

    1. Re:The brain learns by FirienFirien · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In case anyone isn't sure whether the eyes are too complex for the brain to learn, remember that they did experiments with putting inverting glasses on people, so they saw everything upside down.

      I think it took about half a week for people's brains to respond 'correctly' to a given situation (e.g. not bumping into things).

      When the goggles were removed, the test subjects saw things upside down. The brain had adjusted sufficiently to seeing upside down that reverting to the standard way up confused it.

      There was a comment from one of the users that he did occasionally still get confused, which implies that the wiring in these photodetectors may occasionally confuse the user slightly as the brain tries to remember which signal protocol it's using, but the main point is the speed of learning seen in the experiment.

      --
      Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
    2. Re:The brain learns by dustman · · Score: 1

      A few years ago, I lost one of the lenses to my glasses while canoeing. This lens was loose, and occasionally fell out, and when it fell out into a river of brown water, I was hosed.

      My vision is not as horrible as some peoples'. I bet I could pass the vision test to get a license if I squinted hard enough, but it's bad enough that I need my glasses to comfortably use a computer. I can see well enough to do "active" things without my glasses, and I take them off if I'm worried they'll get broken.

      Anyway, the lens that I had left was the one for my "bad" eye. I went several days wearing just the one lens, before I got a new pair.

      What was weird (and unexpected at first, although it makes sense in retrospect), was that the lenses refracted incoming light a little bit vertically. So, for years, I had been fine with glasses or without, but when I switched to having just one lens, I got a little bit of double vision, but it was in the vertical direction. You see horizontal double vision all the time, just cross your eyes, but the vertical kind was a first for me. And, I can't make my eyes move vertically independent of each other (can anyone?)...

      Anyway, the point: Surprisingly quickly (after a few hours), my brain adapted to this situation, and I was seeing "normally" (no double vision) again, for the several days in which I wore only one lens. If I took the one lens off, I once again got the vertical double vision for 30 minutes to an hour, which was kind of scary (I worried that using one lens might screw up my eyes)... When I got a new real pair of glasses, I had the double vision for a little bit, and the "break-in" period (I feel a little weird and headachy for the first few hours when I get a new pair of glasses) was a tad longer than normal, but that was all.

    3. Re:The brain learns by modecx · · Score: 1

      And, I can't make my eyes move vertically independent of each other (can anyone?)...

      Hehe, yeah, I can... I used to freak my band teacher out by doing that. I think I used to have more control over my eyes then, though. I used to do it all the time, but haven't tried for years. My friends said I could make one go up and the other go down, and also instead of crossing, go opposite directions. I never had a camera to actually see what it looked like, or to see if I was acutally doing it. Since my teacher thought I was posessed, I'm inclined to believe that I was.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  38. Obligatory movie reference... by Anita+Coney · · Score: 1

    "I see clocks."

    --
    If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
  39. MPAA owns your eyes by tepples · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One of [the] cool features [of a science-fictional eye implant that this product resembles] was that you could pull pictures and video off of it, as well as see through it. It was an in-skull camera.

    Watch people with implants be banned from entering movie theaters.

    1. Re:MPAA owns your eyes by Keely · · Score: 1
      One of [the] cool features [of a science-fictional eye implant that this product resembles] was that you could pull pictures and video off of it, as well as see through it. It was an in-skull camera.

      Watch people with implants be banned from entering movie theaters.
      No, watch them be banned from locker rooms, the way camera phones have been.
    2. Re:MPAA owns your eyes by FHMyles · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Congratulations on the successful implantation of your new miraculous vision-restoring eye implants! Please note, however, that because of the DMCA Revision of 2009, you are now required to wear a heavy blindfold in any place where you are at risk of viewing copyrighted materials, such as public streets, shopping venues, movie theatres, your workplace and your home."

    3. Re:MPAA owns your eyes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      Watch people with implants be banned from entering movie theaters.

      Nahh, the anti-recording laws have nothing on the Americans with Disabilities Act. For example, you can ban pets from your establishment...but not seeing-eye dogs / helper dogs. Any sort of restrictions of that kind don't apply to something someone needs to compensate for a disability. (Which is as it should be, IMHO.)

    4. Re:MPAA owns your eyes by bwcbwc · · Score: 1

      And watch the countersuit under the ADA for denial of fair access to faciilties by disabled person.

      --
      We are the 198 proof..
    5. Re:MPAA owns your eyes by bwcbwc · · Score: 1

      Actually, now that I think about it, they'd probably just incorporate DRM and RFID into the implant and charge a fee based on any downloads of material from the implant.

      --
      We are the 198 proof..
  40. gives new meaning to the term by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AHHH the sun's in my eyes!!!

  41. Keep doing that and you'll go blind.... by jthayden · · Score: 2

    Finally hope for serial masturbators everywhere.

  42. In Related News... by bjk002 · · Score: 0, Troll

    M$ share prices rose dramatically today as news of a potentially new market opening up. It turns out that M$, whose IP patents cover the automated downloading of information directly to the brain, has already put in place technology to automate image downloading through retinal implants. Users must purchase a subsciption to use the service, but M$ spokesperson was quoted as saying "Our intent is not to capitalize on the misfortunes of individuals, but rather to put in place the technology to enable users to get the most out of offered services such as sight"

    --
    Opinion:=TMyOpinion.Create(Me);
  43. Re:All we need now by chillmost · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is solar powered brain for idiot people

    Care to volunteer?

  44. 1,883,645.12 EUR for a digital camera. Hmm.. by cbbb · · Score: 1

    http://www.ultrapro.ro/magazin/AfiseazaProdus.jsp? pr_id=14022&NewGrid2Page=2

  45. Stem cells in eyes by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1

    In tandem with this research there has also been progress made in retinal transplants using stem cell growth mediums to allow the cells to function normally.
    Just for the sake of curiousity, are these adult stem cells or fetal stem cells they're working with? You know, that being one of the hot-button targets in stem cell research...

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
    1. Re:Stem cells in eyes by jocks · · Score: 1

      As far as I am aware the current research uses stem cells from aborted foetuses.

      This has obvious implications.

      As far as I know the research has not looked at the use of adult stem cells as an alternative. Like any good research they deal with the science of the problem, it is for us to decide how or indeed if we with to implement. One thing is clear to me, however, it is an awful lot easier to have an opinion when you are not faced with the reality of impending blindness.

    2. Re:Stem cells in eyes by Metapsyborg · · Score: 1
      As far as I am aware the current research uses stem cells from aborted foetuses.

      This has obvious implications.

      Well, that would make you uneducated on the issue, and someone who believes a little too much in propaganda.

      Stem cells are harvested from embryos used in Invetro fertilization, or they are cloned:

      http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,66533,00. html?tw=wn_tophead_3

      Aborted fetuses? Okay...

      --
      (\(\
      (^.^) INFECTED
      (")")
    3. Re:Stem cells in eyes by jocks · · Score: 1

      Yes, aborted foetuses:
      http://www.news-medical.net/?id=5911

      I only make statements when I have the facts, something that you should try.

  46. I worked on this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't have anything to do with the implant itself, but I have one of them at home that failed QC - looking at it under a magnifier is amazing. "A friend" made the tool that inserts this implant. It looks like a fat pen with a needle at the end, and the needle ends in a tiny "shovel". The implant is held on the tool by a tiny sheet of plastic over the shovel. There is a little wire that runs inside the needle, and when a trigger is depressed, it slides out the end of the needle, and pushes the implant out onto the retina. Then the tip is discarded, and a new tip with an implant pre-loaded onto the "shovel" is attached to do the other eye. There was a lot of micro-machining and laser welding of amazingly small parts going on!

  47. Lazy eye / Amblyopia by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1

    You're referring to Amblyopia, commonly called "lazy eye." I had a friend in kindergarten who suffered from it. Luckily, they detected it early enough for him to go on the patch, specifically, an eyepatch to force him to use the other eye. Sadly, it is indeed one of those disorders which is not fixable after a certain age.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
    1. Re:Lazy eye / Amblyopia by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      Sure it's fixable. Maybe just not with surgery. I never used to use my right eye. Playing sports was not easy! Now i get to marvel at the world in 3d, i still can't believe this is the way most people see all the time, i had no clue what i was missing. Anyways, long story short, yoga is the answer. Yoga is the instruction manual for what the body is capable of, which is way more than western medicine thinks. Once i started to learn how my eyes work, everything just started to come together. Can't wait to try baseball again and actually be able to tell where in 3d space the ball is BEFORE it hits me in the head :)

  48. Other implants by Living+WTF · · Score: 1

    I am happy to see progress in implant technology.

    I wonder when there will be some implants for all the people who have lost their sense of humor...

    --
    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
  49. Otherland anyone? by zigomushy · · Score: 1

    Since reading Otherland a few years back (Tad Williams), I have been very curious about new advances in the neurobiological fields. While Williams was not the first to come up with these kind of ideas, he had definitly changed the path i have chosen for univerity study.

    Does anyone recall the experiment that implanted electrodes in the brains of chimps, and they where able to play pong just using thought?

    I think that, more than ever before, in the next decade, some of the most life changing science for people with disibilities is going to emerge. not just from the pure medical (and social) reasons - helping the blind, motor disabled ... -, i think people soon will want and have the ability to plug into the net and be _completly_ imersed in the virtual enviroment.

    I know this sounds terribly geeky, and anti social, but just imagine what the combination of all these technologies may do, one day, for paraplegic patients, who have very little, or no ability to comunicate with the outside world.

  50. Bit of irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find my current random tagline at the bottom of the comments a tad bit ironic considering the thread I am in...

    "WYSIWYG: What You See Is What You Get."

  51. Wait'll the Universal Soldiers come... by coachvince · · Score: 0

    Can't wait for the military to ask for the Special Forces troops, etc. to give up one good eye for an even "better" one. And better lungs, so that he can go for hours without breathing (makes gas masks less important).

    And then, of course, those "lustful urges" will be a distraction and discipline issue, so we'll nip that in the bud...



    ManPlus by Fredirik Pohl. Read it.

    Here's some background from Google http://www.routledge-ny.com/ref/cyborgcitizen/cyci tpgs/manplus.html

    A Soldier First. A Soldier Always. The Warrior ethos http://www.tradoc.army.mil/pao/TNSarchives/April04 /042404.htm

    Unlike some however, I don't see this concept as a completely bad thing. Some people would be quite happy to be part of a cyborg. If it comes about because their physical difficulties were abated, why not offer them more options? If my eyesight is poor, why not give me 20/20, 400X zoom, IR, Xray, UV and starlight vision? And if that makes me a slightly better sniper (just slightly, mind you), so be it.

    --
  52. What happens to those who can see by AviLazar · · Score: 1

    Richard Priar "I'm black?"

    Husband to wife: "Hey you said you were a 5'9" super model"

    --

    I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    1. Re:What happens to those who can see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Richard Priar "I'm black?"

      That's Stevie Wonder, dumbass. Richard Pryor never went blind.

    2. Re:What happens to those who can see by Ghouki · · Score: 0


      ..umm f.y.i he was referring to Richard Pryor and the film "Hear no evil;See no evil" ..funny funny stuff! :)

      --

      insert witty comment here
  53. Not enough info... by rarose · · Score: 1

    We'd also need to know the size of the chip to figure out the angular resolution which is far more important than the raw 70x70 size.

    70x70 that had a large angular span would be very very useful for navigating the world, even if it wouldn't help them read the fine print on the bottom of an auto loan.

    70x70 that had a very small angular span would help them read the auto loan but would be absolutely useless for walking out of the house towards the car. Think about it... a blind person's white cane is an extremely high resolution device, but it's angular width is less than 1" at 6 feet.

    --
    --Rob
  54. Subretinal Non-Powered Approach Has Limits by pz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IAAVN (I Am A Visual Neuroscientist) working on artificial vision. I have seen presentations on this approach, and unlike many of the other efforts in this field, Dr. Chow's claims appear astonishingly good.

    The basic idea is beautiful and elegant: you put an array of tiny photodiodes behind the retina, exactly where the photoreceptor cells (rods and cones) are. Shining light on each of these nearly-cell-sized photodiodes creates a localized voltage which should stimulate a small handful of cells, generating a signal that will mimic the original biologically transduced input to the retina. The photodiodes nicely supplant the dying photosensitive cells. It sounds perfect.

    I was very impressed with their presentation at a one-day symposium on artificial vision I attended at USC a few years ago, until one of the audience members pointed out that they had done some calculations, and it seemed that one would need incredibly high light levels to generate enough current to stimulate the local cells. Dr. Chow admitted that, even being optimistic about the conversion efficiency of photodiodes (which here need to be optimized for biocompatibility more than efficiency), the physics involved dictates that you would need light bright enough to cause damage to even the non-photosensitive tissue to get the device to work. Dr. Chow then backpedaled to say that even if the device cannot restore lost vision, it can perhaps supplant any remaining healty cells to improve vision in low-sighted patients. That question-anwer cycle was the first point in his presentation where he backed off from the claim of restoring full vision to blind patients.

    Dr. Chow's results were done in a private laboratory, part of a company set up to profit from his advances. He must answer to his shareholders, and his results are not open to the level of scruitiny that standard scientific claims are. He was reluctant to answer questions at this session. Therefore, as a scientist I am bound by the lack of openness to view his claims with a grain of salt.

    Other efforts to create artificial vision are still having trouble with just a handful of points of light. While I believe that the subretinal approach has a good chance of eventually proving fruitful, using a silicon-based device that lacks an external power source just cannot produce normal vision. This is why the article concentrates on the improvements in existing low vision, rather than discussing restoration of lost vision.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    1. Re:Subretinal Non-Powered Approach Has Limits by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1
      the physics involved dictates that you would need light bright enough to cause damage to even the non-photosensitive tissue to get the device to work.

      Can't they use a small amplifier? Hearing aids also use batteries, why should artificial vision be autonomous?

    2. Re:Subretinal Non-Powered Approach Has Limits by pz · · Score: 1

      The problem with using a small amplifier is that you need to get power to it. All of the other retinal efforts are designing systems with external power sources (and power transmitted inductively to a coil that also gets implanted in the eye): Dr. Chow's is the only one which isn't. While this makes for an elegantly simple design, it severly limits it's capabilities.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    3. Re:Subretinal Non-Powered Approach Has Limits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I figure it's because most people dont want to remove their eye to replace the batteries.

    4. Re:Subretinal Non-Powered Approach Has Limits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like such devices would have a wonderful use for electrical induction.

    5. Re:Subretinal Non-Powered Approach Has Limits by humina · · Score: 1
      The problem with a subretinal approach is if you mess up the surgery at all, there goes your retina and all your hopes of seeing again (unless you implant in the brain or the optic nerve). The epiretinal approach allows doctors to implant multiple times without damaging the retina. Although it takes more power for epiretinal implants, if I went blind I would prefer it due to it's allowance for error.

      http://www.bostonretinalimplant.org/
      http://bmes-erc.usc.edu/index.htm/

      --
      check out the best blog ever:
      http://oehlberg.com
    6. Re:Subretinal Non-Powered Approach Has Limits by Subjective · · Score: 1

      If there's no room in the eye for a power cable, you could always replace the whole eye with a device.
      That sounds so cool and so creepy at the same time :)

      --
      My other .sig is also this bad
  55. Coaxial cameras by rarose · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've always thought that the best analogy for our eyes are two coaxial cameras. A very narrow beam, high resolution camera slightly off the centerline, surrounded by a wide-angle low resolution camera.

    Rods, which predominate the wide-angle camera system, are like hyped B&W film... great night sensitivity, but grainy. Cones, which dominate the inner narrow-angle camera system give color vision, but require much higher light levels to operate.

    --
    --Rob
  56. Biological adaptation by rarose · · Score: 1

    I'd be curious if the sensitivity of the surrounding neurons would increase to better sense the impulses generated by the implant. It seems that this would just be a small modification of the neural net...

    As such it would seem logical to extrapolate that this approach would be far better with patients who still have low vision rather than no vision because their neural nets already have "the right wiring" so there's only one biological know (the sensitivity) that needs to be tweaked.

    --
    --Rob
    1. Re:Biological adaptation by pz · · Score: 1

      I'd be curious if the sensitivity of the surrounding neurons would increase to better sense the impulses generated by the implant. It seems that this would just be a small modification of the neural net...

      Unlikely. The first two synapses in the visual system (in the retina) are already working near the quantum limit for efficiency (under the appropriate conditions, humans can detect a single photon). Although I have not seen anyone actually addressing this issue, the results suggest that the signal from passive photodiodes just won't be strong enough under normal light levels to overcome system noise and the fundamental biochemical thresholds.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  57. Megapixel sight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Coming soon, 2.1 megapixels replacing the 5,000 of yesteryear!

  58. Similar effort by karvind · · Score: 1

    Similar effort by Boston Retina Implants and was covered on slashdot before.

  59. Re:I'm excited!.......Dude...... by TechnoGrl · · Score: 1

    Dude....I'm just guessing but I'm thinking that you'll be making that work commute in your flying car (by Moller of course) before you'll be walking around with that artificial eye......

    --
    ----- In Your Cubicle No One Can Hear You Scream...
  60. Explanation of Query by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1

    I was not trying to attack your use of stem cells in therapy. I was merely trying to clarify. While I have an opinion, it didn't seem relative to the discussion. And yes, this reply is off-topic, but I wanted to assure you that you were not being attacked, as your post seemed to indicate you thought you were.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
  61. Yoga to Cure Lazy Eye by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1
    Interesting. I've read up a bit on yoga, not really gotten into the practice of it outside of some of the stretches and exercises. Did you follow a specific set of therapy and/or exercises or was this something that happened as a kind of a side effect of the general enlightenment?

    ^_^ I'll skip any jokes about how opening the third eye would obviously imply being able to open the second one as well... Heck, that might even be too close to the truth.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
    1. Re:Yoga to Cure Lazy Eye by tabrnaker · · Score: 1
      It was more a side effect, which when i became aware of it i started investigating and pursuing it. Definitely worth the time and effort. Effort is a little misleading, since the whole goal of yoga is relaxation. I have to say if interested try and find someone that's been given the ok to teach by sri. k. pattabhi jois. He only gives the ok when they've gotten control over all their muscles, it's a delight to watch them in action. THere is extreme lightness and grace to their movements. Iyengar also focus on becoming aware of restrictions and that might be a good route to follow but i have not looked into it.

      For those interested only in healing their eyes, look up William H. Bates an the bates method. Freely available on the internet. Not totally correct, but the relaxation practices will help. Unfortunately, this was written in a time when population was largely structurally aligned, before it became fashionable to be out of alignment. If a protruding head keeps on adding tension to the delicate muscles of the face and eye then you'll have little luck until you learn to actually stand properly.

  62. Could use sun directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  63. and now for the Blade Runner eys quote by dual_boot_brain · · Score: 1

    You not come here! Illegal! I just do eyes. Just - just eyes. Just genetic design. Just eyes.

    --
    There is no reset button in life; however, there are bonus levels.
  64. Biological Progression by Efialtis · · Score: 1

    I guess it was only a matter of time before they were able to decode the electric impulses sent out by eyes and received by the brain...
    Once this information in known, they can manipulate it or copy it with artificial means.
    I have a friend with RP, and this would really help him...
    What I want is a way to
    A) do a "shine job" on my eyes so I can better see in the dark
    or
    B) implant one of these kind of chips to enhance my vision with the UV and IR spectrums...

    --
    --E--
  65. Not quite ready by Johnny+Fusion · · Score: 1

    My wife has RP and we have been following the development of this prosthetic for years.

    My wife however wants to wait until they can make a model with "heat vision" therefore becoming a super-powered cyborg, that can cook a steak just by staring at it.

    --
    There are two kinds of fool. One says, This is old, and therefore good. And one says, This is new, and therefore better.
  66. Whipper Snapers! by BobBoring · · Score: 1

    Some of us are from the '60's and have children older than you. The technology discussed in the article was just so much fiction only twenty-five years ago. Many sub 20k Slashdot userids welcome the fact our life expectancy and quality of life has increased significantly due to technology. I first used the internet over a teletype terminal and the six million dollar man was still in production.

    LOL! Kids these days

    1. Re:Whipper Snapers! by geoffspear · · Score: 1
      Which is why I said "the web", not "the internet".

      If you honestly expect me to believe you got your slashdot ID in 1978, using a teletype, I'm going to find it hard to find anything you say credible.

      I've got a very high slashdot ID, and I'm 2 years older than CmdrTaco. I hardly think you can correlate ID numbers with age or even length of web use (I used the NCSA Mosaic betas back in the day. Sure, anyone who's been here since 1997 is probably over 18 or so, but other than that you can't infer much.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    2. Re:Whipper Snapers! by BobBoring · · Score: 1

      And you have very low reading comprehension. I said "USED THE INTERNET". You read "GOT MY SLASHDOT UID". Are you not a native English speaker or just a product of a post 1970 high school?

      I'm amazed you can use the keyboard with reading skills like that! It is no wonder you're such a skeptic since you can't read what is written; you can't believe anything you've tried to read.

  67. Think about it this way ... by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 1

    A large computer icon is often 64x64 pixels. You can extract considerable information from that. If you could adjust your grid to view "between" the pixels (squinting, moving your focus slightly, etc) to build a better idea of what was there, you could do even better.

    It's should be enough to avoid walking into walls, pick things up more easily, identify colour and light, etc. A heck of a lot better than nothing.

    By the way, this has been done for sound for a while now - in fact, I think such hearing aids may be in or near normal clinical use. Visual stimulation like this has been done before too, but I didn't know of anything this self contained or high detail. Wow.

  68. Re:Silicon + Solar implants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that's what I call headlights!

  69. Retinal Scanners will be confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Need to add a barcode on these things so that the retinal scanners will be able to tell the difference between people.

  70. Girl with the X-ray eyes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's the web page that the people who did the experiment set up.

  71. ObTerminator Response by sharkey · · Score: 1
    • Yes
    • No
    • Go Away
    • Fuck off, asshole.
    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  72. Micro lense arrays. by klevin · · Score: 1

    What I'm waiting for is arrays of small lenses that are implanted around the eye, say in the skin above the orbital socket. Then have an implanted computer that uses interferometry to combine the images. Want to look at the night sky without heavy binoculars (or maybe even a telescope)? Done. Walking in the dark w/o tripping? Done.

    The lense material would have to be really tough, though, so as to prevent scratching or breaking due to accidents and day to day wear. It'd really suck to have to get the lenses replaced because they kept getting scratched by your pillow case at night.

  73. More details and pictures in research paper by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

    For more details, here's a link to an actual research paper by Chow et all (2004): The Artificial Silicon Retina Microchip for the Treatment of Vision Loss From Retinitis Pigmentosa .

    Besides more details, the research paper also includes photos of things like a shot of the artificial retina on top of a penny (it's about as big as Abraham Lincoln's nose), the actual circuitry, and where it gets placed in the back of the eye. It also shows the results of their visual tests on patients with the artificial retina.

  74. Phony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I did a lot of research on the Chow team last year. After reading 20+ articles my consensus was that the results were optimistic at best and most likely completely false. I shared this with my advisor and he informed me many people feel the same way.

    There is some good work going on in this field, just not necessarily here.

  75. Do I look like I have eyes in the back of my head? by ZoomieDood · · Score: 0

    With 5 kids... I sometimes wish I did.

  76. old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it worked for Vin Diesel in Pitch Black.

    unfortunately, those with natural sight may have lost theirs after seeing the film.

  77. EMP? by Skilgannon · · Score: 1

    I suffer from a mild form of RP (X-Linked for anyone who has read up on the condition) so its with a certain amount of bias that I read such articles. Could anyone guess for what what kind of effect a large EMP would have on these implants? (I know little to nothing about the the implants themselves)

  78. [Off-Topic] Re:Great News, Little to do With Solar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cuba will rejoin the west when Castro joins Arafat. No, Castro is not in the same league as Arafat, but I don't make the rules.

  79. what I want... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    That's cool, I guess. I'd rather be able to see in sonic or infrared. Where can I get eyes like that?

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  80. IM-->RL by tooloftheoligarchy · · Score: 1

    Yeah, then I could be as clever in real life as in IM sessions:

    TOTOsFrnd: Hey, have you seen the new <thing-that-TOTO-has-never-heard-of>?

    [GoogleGoogleGoogle]

    TOTO: Oh, yeah, man, that's really cool, but the phlognotignomicator interface looks a little clunky.

    TOTOsFrnd: Wow, TOTO, you're really awesome and knowledgable.

  81. you're not TFGeditor! by xtermin8 · · Score: 1

    I though you were either coldcold or TFGeditor who said solar meant no external power source (in this context) Oh well, at least it's nice to know someone else replies to old posts! I thought it might only be me.

  82. Re:you're not TFGeditor! by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

    It always helps to turn on "Email when one of your posts is replied to." in preferences :-P

    My dog's better 'cause he eats Ken-L Ration!