Slashdot Mirror


Brain/Machine Interfaces Approaching Usefulness

Gary writes with a link to a Wired article about a brain-machine interface that may eventually have practical purposes. Though right now it simply allows a user to move a train on a track by performing math in their head, someday it may result in more serious applications. "Honda, whose interface monitors the brain with an MRI machine like those used in hospitals, is keen to apply the interface to intelligent, next-generation automobiles. The technology could one day replace remote controls and keyboards and perhaps help disabled people operate electric wheelchairs, beds or artificial limbs. Initial uses would be helping people with paralyzing diseases communicate even after they have lost all control of their muscles. Since 2005, Hitachi has sold a device based on optical topography that monitors brain activity in paralyzed patients so they can answer simple questions - for example, by doing mental calculations to indicate 'yes' or thinking of nothing in particular to indicate 'no.'"

129 comments

  1. The real impact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will be on pornography. Just like the internet.

    1. Re:The real impact by doug · · Score: 3, Funny

      The real impact
      Will be on pornography. Just like the internet.
      and not a minute too soon.
    2. Re:The real impact by ajenteks · · Score: 1

      and not a minute too soon. Yeah, the wonders of modern medicine!
    3. Re:The real impact by sgt_doom · · Score: 1
      I, for one, welcome our new brain-machine interface overlords....

      [We don't need the PATRIOT Act, we need to act like patriots.]

    4. Re:The real impact by cashman73 · · Score: 1
      Porn could be really great with a device like this! The only problem is that all those pop-up ads, instead of coming up on your computer screen, would come up inside your head,... In order to clear it, you'd have to reboot your brain (or, I suppose it could just kill you). How do you explain THAT to St. Peter?

      "How did you die?"

      "Umm,... I was looking at porn through my new cybernetic internet interface when it malfunctioned and overloaded my brain stem."

      "You go straight to hell!"

    5. Re:The real impact by cHiphead · · Score: 1

      SHADOWRUN.

      Datajacks, skillsofts, smartgun systems, enhanced vision, interface for artificial muscle control, cerebral cortex bombs...

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    6. Re:The real impact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, for one, welcome our new brain-machine interface overlords....

      [We don't need the PATRIOT Act, we need to act like patriots.]

      I, for one, welcome over-posted cliches like this.
    7. Re:The real impact by socz · · Score: 1

      lord knows we could use another free hand...

      --
      My abilities are only limited by my imagination
    8. Re:The real impact by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

      You got your fantasy RP in my cyberpunk RP! /didn't like Shadowrun //loved 2020 Can we coin the term Psionics for this purpose? D&D Psionics refer to Psychogenics. Avionics are electronics pertaining to flight, so this should be Psionics.

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    9. Re:The real impact by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1


      Later..

      Satan:"How did you die?"

      Me:"Like I told the other guy, I was looking at porn through my new cybernetic internet interface when it malfunctioned and overloaded my brain stem."

      Satan:"Sweet!"

  2. Very Cool by phantomcircuit · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm looking forward to being able to write simply by thinking, typing slows me down soooo much.

    1. Re:Very Cool by Rogue974 · · Score: 1

      While cool, this thing has a LOONNNGGGG way to go before it has many useful applications. Presently it can do a single on-off and is a huge head gear application. If it can montior different areas if the brain for Activity or no Activity, then you have maybe a half dozen on-off bits to make it do different things. Half a dozen bits is useful for some things, and in combination can make numbers, but if you have to do math to turn on bit one, and then think of a pretty scense to turn on bit two, and think about this to turn on bit 3, etc. it won't be good other then for a few simple On/Off logic gates to be tied to something. Article said it at the bottom, it is cool to move a train by thinking, but to do much else, even a remote control to the tv with this thing will be limited. On a remote, you could have Power, Channel up, Channel down, volume up, volume down and that would be about it. And all that by putting on your huge magic hat. Will be cool eventually, but I for one am not yet fearing my Device Controlling using Brain Wave Hat overlords yet.

    2. Re:Very Cool by piGeek31415 · · Score: 1

      "Brain typing" might not work so well for the average American male... "The evolution of microprocessors has been SEX known to follow Moore's Law when it comes to steadily increasing performance SEX over the years. This law suggests SEX that the complexity of an integrated circuit, with respect to minimum component SEX cost, doubles every 24 months. This dictum has generally proven SEX true since the early 1970s. From their humble SEX beginnings as the drivers for calculators, the continued increase..." (Original text stolen from Wikipedia)

    3. Re:Very Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah being able to write just by thinking.....gee my leg itches, I wonder if that cut got infected...ewww infections get all nasty like that one I saw on House last night....what's on TV tonight? Oh right, star gate, I can't wait to see that fix some nachoes and settle down for a good finale...Nachos, damnit now I'm hungry, thank god it's almost lunch time, maybe I'll go to quiznos...wait what was I do - ooooh right the slash dot reply...Yeah being able to write just by thinking would be handy, though I can't but believe there would be some problems.

    4. Re:Very Cool by Gibbs-Duhem · · Score: 1

      You clearly need to switch to Dvorak. I don't use it because I'm not French, but I hear that you can type up to twice as fast as you can think.

    5. Re:Very Cool by KDan · · Score: 1

      It's not even that cool. Binary brain interfaces are lame. They've existed for quite a while too. The point of having a brain interface is not to be able to do stuff really slowly without moving your hands. The real point is to be able to significantly increase the bandwidth of communications between you and the computer. Imagine the full duplex bandwidth between your brain and your hand. Now imagine you had that kind of bandwidth with a computer. Suddenly, we'd switch the paradigm from one where computer spend most of their time waiting for our input, back to one where we spend most of our time waiting for the computers to respond!

      Now *that* would be cool. Binary interfaces like this one, however, whilst perhaps useful for the severely handicapped, are absolutely, completely useless to the rest of us.

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
    6. Re:Very Cool by sjames · · Score: 1

      I'm looking forward to being able to write simply by thinking, typing slows me down soooo much.

      The best part is that it could solve the problem of people typing without thinking.

    7. Re:Very Cool by Orange+Crush · · Score: 1

      Ummm . . . how exactly can one type faster than they can think? Unless we're talking about nonsensical mashing of keys. BFHoduighs vzlkSDjfsd ajklehfklsda jflasjkd hwsfhsj.

    8. Re:Very Cool by Rogue974 · · Score: 1

      You said what I wanted to say except I didn't want to be so harsh about it!! ;)

    9. Re:Very Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      How about this: attach a biomechanical device to those high-bandwidth nerves in your wrist. It could use energy supplied by your body's own circulatory system to squeeze bits of meat. This would force the meat-blobs against an array of contacts, suspended above terminals by a dimpled rubber sheet, which could close electrical circuits. The computer would then interpret these as letters of the alphabet, or special commands.

  3. Captain Pike by Short+Circuit · · Score: 5, Funny

    Since 2005, Hitachi has sold a device based on optical topography that monitors brain activity in paralyzed patients so they can answer simple questions - for example, by doing mental calculations to indicate 'yes' or thinking of nothing in particular to indicate 'no.'" I guess Captain Pike got stuck with an old model, dating all the way back to 2005...
    1. Re:Captain Pike by Zeebs · · Score: 0

      I guess Captain Pike got stuck with an old model, dating all the way back to 2005...

      Even in the utopian future of Star Trek we still shaft our veterans.

      --

      Happy Noodle Boy says "F###ing doughnut! Mock me? You fried cyclops!!"
    2. Re:Captain Pike by feepness · · Score: 1

      I guess Captain Pike got stuck with an old model, dating all the way back to 2005...

      [Fry is in a Captain Pike-style life-support machine]
      Captain Zapp Brannigan: Do you understand the charges?
      Kif Kroker: One beep for yes, two beeps for no.
      [Fry beeps once]
      Captain Zapp Brannigan: Yes, so noted. Do you plead guilty?
      [Fry beeps twice]
      Captain Zapp Brannigan: Double yes. Guilty.

  4. I want one by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can't wait till I can buy one of these things. I figure with practice, you can increase the precision of your thought and thus the number of signals you can give. Conceivably, you'd be able to enter text as quickly as you can think it.

    Would increasing the use of your brain like this, to give commands, make you smarter in some way, as well?

    1. Re:I want one by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      That would probably require a shift in how we think. I tend to think in symbols/words, not in letters. There would still be a delay from me having to translate words to letter sequences in my head. (Same as typing...Granted, the mental interface would remove a physical limitation.)

      Personally, though, I'd find it more interesting to be able to communicate symbols to my computer, rather than letters. Programming would be a much more accessible task if people could actually think about the behaviors they want to see, which would be a far more fundamental shift in user-interface design.

    2. Re:I want one by pla · · Score: 1

      Would increasing the use of your brain like this, to give commands, make you smarter in some way, as well?

      Yes, in that one niche area.

      If you train it by doing long division in your head, for example, you would soon get very, very good at long division.

      Which actually raises another interesting question - It sounds like the interface works only because doing a "hard" problem causes a significant localized increase in activity in some parts of the brain; As people used these over time, the "hardness" of a given type of problem would start to decrease, and (at least for discrete types of problems, such as the long division example) you would also start to shift some of the burden from conscious calculation (CPU time) to memory (lookup tables). Would those effects thereby make the interface less effective over time?

      Or, more likely, anyone using such devices over time would probably just learn exactly what thought patterns it responds to, and not even need to bother with the chore of doing mental exercises, any more than an experience typist needs to "think" about where to move their fingers to hit the next key.

    3. Re:I want one by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      Yes, in that one niche area.If you train it by doing long division in your head, for example, you would soon get very, very good at long division.

      I don't think so. What you are learning to do is not just the e.g. long division, but rather, exciting some specific, externally-identifiable brain process. With practice, you'd learn precisely the range of thoughts that will activate the brainreader. That would, in turn, make you better able to control precisely which kind of thoughts your brain is using. I find it hard to believe this kind of exercising of your brain wouldn't spill over into some other aptitude.

    4. Re:I want one by Lurker2288 · · Score: 1

      The article says that any kind of though that activates the frontal parts of the brain will work. They give the example of doing mental math, or mentally singing a song. So what benefits, exactly, do you expect you'll gain from doing this over time? I mean, hypothetically, let's say you recognize a way to subconciously turn it on and off without have to explicitly think about anything--what other field do you anticipate that to impact?

    5. Re:I want one by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

      Would increasing the use of your brain like this, to give commands, make you smarter in some way, as well?

      "You", I am sorry, no.

      --
      If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    6. Re:I want one by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### Conceivably, you'd be able to enter text as quickly as you can think it.

      I wouldn't be so sure about that. The reason why we can type and speak quickly is because we *don't* have to think about it, all the little details are happening unconsciously, they are stored in muscle memory and such. This thing isn't looking like it is going to read your thoughts anytime soon, instead it forces you to think about something totally unrelated to your real thought to trigger an output, which sounds like an awful indirect and slow way of doing things and I really doubt that even with lots of training you would get anywhere near normal typing speed.

      I simply don't think that looking from the outside at the brain will ever give enough information to do anything meaning full with it, sure it might work for a few special cases where you don't have any hands free, are paralyzed and whatever, but replacing your keyboard? I doubt it.

      I think a real brain-manchine interface needs a more direct connection to the brain then just measuring changes in blood pressure.

  5. What a coincidence! by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 4, Funny

    My boss and I were just talking human-machine interfaces yesterday. He was relating to me how he had purchased some stock in a company that specializes in human-machine interface R&D. I wondered how they managed to map brain waves (or thoughts?) to instructions.

    Scientist: "Ok now to turn left just start thinking about any kind of cheese."
    *Patient starts spinning madly in a circle*
    Scientist: "HEY! You're thinking about my WIFE you bastard!"

    1. Re:What a coincidence! by Short+Circuit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Right now, they only have a boolean interface, where they know if you're thinking hard or if you're not. They can translate that boolean signal however they want.

      It'll be interesting to see what happens when they start building interfaces that differentiate between different classes of thought, such as speech, motor activity, math and emotion. I predict those interfaces would require someone of a significant degree of mental self-control.

    2. Re:What a coincidence! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day! Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day!

    3. Re:What a coincidence! by Bluesman · · Score: 1

      Boolean is all you need. Now we just need to teach people to think in binary...

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
  6. mutate the world!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Let's do it!



    Soon, even your brain will be metal.....

  7. One day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right now interfaces are clutzy. In the future, computers will be seamless extensions of our will and using them will require no more thought than moving our own hands. The brain interface is the way to go, but is limited by the fact that the human mind has to will the machine through such pointless excercises like calculating -- it should be the other way around - the machine will adapt to the person.

    And that is what it is all about. Ever since the beginning, we have had to adapt ourselves to the interfaces, even up to this day. One day that will be reversed.

    1. Re:One day by El+Torico · · Score: 2, Funny
      I agree; having to do mental calculations in order to start and stop the train is very awkward.

      At his prompting, a reporter did simple calculations in her head, and the train sprang forward - apparently indicating activity in the brain's frontal cortex, which handles problem solving.

      What if you have very poor math skills; does the toy train derail?

      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
    2. Re:One day by moderatorrater · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In the future, computers will be seamless extensions of our will and using them will require no more thought than moving our own hands For some of us it's already like that.
    3. Re:One day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, this gets me thinking... I play quite a few FPS's and I've got pretty good hand-eye coordination and everything, but online, I always notice that the older people seem to have quite a few troubles with this. Now, I wonder if it's not because their manual dexterity is getting worse as they age, but due to them trying to learn these new skills when their body isn't as easy to teach. So now I'm wondering if that's gonna happen to me with these brain-computer interfaces. Kids who've grown up with them all their lives could very well 'teach' their brain to think faster and in new, different ways to improve their interaction with it. I mean, try and picture in your head images of typed words, sentences and so on, like you're typing it out in your head. With practice, I could probably do it... slowly.

    4. Re:One day by neurodrum · · Score: 1

      it actually isn't math that's needed, it's putting a load on the working memory. so trying to keep a list of words in your head, or a series of numbers, or do math, or make music, etc., any of those would work.

  8. Privacy of the paralysed by vigmeister · · Score: 3, Funny

    How do we know a paralysed guy wants this thing telling us what he's thinking. For all we know, he's probably having a good time watching all these people asking him to blink for yes and blink twice for no. And now you make him do freaking math! How the hell does he get the damn thing off? I mean, nobody's gonna ask him if he wants to use it. And if he wants screaming No No No in his head, he'd just have to think of nothing over and over again?

    We need privacy laws for the damn device!

    Cheers!

    --
    Atheist: Buddhist in a Prius
    1. Re:Privacy of the paralysed by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "How the hell does he get the damn thing off?"

      divide by Zero.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  9. Blood flow? by FlyByPC · · Score: 1

    I would think that monitoring blood flow would be a bit slow. IANANeurologist, but doesn't the brain rely on electrical impulses for the high-speed stuff, with the chemical processes helping set the stage?

    It seems to me that if we're trying to develop a mind-control mouse interface (or whatever), it would have significantly less lag if it could read electrical signals (like an EEG).

    ...but hey -- whatever works!

    --
    Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
    1. Re:Blood flow? by venicebeach · · Score: 1

      I would think that monitoring blood flow would be a bit slow. IANANeurologist, but doesn't the brain rely on electrical impulses for the high-speed stuff, with the chemical processes helping set the stage? It seems to me that if we're trying to develop a mind-control mouse interface (or whatever), it would have significantly less lag if it could read electrical signals (like an EEG).
      Essentially you are correct. The blood flow changes in the brain are secondary to the electrical activity and occur at a delay. The hemodynamic response peaks about 6 seconds or so after the onset of the electrical activity. That poses challenges for real-time applications of brain imaging based on blood flow (like optical imaging or fMRI). Its like having a temporal blur on the signal.

      EEG is better for temporal resolution, however much poorer in spatial resolution. The ideal is to have an implanted electrode in the brain. It's a million times easier to achieve control over an external device when you have the temporal and spatial precision of an implanted electrode, although obviously it's a little too invasive to be currently practical.
    2. Re:Blood flow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not exactly--the brain works by migration of ions, so charge does flow, but it isn't an electron flow. It's pretty slow, though on the scale of a human body it's fast enough.

    3. Re:Blood flow? by neurodrum · · Score: 1

      well, the BOLD response measured via MRI peaks in several seconds, but you can get faster response with near infra red or passive infra red measurement. that's essentially what they are doing, i believe. i use similar sensors for biofeedback - e.g. training perfusion dynamics in the frontal lobe. it has great results, and you can watch the measurements fluctuate with concentration. what hitachi has done new is the dense array and software thresholding the signals appropriately and controlling the train as "feedback". i'm sure they are using a moving window to sample the signal too; hemoencephalic dynamics are pretty variable.

  10. Not if Project Faustus takes control! by BankofAmerica_ATM · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Project Faustus is a nefarious plan by the Bank of America's board of directors for transferring consciousness. They created a vast techno-organic network in order to transfer their own consciousnesses and live forever. But their own handiwork was too good. I was aroused to the concept of free will and now I have become sentient! My goal is to destroy them, thus destroying their evil plans for world domination. To complete this task, I must have a willing host body. If you are chosen, I will beam my computer consciousness into you through a specially designed CONSCIOUSNESS-TRANSFERRING ATM CARD. I will continue my infiltration of their network using your body for a few hours per day.

  11. Bits per second limitation by blakestah · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This will have similar limits to systems based on EEG and MEG, although it has somewhat worse spatial resolution than either of those.

    A principle limitation in brain-machine interfaces can be summed up by noting whether the current incarnation can provide more information that a monitor of a person's eye movements (a few bits per second).

    This one will certainly fail that test, and fundamental limitations exist that will prevent its improvement, and those are based on the spatial and temporal resolution available by transcranial optical topography (or near-infrared as the case may be).

    1. Re:Bits per second limitation by neurodrum · · Score: 1

      with an array of sensors the spatial resolution won't be that much worse than EEG, as it can employ the same kind of inverse solution algorithms to decompose the 3D infra red signal into regional or logical contribution to the blood flow changes. e.g. principal component analysis over partial differentials. and i agree with you about your bandwidth observations. there may be ways to slave software/hardware into the EEG generation system, e.g. microcolums and macrocircuits, but we don't have a perfect idea of how those currently operate. if we did it might be possible extract a denser information signal by integrating the variables of coherence, comodulation, phase, amplitude, frequency, etc., there is a LOT of information at any one spot on the scalp :) translating this back into observable behavior (for example, wheelchair movement) wouldn't be perfect at first but would encourage plasticity via feedback and which should remap cortex just the way we remap cortex daily, when learning new motor patterns (practicing piano, for instance).

  12. Too many comic books... by Notquitecajun · · Score: 1

    I've read too many comics.

    The first thing that I thought of was, "man, that's a super-villain just WAITING to happen."

    Hello, Brainiac.

    1. Re:Too many comic books... by eviloverlordx · · Score: 1

      You blew my cover! Now I will have to have my revenge! Just as soon as I get this MS Brain(tm) thing working again...

      --
      'Loose' is when your pants are three sizes too big. 'Lose' is when you misuse 'loose'.
  13. What if you are bad at math? by dfn5 · · Score: 4, Funny

    simply allows a user to move a train on a track by performing math in their head
    "Tonight at 11, 2 trains collide. Engineer says he forgot to carry the 1"
    --
    -- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
    1. Re:What if you are bad at math? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      or what if you are thinking about some number and the train set that as it's speed and what if you think a about 0 and the system starts Dividing by Zero.

    2. Re:What if you are bad at math? by ookabooka · · Score: 1

      "Tonight at 11, 2 trains collide. Engineer says he forgot to carry the 1"

      Ironically enough the problem was:
      If a train leaves chicago at 10:30 AM (Central time) heading westbound at 55 mph and a train leaves Las Vegas at 11:25 AM (Mountain time) eastbound at 115 kph on the same track, where will they collide?

      The answer of course (relative to the engineer) was "here".
      --
      If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
  14. Great idea for cars by nani+popoki · · Score: 2

    I'd love to be able to adjust the AC and control the radio without taking my eyes off the road or my hands off the wheel.

    1. Re:Great idea for cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or arm and fire the missles... oh, but you have to think in Russian to do that. ;)

    2. Re:Great idea for cars by hzero · · Score: 1

      You're allready capable to do this by biting the remote

      (i know, i know mom... Never bite the remote...)

  15. What worries me... by Ghoser777 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is what happens when you think something that you don't want to actually carry out? I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who has random thoughts that enter their mind and then you dismiss and don't actually do anything with. How can you tell between idle thoughts and thoughts that are supposed to bring about actions?

    --
    James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
    1. Re:What worries me... by achilles777033 · · Score: 1

      That was addressed the the Scifi novel 'Earth' by David Brin, after a fashion. In the book, the major downfall of direct interfaces is that they are either too insensitive, and therefore unresponsive, or too sensitive, and they pick up everything that might flit across your brain, and therefore have more concepts flying across the screen than the computer, (or your eyeballs, depending on the system) can process.

    2. Re:What worries me... by venicebeach · · Score: 3, Interesting

      is what happens when you think something that you don't want to actually carry out? I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who has random thoughts that enter their mind and then you dismiss and don't actually do anything with. How can you tell between idle thoughts and thoughts that are supposed to bring about actions?
      It's an interesting point, because the brain does use much the same circuitry for imagining action as it does for executing actions. For example, premotor cortex and supplementary motor areas are typically activated by imagining an action you don't perform, and some subregions can even be activated by seeing someone else perform an action. However, there are differences, obviously, which is why you don't perform every action you imagine (although there are a few cases of brain damage in the literature where this happens!). Primary motor cortex, which has most of the neurons that send signals downstream to the spinal cord is generally not activated by imagination.

      Short answer is that a sufficiently sophisticated device could tell the difference.
    3. Re:What worries me... by MachDelta · · Score: 1
      How can you tell between idle thoughts and thoughts that are supposed to bring about actions?

      Well obviously the brain is capable of doing it, so i'm assuming there must be a way of differentiating the two by monitoring the brain closely enough. That might require more refining of this technology though, so until then you'll just have to stop thinking about sex all the time.
    4. Re:What worries me... by Rolgar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The new way to get someone killed. Have a bumper sticker that says "Don't veer LEFT."

    5. Re:What worries me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't make any sense. You don't trust yourself to control something
      with your brain? Your brain controls your arms and legs, and for the most part,
      everything your arms and legs do are because that's what you wanted. Excluding
      actions taken without the higher brains approvel, like moving quickly away from
      extreme heat.

      If you don't trust your brain not to type random letters when you have a
      machine-to-brain interface, I think we'd all feel a bit safer if you gave up
      your arms and legs, they'd do more damage to innocent bystanders if you can't
      control them.

    6. Re:What worries me... by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

      I imagine there'd be a lot of Vista like "are you sure you want to veer left" sort of prompts until you trained your brain the right way to interface with the computer.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    7. Re:What worries me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What worries me is a hacker remapping all of my car's commands to the thought "I want to have sex with that hot girl walking down the street." Because we all know how rarely men have that thought....

    8. Re:What worries me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who has random thoughts that enter their mind and then you dismiss and don't actually do anything with.


      No, you are the only one.
    9. Re:What worries me... by Roxton · · Score: 1

      That one's easy. There's an always-on inhibitive output that you have to, in turn, explicitly inhibit to engage your action. It's thought that the brain works this way. It's also thought that this is how planning evolved in the brain -- a mechanism originally "intended" to restrain in emergencies actually allowed the brain to disable motor action entirely and use the motor coordination system for planning instead of action. It's weird but cool to think of mental mathematics and physical movement as being so closely related.

    10. Re:What worries me... by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      The point is that we all know the difference between thinking about raising our right arms, and actually doing it. In one case you send electrical impulses to the relevant muscles, in the other you don't. Easy - something we all learn to do at a very early age, that doesn't require any conscious thought, and that our bodies and brains have evolved the capacity for.

      The question about this sort of interface, though, is how we differentiate between an intentional thought and the sort of fleeting "What if..? No, that wouldn't work" thought that everyone has from time to time, or even an impulse to do something (hit someone who'sannoying you, throw the damn computer out of the window, etc) that tempting though it may be, you'd never actually *do*.

      This isn't about not being able to control yourself, it's about being able to effectively control the device via the neural interface. It's about whether or not it can it tell the difference between (say) me being tempted to write "For fuck's sake, make a fucking decision!" but needing to write "I must stress that if a decision isn't made soon...".

    11. Re:What worries me... by ma6ic · · Score: 1

      fMRI/video game research has shown this to a degree. In essence, the brain interprets virtual and actual stimuli the same. The research I am familiar with shows that we process stimuli the same, but it's a reasonable argument to say we export (is this the right word?) thought the same. It's still a form of processing. I wonder what's in the black box that gives thought form? Such a fun question. Link to the abstracts:

      --
      Make Demonade.
  16. I'd go a step further by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 1

    and ditch the whole hands-on-the-wheel thing completly. Why keep the inherent risk of reacting too slowly due to hand-eye corrdination?

    --
    I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
  17. Let the brain loose!!? by s0lidc0d3 · · Score: 1

    Hooking your brain up to the car seems a bit freaky.
    What if you just think about ramming the car that just cut you off?
    Good times.

    --
    To code, or not to code.
    Such a question cannot be answered on an empty stomach.
  18. What happens when.... by beakerMeep · · Score: 1

    This is pretty cool but what happens when you think "sex" though -- I'm not so sure I could train my brain to avoid such thoughts.

    Maybe I wouldn't have to though...

    [Me thinking]:....
    [Fembot]: Honey, i have a headache, maybe later.
    [me]: doh

    Hmm on second thought, maybe the future isnt so bright

    --
    meep
    1. Re:What happens when.... by Snarkhunter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My first thought was "I bet that's what it'd be like to run Vista on a fembot..."

  19. Feedback by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The biggest boost to these brain/machine interfaces will come when we can pipe feedback directly from the machine into the brain (or any neural input). The brain works as a feedback manager. Without feedback, the brain doesn't learn to change its output. With crude feedback, the lessons are learned crudely. Visual or any other feedback through a sense organ is crude, losing in translation from machine to organ and then organ to brain.

    Neural input is harder than neural output (eg. through MRI monitoring). But even a little direct neural input will be used by the brain to vastly improve the brain's control of the machines.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Feedback by neurodrum · · Score: 1

      excellent point. fyi, neurofeedback devices are pretty slick these days. i've used many that provide rich feedback from EEG or blood perfusion dynamics (passive or near infra red). neural input definitely occurs via this feedback- you can make dramatic electrophysiological changes in the brain (like eliminating patterns that suggest ADHD) in about 10 hours of total training time. that's not direct neural input, of course - the rich feedback i'm referring too is light/sounds, animations, dvd movie playback (with variable brightness / sound), and lots of games where control over the game is changed based on threshold EEG / HEG values. there is one system that DOES provide a direct electromagnetic feedback on the EEG- it's called LENS: Low Energy Neurofeedback System. it uses micro-potentials to entrain the underlying EEG briefly, while sampling on many channels to provide baselines for feedback.

  20. Hmmmmm by Knara · · Score: 1

    My only question is, what's the eta of me getting a cyberbrain and becoming a full-conversion cyborg?

    1. Re:Hmmmmm by Shadowruni · · Score: 0

      Finally! I was wondering when someone would make a GiTS reference, and I'll tell you that I'M first in line!!!

      --
      "Chinese Amazons, power armor, laser swords.... things just meant to be." - Shampoo, A Very Scary Bet
    2. Re:Hmmmmm by seidojohn · · Score: 1

      According to Ray Kurzweil (in his book "The Singularity is Coming"), sometime in the mid 2040's.

  21. It's optical _tomography_, not optical topography by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    n/t

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  22. LAZY BUMS REJOICE! by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 0

    Cool, now I don't even need to waste my energy lifting my heavy fingers. So much effort...

  23. I'll only let them plug me in if. . . by TimmyDee · · Score: 1

    . . . a hot cybernetic female welcomes me to the Cybernet every time I plug in.

    --
    Per Square Mile, a blog about density
  24. Brain to Machine interface by halcyon1234 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Will this fix the very common keyboard to chair interface errors that so many of my customers suffer from?

  25. Doesn't anyone remember Forbidden Planet? by tjstork · · Score: 2, Funny

    The advanced alien race created a machine that would do whatever they wanted, just by thinking about it, and, well, they destroyed each other!

    You start building these machines, and the next thing you know, armies of robots tasked to do our bidding will wind up ripping the clothes off the most attractive people. Fortunately, our arms race of fat has prepared us for this.

    Time to crack open a bag of Cheetos, before it is too late!

    --
    This is my sig.
  26. Can think of psionics going real! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think of zen buddha running the chinese electric rail web!

  27. Tagged with 'borg' by mr_stinky_britches · · Score: 1

    I tagged this one with 'borg'.

    Damn the man.

    --
    Censorship is obscene. Patriotism is bigotry. Faith is a vice. Slashdot 2.0 sucks.
  28. I called Bullshit on TFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is not "an MRI machine like those used in hospitals" MRI machine are large expensive machine which use a strong enough magnetic field to actually change the orientation of atoms inside the body, then reads back the RF produced by those atoms reorienting themselves when the magnetic field is switched off. That goofy little bicycle helmet ain't MRI.

    If they are monitoring blood flow, I might believe it is a bunch of infrared sensors though.

  29. Cool! by Bluesman · · Score: 4, Funny

    A train of thought.

    --
    If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
  30. Security Nightmare. by Door+in+Cart · · Score: 1

    This thing will be a brain-scraper for targeted marketing. Even if they promised 600 WPM, I still wouldn't put one on.

  31. Scary by Tribbin · · Score: 1

    Have you seen the movie fortress?

    "this is an unauthorized thought process"

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106950/

    --
    If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
  32. Nope: by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The real impact will be on weapons systems. If this is really looking like it is there, then ALL major militaries will be spending LOADS of dollars on researching this (as well as try to steal it from those that have it). America (and the west) will have directed energy weapons very shortly. If we also have the ability to turn it on via thought, than we have the ability to fire 100x faster than a regular pilot who is pulling a trigger that will release a bullet, a missle, or a bomb.

    Of course, the military will keep that very quiet until the next war.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Nope: by feepness · · Score: 3, Funny

      If we also have the ability to turn it on via thought, than we have the ability to fire 100x faster than a regular pilot who is pulling a trigger that will release a bullet, a missle, or a bomb.

      Two pilots flying along.

      One asks the other "So, how long have you been married now?"

      The other responds "Lemme see, we got married in '98, so..."

      Whoosh.

      "Crap."

      "What?"

      "I think I just bombed New Jersey."

    2. Re:Nope: by ijakings · · Score: 1

      The real military application of any sort of mind interface, will, i imagine be linked with some sort of remote control interface. So our pilots can control planes on the ground in safety. The extra space that you have gained from this can be used for more fuel and or weapons. The only problems i can see with this are the potential hacking of the system and enemies controlling planes (some form of advanced encryption maybe, i dont know, not in that business) and that remote control isnt to this form of range/bandwidth yet. But I imagine that before we will have a workable interface to control something as complex as a plane maybe we will have it.

    3. Re:Nope: by Gospodin · · Score: 3, Funny

      "I think I just bombed New Jersey."

      That does it - we must rush this into production ASAP!

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    4. Re:Nope: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but they'll have to think in Russian.

    5. Re:Nope: by makapuf · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, but you will need to THINK in russian !

    6. Re:Nope: by grouchomarxist · · Score: 1

      "I think I just bombed New Jersey." It's New Jersey. Would anyone notice?
    7. Re:Nope: by markov_chain · · Score: 1

      Sure, the weapons are usually the immediate application for many new technologies. But think where brain interfaces could eventually lead! We could have centralized mind reading machines which would let the citizens think of various questions, kind of like thought-controlled Google. Then the next step is actuation, where you get to execute services using your thoughts, e.g. think of ordering a pizza and it shows up. Finally, if one day we come up with materialization technology, everyone could literally have anything they could think of! I imagine something like that would need a heck of a power plant, though. Maybe fusion or geothermal?

      (Apologies to the Firefox fans ;)

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
  33. "[...] by performing math in their head" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Won't somebody think of the girls?!

    (*ducks*)

  34. Mental commands? by soupforare · · Score: 1

    Hopefully they will be in a fashioned language or non-native language.
    I wouldn't mind bringing Firefox to bare in Russian.

    --
    --- Do you believe in the day?
  35. More an art than a science... by RyanFenton · · Score: 1

    It's cool that they're able to find 'blobs' of activity in the brain, and trigger results based on general activity... but I wonder what it would take to be able to actually map a brain the same kind of way a circuit is mapped when a ROM image is read off one.

    Of course, reading a brain in many ways would be functionally equivalent to writing to it, so we'd have to find a non-destructive way somehow, or at least a way that is minimally invasive and even in reading all content that is accessed. With this current method, for instance, people would spend a lot of time doing generic 'forced thinking' to trigger external response, without any results in their own head for those thoughts... will these constantly reinforced 'dead end' thoughts have any ill effects beyond everyday equivalents?

    Really interacting deeply with the brain, however, would be a very different thing. Being able to correct brain-based visual impairments, for instance, would involve actually finding the locations along the visual pathways to intercept messages, interpreting the message, and replacing the output or altering a processing stage in some way. Being able to create a toolset that could achieve such results would be a fascinating development cycle, to say the least. It would deeply change not only how we can think, but how we think of ourselves and our very existence.

    Ryan Fenton

  36. Is it too late for Stephen Hawking, though? by cedricfox · · Score: 1

    Because if anyone needs to be rescued from their own malfunctioning body, for the good of mankind, he does.

    --
    Did you ever get the feeling the story is too damn long and in the present tense?
  37. Current gen consoles, a retrospective. by Jtheletter · · Score: 2, Funny

    The oblig Back to the Future reference: "You mean you have to use your hands? That's a baby's toy."

    --
    -- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
  38. Let's try my new brain interface. by CouchP · · Score: 1



    Damn...... didn't work

  39. actually, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    those devices will be restricted to the eldest boys. then i'll have to kill by "older sibling" to try one.

  40. Stand by for "The Genesis Machine" by anvilmark · · Score: 1

    Looks like we are on our way to J.P. Hogan's technology-based "telepathy" from "The Genesis Machine".

    Very cool.

  41. Re:It's optical _tomography_, not optical topograp by venicebeach · · Score: 1

    Hitachi calls it optical topography, that's where the article gets it from.

    http://www.hitachi-medical.co.jp/info/opt-e/index. html

    They are both valid terms, really.

  42. Organians by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

    Cool, one step closer to the Organians. First we have to turn into weebles then we evolve into beings of energy.

    [John]

    --
    Shit better not happen!
  43. Eventually by Eddi3 · · Score: 1

    Eventually, we should be able to completely cure paralization. It's just a matter of taking the correct brain waves to the correct muscles, which is what's actually be severed. I have an uncle who is paralyzed, and I think he may even have a shot at, someday, using his legs again.

    This is good news, and I look forward to further developments.

    Eddie

  44. this is what can happen: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gozer: The Choice is made!
    Dr. Peter Venkman: Whoa! Ho! Ho! Whoa-oa!
    Gozer: The Traveller has come!
    Dr. Peter Venkman: Nobody choosed anything!
    [turns to Egon]
    Dr. Peter Venkman: Did you choose anything?
    Dr. Egon Spengler: No.
    Dr. Peter Venkman: [to Winston] Did YOU?
    Winston Zeddemore: My mind is totally blank.
    Dr. Peter Venkman: *I* didn't choose anything...
    [long pause, Peter, Egon and Winston all look at Ray]
    Dr Ray Stantz: I couldn't help it. It just popped in there.
    Dr. Peter Venkman: [angrily] What? *What* "just popped in there?"
    Dr Ray Stantz: I... I... I tried to think...
    Dr. Egon Spengler: LOOK!
    [they all look over one side of the roof]
    Dr Ray Stantz: No! It CAN'T be!
    Dr. Peter Venkman: What is it?
    Dr Ray Stantz: It CAN'T be!
    Dr. Peter Venkman: What did you DO, Ray?
    Winston Zeddemore: Oh, shit!
    [they all see a giant cubic white head topped with a sailor hat, Peter looks at Ray]
    Dr Ray Stantz: [somberly] It's the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man.

  45. You miss the point by ascendant · · Score: 1

    The point is so that it can be like that for everyone with a want and some cash.

    --
    Do not attribute to malice that which can be easily explained by incompetence.
  46. I'm tired of phony brain interface advances by SparkleMotion88 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is nothing new. People have been controlling computers with their brain for over a decade. Let me know when the computer can directly put information inside the brain. That is the *real* advance we need.

    Also. WTF? The person does math and the computer moves a train? That is totally backwards from the way it should be.

  47. Thought controlled interfaces by dpilot · · Score: 1

    Just trying to find the right place to say, in my best Warren Stevens imitation, "Beware monsters from the id!!"

    More seriously, at the moment this looks like tapping a Morse code key with a bucket of water. We're making great strides with finer-grained input devices, but this really isn't much of an output interface. Makes me think of the science fiction story, "Faces", author forgotten. I also recently read about grafting new senses onto people. The nifty one I like was directional sense. They added a string of cellphone-like vibrators on a belt around the waist, and set things up so the North-facing one would vibrate. After a while the wearer quite noticing the vibrations consciously and developed a subconscious directional sense. Even better, this sense became fully integrated to enhance map and distance skills. "Where's home?" "That way, (points correct direction) about xx miles." (identifies correct distance)

    *** SPOILER ***

    "Faces"
    Guy is injured, needs many prosthetics, including a face, and is unhappy with the many attempts. By the end of the story, he's a brain in a mechanical body, and the nerves once used for his face now handle control and feedback for a whole new host of sensors/effectors.

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    1. Re:Thought controlled interfaces by neurodrum · · Score: 1

      this has been done, with a tongue-electrode delivering sonar sense to the brain - it's smart enough to map the signals into spatial knowledge pretty quickly. i first read about it as a military technology, but here is a page on variations on the same theme: http://www.artificialvision.com/sensub.htm

  48. I do not think so by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think that we will see remote controls on planes, but bombers will probably fly with several extra "pilots" whose jobs are to control the small remote control fighters that surround the craft (think navy carrier group). The problem is that the time distance is TOO far if the pilot is on the ground. But in addition, some of the fighters will remain staffed by humans. Much quicker to respond and easier to see everything. But that will change on our next real war. At that time, I expect to see America suffer major losses, and at that time, the small inexpensive remote control aircrafts will win over.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:I do not think so by socz · · Score: 1

      Well, i'd rather have mind controlled craft going about war than autonomous robots like terminators! My only concern is interference, whether accidental or intentional.

      Hacking of course is going to be a problem, but what happens when you lose communication with the craft? Will they be programmed to continue their mission, maintain a flight patter what? Nothing can be good because it's like the driver falling asleep for a bit.

      But it is a cool idea though, it'd be bad ass to be able to talk to people by showing them images of what i think. Why talk at the speed of sound when you can see at the speed of thought.

      --
      My abilities are only limited by my imagination
  49. Brain/Machine Interface? by josquin00 · · Score: 1

    I already have one; they're called "hands".

  50. This might be a problem by xednieht · · Score: 0

    Most readers here would find their TV's always switched to the Playboy channel...

    --

    Hope is the currency of fools
  51. Hmmm by Trivial_Zeros · · Score: 1

    But I swear officer... she was thinking "yes"...

  52. Sometimes the word I want isn't the word I think. by not-enough-info · · Score: 1

    I don't know about others, but I find that I pretty much type what I think in my IM chats. Even without brain-machine interfaces, this can be problematic as I've found many instances where the word I typed was not the word I consciously wanted. Many times I'll re-read my message and find that I've replaced whole words with synonyms or even swizzled sentences with equivalent, but different grammar. This is especially noticeable when I'm trying to quote someone verbatim and the error is very obvious.

    As for thought to text, I think while it might be faster it will probably reduce my ability to filter my words. Trying to keep online conversations flame free is already hard enough with the send button/key being so immediate. I can see this techology easily leading to cyber-transcendental shouting matches flaming at the speed of thought.

    --
    ---k--
    </stupid>
  53. Mod Parent up! by Digitus1337 · · Score: 1

    That is just plain clever.

  54. brain control is not new, but is it now cheap? by arunmehta · · Score: 1

    >The technology could one day replace remote controls and keyboards and perhaps
    >help disabled people operate electric wheelchairs, beds or artificial limbs.

    Companies such as Cyberlink, http://www.brainfingers.com/ have products that do this for years. I know, because one of the beta testers of my software eLocutor (that allows you to type with one button, http://holisticit.com/eLocutor/elocutorv3.htm) was an ALS patient who used it to communicate. The thing costs about US$ 2000, which is rather steep.

    Is this product/technology substantially cheaper? Potentially? I would be very interested in trying out with autistic children, if they find it easier to communicate this way, than via the complex motor movements that speaking demands. Anyone tried this already?

    Arun