Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Harvard Creates Cyborg Tissues

Posted by samzenpus on from the getting-wired dept.

MrSeb writes "Bioengineers at Harvard University have created the first examples of cyborg tissue: Neurons, heart cells, muscle, and blood vessels that are interwoven by nanowires and transistors. These cyborg tissues are half living cells, half electronics. As far as the cells are concerned, they're just normal cells that behave normally — but the electronic side actually acts as a sensor network, allowing a computer to interface directly with the cells. In the case of cyborg heart tissue, the researchers have already used the embedded nanowires to measure the contractions (heart rate) of the cells. So far, the researchers have only used the nanoelectric scaffolds to read data from the cells — but according to lead researcher Charles Lieber, the next step is to find a way of talking to the individual cells, to 'wire up tissue and communicate with it in the same way a biological system does.' Suffice it to say, if you can use a digital computer to read and write data to your body's cells, there are some awesome applications."

108 comments

  1. Paging Adam Jenson... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "I never asked for this."

  2. Why don't they... by multiben · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... just build cyborgs which don't need to blow their nose?

  3. Star Trek: First Contact, anyone? by jehan60188 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    that part where Data had like 4 square inches of skin grafted on to him, and it was the greatest thing that ever happened to him

    1. Re:Star Trek: First Contact, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wasn't there a TNG episode where Q made him into an actual human being? That might be a little better though the borg queen exhaling her hot sensual breath over the nascent tissue might tip the scales!

    2. Re:Star Trek: First Contact, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      No. Riker, with the power of Q, offered to transform Data into a human but Data refused. In another episode, Data becomes Q's only friend when the latter is stripped of his powers. When Q got his powers back, he offered a gift to Data, which Data assumed meant turning him into a human but instead Q made Data laugh.

  4. DRM. by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your heart possibly being owned by a corporation. Or your willy wang and the police busting down your door for unauthorised jerking methods.

    1. Re:DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your heart possibly being owned by a corporation. Or your willy wang and the police busting down your door for unauthorised jerking methods.

      That's exactly the kind of bullshit that would make any advanced alien species decide that we're not worth contacting. But it's standard bullshit. It's been going on for a long time.

      The full implications are worse than that. We are headed towards technological singularity. While I would like to believe this will usher in a new era of prosperity and achievement, consider the kind of sociopathic fevered egos who always wind up running things. Now imagine them even more "effective" (at doing what they have always done) than ever.

    2. Re:DRM. by arthurh3535 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Your heart possibly being owned by a corporation. Or your willy wang and the police busting down your door for unauthorised jerking methods.

      You mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repo!_The_Genetic_Opera ?

      --
      No! It's a *SIG*. Keep the Special Interest Groups away! (Con joke!)
    3. Re:DRM. by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      The full implications are worse than that. We are headed towards technological singularity. While I would like to believe this will usher in a new era of prosperity and achievement, consider the kind of sociopathic fevered egos who always wind up running things. Now imagine them even more "effective" (at doing what they have always done) than ever.

      I'm a bit more optimistic than this but should the singularity occur you might as well not worry about the details of what comes after as by definition it's unpredictable. As far as companies DRMing artificial organs we probably have about as much to worry about that as we do all the other barn doors they've slammed shut after the horse got free. Certainly puts a new spin on rooting and jailbreaking!

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    4. Re:DRM. by Freaky+Spook · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm a bit more optimistic than this but should the singularity occur you might as well not worry about the details of what comes after as by definition it's unpredictable.

      I'm not at all, looking at just the USA and what companies like Monsanto, GSK and Kaiser Permanente have been able to get away with and also get legislated to protect their interests at the expense of everyone else, I'm not optimistic at all.

    5. Re:DRM. by cplusplus · · Score: 1

      The full implications are worse than that. We are headed towards technological singularity. While I would like to believe this will usher in a new era of prosperity and achievement, consider the kind of sociopathic fevered egos who always wind up running things. Now imagine them even more "effective" (at doing what they have always done) than ever.

      Open source it or pirate it. You're probably right... in all likelihood, corporations will tie this tech down and bleed the masses for every last cent for access. Pirates and hackers will be the saviors of humanity after the singularity, and they're always one step ahead.

      --
      "False hope is why we'll never run out of natural resources!" - Lewis Black
    6. Re:DRM. by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm a bit more optimistic than this but should the singularity occur you might as well not worry about the details of what comes after as by definition it's unpredictable.

      I'm not at all, looking at just the USA and what companies like Monsanto, GSK and Kaiser Permanente have been able to get away with and also get legislated to protect their interests at the expense of everyone else, I'm not optimistic at all.

      If we accept that all human beings have weaknesses, fears, failings, and that no individual or finite group is impervious to corruption and/or compromise/influence/pressure, then logic says that the only realistic option to avoid most of the worst of corporate and other influence/corruption/compromise of the government is to make the central government as small and weak as practical, and keep as much of the local day-to-day governance as local and answerable to the people as possible.

      Decentralization, baby! Like the way the internet was intended to work, damage/corruption is routed around until repairs are effected.

      That way the Monsantos, GSKs, and Kaiser Permanentes of the world won't be able to buy influence over the entire nation in one spot from a relatively-small number of the very very powerful in the Federal government like a "supermarket of sleaze", but would have to influence/corrupt/bribe many, many city/county/state governments and officials/legislative bodies across the country and keep all those illegal acts from becoming widely known and drawing prosecution. A much more expensive, time-consuming, and risky proposition. It would thus help reduce the risks of corruption of the singularity from those sources and help tilt the scales a fraction more towards a more benign outcome.

      Look, we've all generally agreed and acknowledged that politicians are all ambitious, greedy, power-hungry sleazebags that can and will, given the chance, bring that painting of a boot crushing a human face forever to reality. And yes, that includes "your guy", too.

      Given that, wouldn't it be wise to keep the ones with the most power and ability to control you and your life within easy arm's-reach where you can nip their overreaches and encroachments on your wealth, security, free speech, and freedom in the bud? Keep in mind also that it's much harder for them to go astray if they've got to face the people they're governing across their own backyard fences, their kids go to the same school, etc etc.

      As a side-benefit, it would also tend to greatly reduce the power and influence of the two major national political parties and severely reduce the ability of a relatively few national party leaders to dictate to the rest. It's possible it could even allow the emergence of a third party or even more.

      It also coincidentally assures some variety in the style, flavor, and feel of governance from place to place across the nation and thus there is a better chance one can find a place to live with governance that accommodates one's religious, cultural, and political beliefs to a sufficient degree.

      This, I believe, would also greatly increase the chances for a more-positive outcome from the singularity by assuring a variety of views, cultures, and beliefs, thus avoiding a monoculture of tyranny.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    7. Re:DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great idea! They could patent a boner and provide the feature on a one time or yearly license!

    8. Re:DRM. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Or your willy wang and the police busting down your door for unauthorised jerking methods.

      I think I would take the risk if my down-under-thunder could honestly be used to bust down doors...

    9. Re:DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your Erection Trial Period Has Expired. Should you wish to subscribe to the full version please enter your billing details below.

    10. Re:DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You speak true!

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

      Your heart possibly being owned by a corporation. Or your willy wang and the police busting down your door for unauthorised jerking methods.

      While this is scary enough, how about "bio-hackers" jacking up their body's performance during sporting events, or "bio-scumbags" hacking into your body and holding your heart for ransom.

    12. Re:DRM. by CommieLib · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, no, you don't understand - THIS TIME we'll get it right. The people involved are so good and so pure, they'll make the right choices, and resist the pull of corruption. You just don't understand how smart these new people are - the New York Times talks about them everyday. These are the best and brightest, the very smartest of society - isn't it better for them to make the choices for us?

      You don't understand - human beings are corruptible and evil, and so we need to make government powerful so that it can be better. What will the government be composed of? Well, human beings, of course. Er, well, these human beings are less corruptible, I think. And look at these wonderful corporations who are supporting our rise to power - they must surely be led by disinterested saints committed to social justice.

      You see, we're not committed to ideology - we're pure pragmatists, we only care about what works. Well, yes, I suppose that ideology does define what goals are worth working towards and which ones aren't, and I definitely have preferences in that area...well, yes, I suppose that I have premises that I operate from in choosing methods that constitute ideology...but ideology is bad! I mean, YOUR ideology is bad! Mine is progress. Towards what? Well...the future! Forward! By what methods, and to what ends? Eh, those are details we'll figure out later...what matters now is that we get unlimited power to reshape society according to our beautiful vision.

      What? I don't care about the history and track record of these ideas! I'm not hide-bound and shackled by tradition like you! The performance of these methods in the past has nothing to do with what's going to happen when we get power! </sarcasm>

      . Individual liberty may be imperfect, but ultimately it's the only deal worth considering.

      --
      If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
    13. Re:DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Decentralization, baby! Like the way the internet was intended to work...

      That was never the intention behind The Internet. Don't act like that was the goal. The goal was merely to connect computers, as one might connect telephones. That's it.

    14. Re:DRM. by captjc · · Score: 1

      Well, connect computers and withstand a nuclear war. Remember, it was a DoD project before it was a way to download porn and bitch about things.

      --
      Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
    15. Re:DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly the kind of bullshit that would make any advanced alien species decide that we're not worth contacting.

      Humans pre-equipped with the stuff the aliens need to enslave us should be a reason for the aliens to not contact us?

      However it would be a reason to not openly contact us, at least until they managed to steal the secret codes.

    16. Re:DRM. by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      I would like to note that it is available on Netflix!

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    17. Re:DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I agree with you to some extent - I am in favor of gov't being always as local as possible - but any large organization can be dangerous, not just government. Make government weaker than the corporations, and the corporations will effectively become the government. My problem with the modern libertarian movement is that they seem willfully naive to the dangers of anything but government, as if gov't created all problems, rather than having been invented to address many of them.

    18. Re:DRM. by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Make government weaker than the corporations, and the corporations will effectively become the government.

      Government is *always* stronger than private corporations, unless corporations somehow surprise the world like in a Bond movie and have a "secret army" or some nonsense.

      Government controls the courts and the police/FBI. The DoJ/justice system. They pass the laws. They have the US military, all branches. The TLAs. Prisons.

      Drones.

      Cruise missiles.

      The bomb.

      They have the monopoly on the use of force.

      Now, please tell me how the corporations are going to "force" the government to do ANYthing!?

      It's precisely the government that the corporations use to exercise their power over you, your life, and our society, and so it is government whose scope and power needs to be reduced.

      That doesn't mean gut the ability to prosecute corporate lawbreakers.

      It's just less ability for those lawbreakers to control you through the government and it's endless laws, regulations, etc and expand their control over more and more aspects of your life.

      They can't buy influence over the use of a government power over your life that doesn't exist.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    19. Re:DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Government is not the only source of corporate power. Any large organization that allocates resources has the potential to use it for power.

      2. Modern *multinational* corporations are not dependent on any one government. By the way, they generally wield their power much more in the countries with weak governments than the ones with strong ones. They are also the source of most of the tools of coercion you mentioned. They do many of the functions you mentioned as well, including the use of force, through contracting. Finally, they have what appears to be an utter death grip on US policy.

      3. I agree we should limit the power of the government carefully, and watch it closely. I think we've gone too far already in the direction of a surveillance state, that there is entirely too much effort across the spectrum to make other people "act like me", and that it still does not have the level of transparency and accountability that any self-respecting free people would demand. But it is not the only threat to our freedom; and it is what we use to defend against the other threats to our freedom. It's a shame that the libertarians were hijacked by corporatists, because the nation would benefit tremendously during this time of technological and cultural change from clear, coherent, plausible libertarian voices, which won't happen while they're trying to pretend corporations don't have power, and giving anarchist - not libertarian - arguments to support them.

    20. Re:DRM. by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      It's a shame that the libertarians were hijacked by corporatists...

      Where in the world do you get that from? I'm a small-'L' libertarian, probably the best short description would be "practical libertarian", in that I recognize that a "pure libertarian" (whatever that means) approach is not necessarily the best solution for every problem. The right tool for the job, and all that.

      So far, I've not seen you offer or propose any solutions. It may not be perfect in every conceivable way, but the ideas I've outlined in my OP seems to beat everything else I've heard proposed so far. I'm always open to hearing others ideas for a solution.

      One thing, though. I often hear people say that we need more laws and regulations, giving the government more power. The same government that everyone says is already owned by the corporations.

      Passing more laws and enacting more regulations only gives the corporations more power to prevent anyone else from challenging their dominance (keeping out competition/start-ups) and giving them more power over you and your life, and removing choice while enriching themselves at the taxpayers' expense.

      Any solution depending on a corrupt government to somehow suddenly become a white knight in the fight against corporate lawbreakers by giving them expanded powers/resources/wealth and passing more laws & regulations is ignoring both the last 100 years of history and reality, and is doomed to fail miserably.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    21. Re:DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am very much in favor of removing the vast majority of regulations. But an indiscriminate bonfire would be disastrous, and would remove such restraints on corporate power as still exist. The problem with your plan - that we should throw away the only tool that can address the problem - is that it delivers us even more directly to those non-governmental sources of power that have been working hard to popularize it.

      Some regulations are worth keeping, and others worth creating. It is unfortunate to let a natural and healthy desire to minimize regulation lapse into forgetting why they exist in the first place, and calling for blank repeal and opposition to regulation.

      It's a shame that the libertarians were hijacked by corporatists...

      Where in the world do you get that from?

      Sorry, I was referring to the big-L Libertarians, the political party. Their interest in liberty has focused largely on corporate deregulation since most of their funding now comes from corporate sources. (Accordingly, they like to pretend we live in a pre-industrial age, refusing to acknowledge any problems arising with the modern economic system except those that stem from government.) Classically, libertarians focused on maximizing liberty, whether that happened by getting rid of regulations or by adding them - they understood that government is a tool, a dangerous but necessary one for maximizing liberty.

      So far, I've not seen you offer or propose any solutions.

      Well, I thought it would be rude to shoehorn that stuff in, when I was really just trying to explain what I thought was wrong with your plan (in short, that it accomplishes the opposite of its stated intention.) But! Let's see, solutions for what? Too many useless regulations? Overweening corporate power? The corruption of government? I'm happy to take my favorite current whack at each. Warning, most of them will in fact involve government - the only available tool I am aware of that can address these matters. (It's easy enough, and mostly true, to say government is corrupt - with the implication that it therefore is useless, but of course you realize the truth is more complex than that. We are not yet at the point of true impunity in all matters, right? So there is still leverage left in the realm of ideas and citizen involvement.)

      Too Much Regulation: One imminently helpful step is simply to establish a permanent legislative committee or commission whose sole purpose is to repeal regulations. It is to stay out of any controversial issues where there is an ongoing political dispute about what is to be done. Rather, their job is to mow through the low-hanging fruit as fast as possible: regulations that serve no known purpose, or fail to serve the intended purpose. They would offer recommendations that would be passed on a informed unanimous consent basis - if nobody offered specific reason to object to the removal of a particular regulation over a decent period of review time, out it goes. Obviously, a lot of troublesome regulations would not be touched by this committee, so it would only be a partial solution. But we need to get a process in place to continually remove regulations.

      The other part you have to address, of course, is how regulations are made. Obviously, a big part of the problem there is the legislation, but there's so much to go into there I'd perhaps better save it for the sequel. Most regulations are actually written by agency employees. They're mostly not trying to write regulations that suck, but the odds are against them. It's all too easy to write regulations that sound fine in your office but like a disaster in the distant workplace they apply to. (And yes, this is an argument for localizing whenever we can, but we also need to recognize that's not always the best choice when dealing with multistate entities.) Two suggestions I would offer to alleviate this problem. One would be a lengthy (if not permanent) period of

    22. Re:DRM. by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      The problem with your plan - that we should throw away the only tool that can address the problem

      This, I believe, is the root of our disagreement IMHO.

      You believe that I mean to toss away the power and ability of the government to prosecute corporations and their officers/boardmembers that break the law, when that is the opposite of my goals.

      I want to make sure there is a justice system and process in place that hasn't been totally compromised as it is now. Right now it doesn't matter how many new laws/regulations are put into place, as the entire system is corrupt and turns a blind eye and/or does a whitewash.

      You can't bust powerful wrong-doers with a system that's in the wrong-doer's hands. That's why problems with corporate power are really problems with too much government corruption and power, as the government could seize all US assets of the wrong-doers, prosecute/try them, and throw them into prison if it had the will right now. It's the all-pervasive corruption through all the branches of government that prevents this from occurring.

      You're trying to cut bait with a dull, rusty knife that is more likely to end up causing you injury than performing the job intended.

      In that sense, you could say that I want to "sharpen my (government/justice system) axe, I'm here to sever (lawbreaker's) heads (metaphysically speaking)". Caveats in parentheses added so that I don't end up like Brandon Raub.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    23. Re:DRM. by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      Have you seen "Repo Men"? The movie is based on a future where companies rent artificial hearts, and if someone has too many payments overdue, it's no more heart for him/her.

      Sadly, I can see us moving toward a future as horrible and ultracapitalistic as that; where collecting rent for a heart weighs more than a human life.

  5. Obligatory... by dark_requiem · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I for one welcome our new Cyborg Overlords!

    1. Re:Obligatory... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I for one welcome our new Cyborg Overlords!

      How can you welcome me when I was here first? Yes, I am a cybog. For real; I'm not entirely human -- part of my left eye is a human-made mechanical device.

      You will be assimilated.

      --
      Free Martian Whores!
  6. Oh Noes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I are hacked!

  7. Grown. by MnemonicMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The issue for all of us who already exist today is that the tissue grows around the mesh. Certainly in the future new organisms can be grown and integrated at the same time to become cybernetic life forms. However, for all of us who are already grown getting a mesh inside of our tissues presents a whole other engineering problem.

    1. Re:Grown. by dark_requiem · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not really, use your own stem cells to grow the tissue, grow a new heart/arm/etc., and transplant it. Transplant tech has advanced enormously in recent years.

    2. Re:Grown. by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      Not really, use your own stem cells to grow the tissue, grow a new heart/arm/etc., and transplant it. Transplant tech has advanced enormously in recent years.

      I think simply growing a full heart/arm out of your own stem cells would be the more impressive accomplishment there, actually. It'd almost certainly have a greater impact. Making it a cyborg part and transplanting it are pretty easy by comparison.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    3. Re:Grown. by MnemonicMan · · Score: 1

      Not really, use your own stem cells to grow the tissue, grow a new heart/arm/etc., and transplant it. Transplant tech has advanced enormously in recent years.

      Which is the "other engineering problem." ;)

    4. Re:Grown. by Kyont · · Score: 1

      Aha, this finally puts to rest that nagging question "Why can't God heal amputees?" The answer, of course, is that she couldn't get into Harvard.

      --
      You shall see a cow on the roof of a cotton house.
  8. On the one hand, I am excited... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    On the other, I'm thinking "kill switch"

    1. Re:On the one hand, I am excited... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The good thing about this tech is now you can have a third hand.

  9. Aww, they're so adorable... by Lord_of_the_nerf · · Score: 1

    ...they're trying to take over that iPod!

  10. DNA wants to be free. by Ostracus · · Score: 1

    Suffice it to say, if you can use a digital computer to read and write data to your body's cells, there are some awesome applications.

    Turn the human body into a biological Pirate Bay.

    --
    Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
    1. Re:DNA wants to be free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, then the content industry will have to 'shut you down'.

    2. Re:DNA wants to be free. by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      Yeah, a good old fashioned denial of service would be a bitch!

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    3. Re:DNA wants to be free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, a good old fashioned denial of service would be a bitch!

      It usually is.

  11. Not the use you expected... by girlintraining · · Score: 5, Funny

    Suffice it to say, if you can use a digital computer to read and write data to your body's cells, there are some awesome applications."

    Yes. The RIAA can now ask for someone to be disassembled to search for pirated software, and the government in order to check for terrorist cellular data. Reassembly of course, will be your problem, not theirs.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Not the use you expected... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha.. Terrorist Cells

  12. The Daleks are coming by Streetlight · · Score: 0

    Aren't Dr. Who's nemeses the Daleks? They're allegedly a construction of living tissue and mechanical parts.

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
  13. When asked why Bob wet himself he said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was just hacked...dammit!

  14. Cyborg Jones for President! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, if a cyborg is built entirely in the US and is activated here, does that mean they can run for President after they have been on 40 years? And since computer/cyborg time is so much faster than human, if it is in their "years", what would that mean? That they can run for office in 3 weeks? :-)

    1. Re:Cyborg Jones for President! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It took us almost 200 years just to let all humans vote, and we're still debating civil rights for all of them. How much worse will we be to those who are demonstrably not entirely human? Run for President? First they'll need the right to drive.

    2. Re:Cyborg Jones for President! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shit the demographics are swinging, we need to build more voters!

    3. Re:Cyborg Jones for President! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It took us almost 200 years just to let all humans vote, and we're still debating civil rights for all of them. How much worse will we be to those who are demonstrably not entirely human?

      I'm not entirely human, I'm a cyborg, and a lot of people I know are even less human. Me, it's just a device implanted in my left eye that gives me "super" sight. Others I know have artificial joints. Our previous Vice President was a cyborg. We cyborgs can not only vote and drive, if Bush had died the President would have been a cyborg.

      Check your constitution, it lays out what you need to be congressman, Senator, and President, and none of the qualifications include "100% human."

      You will not only be assimilated, but when your time comes you will pay good money to be assimilated.

      --
      Free Martian Whores!
  15. Required... by rock56501 · · Score: 1

    You will be assimilated, resistance is futile!

    1. Re:Required... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      Assimilation is irrelevant. Futility is irrelevant. We are the protagonists. We always prevail.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    2. Re:Required... by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      I've already been assimilated, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Free Martian Whores!
  16. Bacteria will kick your arse by harlequinn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Cool.

    I wonder what the infection rate along the interfaces is?

  17. I'll be back. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll be back.

  18. Fiction To Reality Issue by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

    Is it too much to ask to at least let me finish my new video game, Deus Ex: Human Revolution before you start making the real crap in a lab? geesh.

  19. JC Denton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Bravery is not a function of firepower."

    Not only is JC more advanced but he has better lines too.

  20. Mmmm, Transglutaminase by Penurious+Penguin · · Score: 1

    With a little Transglutaminase and MSG added to the recipe, there could be a lucrative market for obsolete or misbehaving cyborgs, perhaps in places like Papua New Guinea, or certainly in Washington, D.C.

    --
    Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
  21. Give me $10 on pump 3 and a $30 Harvard PIN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Text msg: "This is your heart. Less than 5000 beats remaining. Please add lifetime now".

  22. Combine with the Patch Clamp? by bughunter · · Score: 2

    the next step is to find a way of talking to the individual cells, to 'wire up tissue and communicate with it in the same way a biological system does.'

    I wonder if these nanowires can be combined the patch clamp to solve this problem?

    --
    I can see the fnords!
    1. Re:Combine with the Patch Clamp? by joocemann · · Score: 1

      They are probably already doing this. Kit Parker (Harvard rat heart muscle jellyfish) just gave a talk at my work today and showed his badass dual-patch clamp data among other glorious feats in bioengineering.

      These are the necessary steps. To build a house, you need a hammer. To build a hammer, you need ore, wood, sharp stones, and a powerful mind.

  23. Awesome! by Lotana · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ignoring all the ./'s typical cynicism: This is quite an exciting development.

    If the artificial components can be kept functioning without affecting the living tissue, we will be able to help people with virtually any physical disability! A few weeks ago there was a stoly how brain signals were decoded when it came to sight, so combine that with this breakthrough we can even have people controlling the devices with their mind!

    Biotech is making great strides in progress. This is a very exciting time to be alive.

    1. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree wholeheartedly and would like to welcome our new cyborg overlords.

    2. Re:Awesome! by joocemann · · Score: 1

      Biotech is, in my opinion, at the 8086 level of computing tech. Once the bigger kinks start to get worked out, development will show its exponential growth. $1000 genome in a day is 2012/2013 technology. The steps are compounding.... invest now! Or maybe wait a little longer...

      If I were a betting man, ViaCyte is the invesment for today. They are leading the way and will be saving Americans from poor diets/lifestyles in under a decade.

    3. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Controlling external devices, including prosthetics, with one's mind is already done and past. Monkeys have even done it. Newer frontiers that this particular study points towards is making the meat-to-digital connections better all around.

    4. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ignoring all the /.'s typical cynicism

      Here, FTFY

    5. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They knew back in the 1960's, what type of the signals visual neurons in the retina sent. Top most layers are the rods and cones for detecting white and three wavelengths. The lower layers combine these into contrast values (red vs. green, blue vs. yellow). Other neurons would fire when edges, dots and ring patterns as well as motion were detected. That's the only way the signals from 100 million receptors could be compressed down the 10 million nerve paths in each optic nerve. Inside your brain, the visual processing system does a "closest match" in order to reconstruct a scene from that information. So you would have a list of objects and their orientations combined with shading.

      People with brain damage, sometimes can tell that their is an object there, but it is just a shimmering cloud of colored dots, or it just continuously spins.

    6. Re:Awesome! by sabbede · · Score: 1

      Combine this with the robot doing neural patch clamping and maybe I can finally get past being forced to waste time composing comments via my fingers like a damn hobo.

    7. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck I wish there were a way to filter out all posts containing "FTFY"

  24. In other news, China steals Harvard research, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sends cyborg girl to swim in the Olympics . . .

  25. So.. would you say.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would you say.. resistance is futile?

  26. Does this mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps Jon Daly was correct, someday there might be a vagina that doubles as a Wifi hotspot.

    1. Re:Does this mean... by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Perhaps Jon Daly was correct, someday there might be a vagina that doubles as a Wifi hotspot.

      The only thing going in my vajayjay that runs on batteries comes with a happy at the end. I'm sure most women feel similar. Second, do you really want your dick in a microwave? What do you think rubbing your man-sausage on a transmitter pumping out several watts is going to your little swimmers?

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:Does this mean... by Dekar · · Score: 1

      I think you've just discovered a new method of contraception. Well done!
      Now, to the patent office, and I doubt there will be any prior art in this case.

    3. Re:Does this mean... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      What do you think rubbing your man-sausage on a transmitter pumping out several watts is going to your little swimmers?

      Doesn't matter, had sex :D

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    4. Re:Does this mean... by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      Oh, right, we'll have cyborg bodies, but will still rely on our own sperm as the only means for reproduciton, right?

  27. Planned Obsolescence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "This human has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down."

  28. Hmm... by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    Childhood memories or another 12 petabytes of live goat porn? Oh, like I even have to ask!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Hmm... by hajus · · Score: 1

      Wasn't that a side plot from Johnny Mnemonic?

    2. Re:Hmm... by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      There was a plot in Johnny Mnemonic?!

    3. Re:Hmm... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I think it had something to do with laser whips

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  29. mit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MIT produces far more amazing things with incredibly less money then the DOD, let's give them a trillion dollars and I'm sure they will be able to cure all diseases in less then 6 years.

    1. Re:mit by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      You think their researchers don't get government grants?

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:mit by JimCanuck · · Score: 0


      The DoD pays for most of MIT's research.

      http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Graphic/2010/08/08/~2107881__1281260297_5023.gif

    3. Re:mit by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Lets get 9 women together and they can make a baby in 1 month!

  30. Beowulf Clusterfsck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would never have considered it, but since you've proposed the possibility, I can only speculate a possible likeness to overly close encounters with certain Secretaries of certain Provinces. However, please do not think I'd ever more than consider it beyond the most purely hypothetical. The story of Beowulf and specific attention to Grendel's younger brother is enough to thoroughly discourage me.

  31. Cu, Copper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    It has antimicrobial properties. In essence this could help fend off disease just by being there.

    It is rather interesting and is worth the time to check it out.

  32. Sure its good in the lab by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    But in real people, cells can repair themselves or be replaced. Wires and transistors, not so much.

    1. Re:Sure its good in the lab by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      Cells can only repair themselves up to a certain point. Transistors can be replaced if designed properly. It's just a matter of finding the right balance.

    2. Re:Sure its good in the lab by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      If you cut a leg off a starfish, it will grow back completely. Scar tissue is a recent development in animal evolution.

  33. reboot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what do you do when then software that is at the end of the wires , is so badly written that your heart and tissues are completely bugged ? Reboot ?

  34. youtube series by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And there is already a commercial youtube sci-fi series about the next step.

  35. imagine pirated good then ROFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i would go for the non paying pirated penis....

    1. Re:imagine pirated good then ROFL by zlives · · Score: 1

      the DOJ will seize it and ask you to forfeit it to them... repeatedly

  36. Applications by theurge14 · · Score: 1

    Well, there are virus scanners and then there are VIRUS scanners.

  37. Does this mean...Over voltage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only thing going in my vajayjay that runs on batteries comes with a happy at the end.

    Double AA or car battery? :)

  38. Can't wait to see the first Zero Day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would be ... interesting.

    I can imagine that malware in this industry will have a whole new meaning.

  39. In the future by iplayfast · · Score: 1

    This tech is worrisome, and awesome.
    It's awesome because it will help with all sorts of diseases, It's worrisome because it can be hacked.

    In the future viruses will be more serious.
    Imagine getting an email stating that your heart now has a new virus, please send $1000 to a numbered account or you will have a heart attack. And of course when you open the email, your heart starts pumping faster.... was it because of the virus or the possible virus.

  40. Re:You will be assimilated by Cute+and+Cuddly · · Score: 0

    To the moderator that has marked my previous comment as being "Off topic", please familiarize yourself with the Borg