Using Fractal Interconnects To Improve Electronic Eyes

An anonymous reader writes "Electronic eyes today remind me of Frankenstein with the way they jab electrodes from each pixel into the optic nerve and hope for the best. Some researchers claim to have solved this problem by growing fractal electrodes that mimic the way real eyes connect retinal cells to the optic nerve. If they are right — and their research will find out over the next year — then next-generation eEyes could enable the blind to not just detect objects, but to see again normally."

Comments

Resistance is futile

[elPetak]

I want my eyes with enhanced reality... can I have them?

Re:Resistance is futile

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently you are not the only one thinking of enhanced vision. Did you see the funders?

U.S. Navy and Air Force.

Re:Resistance is futile

[i kan reed]

I feel like we're only 20-50 years away from the stuff you can attach to your body being better in most ways than the originals. The only problem is a I feel like bionic limb replacements are going to cost an arm and a leg.

Re:Resistance is futile

[Dachannien]

The only problem is a I feel like bionic limb replacements are going to cost an arm and a leg.

We take lungs now, gills come next week.

Re:Resistance is futile

[Metabolife]

I would give my big toe for a super balancing foot.

Re:Resistance is futile

[binarylarry]

Nah chummer, Doc in Chiba hook you up real nice for cheap even.

Only set you back a few hundred New Yen, cheaper if ya catch a sale.

Re:Resistance is futile

[PopeRatzo]

I want my eyes with enhanced reality

You can leave my eyes alone. Just give me the enhanced reality.

That would suck.

[MrEricSir]

Imagine only being able to see fractals everywhere you look. I think I'd go crazy!

Another step towards star-trek. - VISOR -

[carcomp]

From http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/VISOR The VISOR, acronym for Visual Instrument and Sensory Organ Replacement, was a medical device used in the Federation to aid patients who have suffered loss of eyesight or who were born blind. The VISOR detected electromagnetic signals across the entire EM spectrum between 1 Hz and 100,000 THz and transmitted those signals to the brain through neural implants in the temples of the individual via delta-compressed wavelengths. We may not be at brain-interface yet, but looks like we are heading in the right direction.

Obviously...

[imyy4u3]

I can "see" why the blind would like this! (excuse the bad joke!) Then again, how would a blind person, who has never been able to see before, be able to function in a world where all of a sudden (s)he could see? (s)He would be overwhelmed, and would have to re-learn everything - walking, etc., as his/her balance and entire life to that point had been based upon their other senses...I wonder if anyone has taken into account if any blind people actually "want" to see? I mean I can't see in the 4th dimension, but if you told me I could, would I really want to? I'm guessing many people wouldn't want to (at least not permanently).

Re:Obviously...

[plalonde2]

Most blind people aren't blind since birth. A large fraction of blind folks suffer from age-related macular degeneration, where the reflective pigment at the back of the eye gets damaged or destroyed (through a few mechanisms), or the retinal "screen" is otherwise damaged (torn, distorted, occluded) by capillary leakage and scarring. In some cases it's very narrow areas - you won't notice them if they are in the periphery - but they wreak havoc if they are centrally located and/or spreading. Note that these processes don't affect the neurons as much as the detection equipment and/or shape of the receptor field.

Add the baby boomer effect, and it's become very profi^H^H^H^H^Hrelevant to be able to overcome these degenerations.

Re:Obviously...

[ElectricTurtle]

While there might be a few adults blind since birth that would opt out for such reasons, you can wager that blind children of seeing parents would get it rather quick, on the parents' authority as legal guardians. The fact that they would be adapting in early childhood means they would likely be almost, if not completely, normal by adulthood. So those blind persons who might think the detriments outweigh the benefits would be categorized as niche that would only diminish over time.

Re:Obviously...

[Kilrah_il]

I think in a way it's the same as the situation regarding Cochlear Implants (CI) for profound hearing loss. CI are good for adults that lost their hearing at an advanced age, or for babies that are hearing impaired from birth, provided the CI are implanted at a young age (usually before the age of 6-12 mo). The reason is that every sense in our body has both a receptor part (eye, ear, nose, etc.) and an area of the brain tasked with processing the information*. The area in the brain is developed by being stimulated, just like a muscle is built by use. But it's worse than muscles: if the area has never been used, it cannot develop in a later age, so you have to stimulate it as soon as possible. Today it is known that the sooner you implant a baby with a CI, the better the results.
That was the medical side of the issue. The other part is moral: How can we decide for someone if he needs something? Lots of blind and deaf people have succeeded in life without help. OTOH, there is no doubt that life is much harder when you are short one modality compared to everyone else, and this handicap is much more obvious for blindness than it is for deafness. I think the moral dilemma is more difficult for deaf people (esp. deaf children born into deaf families; hearing parents would like nothing better than to have "normal" children). For blindness I don't think there will be any objection to such treatment.

So, assuming the technology gets there (and it will, someday):
Medically - The implant will probably be useful for congenital blindness (if implanted at an early-enough age) and for people who have lost their vision in later life.
Morally - Although there might be some objection about tempering with a child who is too young to decide for himself, I believe most would agree its for his benefit. At a later age, people can decide for themselves (although I personally would love to get my vision back, if I ever lost it).

* This is a bit of an oversimplification since a bit of preliminary processing happens in the sensing organ.

P.S.
I don't think you have to be so pedantic about using both male and female pronouns [s(he), his/her]. Just use the male, and everyone will understand you meant both. Nobody will think you meant to treat only men, and not women.

Not that simple

[symes]

It is not just about replacing the retina - you have to learn to see and this involves higher cortical function. If you have gone without site for a very long time then learning to see isn't neccessarily that easy and can cause considerable distress and disorientation. Sure, for those who have seen and lost sight for a short period of time then lets hope this works out. But it isn't the solution to everyone's problems.

Re:Not that simple

[binarylarry]

Yeah fuck all this learning shit, I want to be blind!

Why stop there?

[mjperson]

>then next-generation eEyes could enable the blind to not just detect objects, but to see again normally.

Why stop at normally? Full zoom, magnifications, color-filtering, recording mode... All the stuff up front is nigh-trivial compared to the interface they are working on. Once you have an interface, the world is your oyster.