Slashdot Mirror
Two Heads Are Better Than One For Brain-Computer Interfaces
FatLittleMonkey writes "My mind to your mind... my thoughts to your thoughts... Researchers at the University of Essex have shown that combining the output from two non-invasive 'brain-computer interfaces,' computer-interpreted EEG signals, led to a much clearer signal of the subjects' intention than the output from a single subject. To test this idea, they had two subjects try to steer a simulated space-ship at a target planet, by thinking of one of eight possible directions. While a single user could achieve 67% accuracy, this jumped to 90% when two minds were combined. Researchers believe the technique also compensates for individual lapses in attention, and thus may have applications in real-world space missions."
If I'm thinking it, you're probably all thinking it too:
with the addition of another brain it became "crowd intelligence" or "crowd sourced" and is now sufficiently buzzword compliant.
I think they just proved that 0.33*0.33 = 0.10.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I saw a TV program that showed electrodes connected to one person. That person was able to move an avatar around a 3D environment. Sure doesn't seem like they have come very far...
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
A positive use for Tasmanian's. Explanation for non Australians found here http://www.utas.edu.au/library/companion_to_tasmanian_history/T/Tas%20reputation.htm
I got to the chocolate box before you, that's why the hard ones have teeth marks.
While a single user could achieve 67% accuracy, this jumped to 90% when two minds were combined.
Meanwhile, a lone monkey with an hour's training, a penchant for bananas, and a joystick achieved 99% accuracy.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Finally, the giant robots in Pacific Rim make some sense... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=2vKz7WnU83E#t=61s
Of course they would have to weigh this against the benefits of giving the rovers better ai for moving from place to place.
This would only be a surprise if people would all use their brain differently. On this level, they do not. No surprise here.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
http://www.universiteitgroningen.nl/fmns-research/theobio/events/_pdf/ma_eanatureneuro06.pdf
... didn't Zaphod Beeblebrox think like that too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaphod_Beeblebrox
tells us that Bayesian inference with probabilistic population codes works best if the two channels/ two brains are spiking with a Poisson distribution.
Talking about bable fish
Artificial intelligence is the study of how to make real computers act like the ones in the movies.
Or are both pilots going to be texting and surfing for pr0n with the assumption that the other one is taking control?
"It must have been a computer glitch which caused us to run out of fuel and crash into the Atlantic on our flight from Houston to Toledo."
Javascript, cookies, flash, and ActiveX must be enabled in order to view this sig.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
Have gnu, will travel.
no doubt
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
Not to mention the whole cord of three strands verse. Clearly implying that Menage a Trois is a good thing!
God's way is what? Capitalism? I don't think so. If God subscribed to any ism's, communism would be as likely as any. At it's core, before the addition of greed and corruption, communism intends to take care of everyone, and to eliminate the rich, the poor, leaving only a middle class. "Give what you're capable of giving, and take what you need" almost sounds biblical. Almost.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
God's way is what? Capitalism? I don't think so. If God subscribed to any ism's, communism would be as likely as any.
Actually, a ton of Christian philosophers, economists etc. have tried to answer that. The best result of their attempts, as far as I know at least, is that of what we'd call a "3rd way", called "Distributism".
Distributists agree with communists in the centrality of the means of production, and that it shouldn't be in the hands of a few for them to use it to exploit the masses. Contrary to communists, however, they also don't think it should be in the hands of a single one (the state), but rather spread among as many owners as possible. Thus, they also agree with capitalists in the you must have and preserve private property. But goes against it in that the state should prevent such private ownerships from aggregating into monopolies. They also place a strong focus on small communities, and think that social security must be provided locally, by the well of members of a community to the less well of, thus going against both liberals, who think it must be provided by a centralized state, and conservatives, who think it must be provided by the individual alone. And they think the concept of employment as practiced today is fundamentally flawed, preferring cooperatives of free workers who own their own means of productions to that of employees (who don't) working for someone else (who does).
The best analogy I can think to this is of a world composed of unions who are also companies and who provide social security for their members. In other words, the ideal social model of Christianity would be a world of professional guilds.
The Distributist Magazine offers lots of information. See also the Wikipedia page.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
That two antenna's are like 1 larger (more sensitive) antenna.
THINK! It's patriotic
Hands free porn surfing!
THINK! It's patriotic
That's very interesting. I've never heard of distributism before - maybe I lead a sheltered life or something. (That's a joke - I've led anything but a sheltered life, LMAO)
Only problem I see, as I skim the surface, is that I'm quite anti-Catholic. But, the philosophy looks good. I need to spend some time looking at this. Note, I don't say "spend some time studying", merely looking. I'm to damned old to actually start studying economics, nor am I especially interested.
I do know that where cooperatives are permitted and encouraged, they seem to do well. Those I know about include credit unions, farmer's coops, and rural electric utilities. Members actually have a stake in those businesses, and they might find a small personal loss acceptable, if they know that the loss is going to a business in which they hold an interest.
Personally, I get a small payment from the electric coop every year. It usually equals a week or so of electric usage. Errrr - maybe five days, I never actually did the math.
Thanks for the links!
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Only problem I see, as I skim the surface, is that I'm quite anti-Catholic. But, the philosophy looks good.
Yep. I like to make a distinction between "Catholicism the religion" and "Catholicism the philosophy". They overlap quite a bit but one can be taken without the other and the later is much more interesting and universally applicable than the former. I myself am not Catholic, but I do absorb quite a bit of their philosophy. After centuries of very serious intellectual development it acquired a "solidity" that most alternatives lack. As such, it's a joy to study for those so inclined, even if they disagree with it in many things (or specially when they disagree -- we in the humanities are weird like that).
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
My condolences on your loss.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.