Hardware Implants Mimic Brain Cells

An anonymous reader writes "PopSci is reporting that Ted Berger, a USC scientist, has been working to engineer a brain implant the mimics the functions of neurons. Early tests on rat brain cells have shown promise, and if successful, Berger's implant could remedy everything from Alzheimer's to absent-mindedness — and reduce memory loss to nothing more than a computer glitch"

Comments

Is "PopSci" the old Popular Science mag?

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

Is "PopSci" the old Popular Science mag? The one with the futuristic scramjets and flying cars on the cover and pages filled with useless gadgets? (I think half its readers went to Wired and the other half went to SlashDot.)

Engineered humans?

[Checkmait]

I am torn over this idea because clearly it represents a potential major advance in science and a cure to several insidious, incurable (as of today) diseases. We could probably extend the life expectancy of humans by a decade or so.

However, it also presents some less optimistic possibilities: for example, someone might be able to "program" humans as we program computers today. Imagine some terror organization such as Al Qaeda creating a fearless, seven-foot, feel-no-pain specimen....

Re:Engineered humans?

[Lord Ender]

However, it also presents some less optimistic possibilities: for example, someone might be able to "program" humans as we program computers today.

We already have this. It's called "religion," "nationalism," or "racism," depending on the form.

Note: If this seems offensive to you, and you have no doubts (faith) that your religion is the the one true religion, and your country is the best, surely you must admit that those other people over there have been "programmed" into falsely thinking that their religion is true and their country is best.

Re:Engineered humans?

[jfdawes]

Uhm, maybe because pain is the body's way of telling you that something you're doing to it is causing damage?

Without a pain analog, you get robots that are unable to respond to damage that they did not detect with whatever other senses they have available.

i.e. Just because you didn't feel yourself get shot in the back, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Re:Engineered humans?

[Dr. Eggman]

...and Corporations, Governments, Parents. I think it unfair to only metion religion when talking about 'human programming.' This isn't something that only certain organizations do; all people do it. There is a saying that says people are separated from animals by their desire to control their environment, in reality we are separated by our desire to control everything, including each other.

Re:Engineered humans?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Actually, you've stumbled onto the primary problem and philosophical question about AI.

You've duplicated the information-crunching aspect of a neuron. Ok, fair enough.

Now how in god's name does the subjective perceptual conscious experience arise out of that? You didn't simulate that whatsoever.

Searle pointed out that, since consciousness is a physical phenomena, it must arise out in the real world somehow. But merely duplicating the information pushing (probably) isn't enough. It can't just arise out of the nothingess of information pushing per se.

Re:Engineered humans?

[ni42]

>Whats to stop you from transferring to a completely electronic brain and living on as long as you have juice?

What's to stop you?

Natural resources (or lack thereof). Money (being busy dealing with the cost of having a *place* to live -- not to mention retirement). Power (if you don't have any). Politics (all those people in developing countries ALSO wanting electronic brains, the greedy bastards -- and all the people in power who want to look like they care). You know, business as usual.

Besides, electronic != invulnerable. Don't people talk about how their cars or their computers "DIE"? Personally, I think our body has a good thing going with its cell division technology (as long as it has juice). Sadly, our cells are programmed to die... except for cancer cells, which are programmed to be immortal. I'm hoping for a fix in Homo sapiens 2.0.1.

I don't have a problem with an electronic brain. (I have money. Bring it on!) I'm just saying it's not the magic key to eternal life.

Is absent mindedness something you can "cure"

[antifoidulus]

or is it just part of being human, and more importantly, a part of who you are as a person? I exhibit all the signs of adult ADD(lets not go into the debate of whether it is really a disease or not) but I refuse to take personality altering drugs. I may wind up more successful etc. but I lose a fundamental part of who I am. I won't take anti-depressents for the same reason. So I personally fail to see how absent mindedness is something different. Its part of who you are, embrace it!

Re:Is absent mindedness something you can "cure"

[192939495969798999]

Having seen Alzheimer's in my family, I can tell you that anything that might cure that would be worth it for me. It is the most horrible tragedy to see someone lose a lifetime of memories, it is unthinkable until you see it for yourself how devastating it really is.

Raises some interesting questions

[Orange Crush]

I find the philosophical issues especially interesting. How much of the brain can be replaced before the original "self" no longer exists? I guess it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things so long as the pattern is replicated . . . I guess our brains are constantly gradually replaced throughout our lives--the molecules we were born with aren't necessarily the molecules we're currently made out of.

Re:Great mambo Chicken

[Orange Crush]

This makes me wonder how they'll address the chemical interactions in our brains. What'll happen when large portions of bio-brain have been replaced or augmented by hardware that doesn't respond to or produce neurotransmitters like seratonin or hormones? No sense bolting on silicon if it just turns us into bipolar schizophrenics.

Interesting Timing

[jfdawes]

This guy is making chips that can "talk" to the brain in signals the brain can understand, even if he doesn't know what the signals mean. Pure mimicry.

Oddly enough, the people mentioned in Hacking Our Five Senses (Apr-03-2007) are using similarly arbitrary but mechanical means to also send signals to the brain (admitedly using existing pathways).

Would it be possible to combine these two techniques, as well as a few miniturization techniques (and perhaps standard "ports") to enable people to not just replace storage capacity but indeed "add" senses?

Instead of using a belt to buzz "north", use implants to send one of a set of predetermined signals. It won't matter what the signals would originally mean (if anything) - because if Hacking Our Five Senses is any indication, the brain is capable of creating maps for the the new signals anyway.

Borg indeed.

Perhaps it can be..

[Meph_the_Balrog]

While I agree with the philosophical implications in your statement, perhaps data storage is the only truly necessary function of the brain. If we invented a computer that could store data as efficiently as a brain, and also gave it artificial senses (touch, taste, hearing, etc), and the standard neurological processes (pain, pleasure etc), who is to say that it wouldn't develop a consciousness.

Give an efficient data storage and processing system the ability to sample the world around it at its own speed, and who knows what might occur.