An Organic Computer Using Four Wired-Together Rat Brains

What could possibly go wrong? by random+coward · 2015-07-09 09:25 · Score: 4, Funny

Really! What could possibly go wrong?

Re:What could possibly go wrong? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2015-07-09 09:59 · Score: 4, Interesting

This was covered in a 70's horror filmed called "Willard": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Oh, you just can't beat those classics . . .

--
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 10:03 · Score: 1

This, for a start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amazing_Maurice_and_his_Educated_Rodents
(And I'm not referring to the Rodents in the title. If you've read the book, it's a whole different set of rats we should be scared of.)
Re: What could possibly go wrong? by CurveBall · 2015-07-09 10:09 · Score: 1

Conjoiner rats. That's what.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 10:21 · Score: 1

I was more thinking 'The Matrix', Maybe Morpheus got it wrong and the real reason for harvesting humans was a form of compute expansion, harvesting the higher-level functionality of living human minds while keeping the lower levels stimulated.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by ArmoredDragon · 2015-07-09 10:40 · Score: 1

Maybe skynet actually ran on a Beowulf rat cluster.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Forever+Wondering · 2015-07-09 10:59 · Score: 1

Or, try "Donovan's Brain" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

--
Like a good neighbor, fsck is there ...
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by iluvcapra · 2015-07-09 11:31 · Score: 1

They remade it in the early aughts with Crispin Glover...

--
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by jsilver212 · 2015-07-09 12:16 · Score: 1

I have heard that was the original plot idea in the Matrix (using a human mind network for some nefarious computing tasks), but it was changed to the "battery" idea because they didn't think the audience would get it. [citation needed] Anyone have any references of this?
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Chikungunya · 2015-07-09 13:23 · Score: 1

This is what came to my mind immediately when reading the title, for both kinds of rats.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by phorm · 2015-07-09 15:02 · Score: 1

I thought the plot seemed familiar but I recall seeing it in colour.
Sure enough, there was a remake in 2003.
Is there any old movie that HASN'T been remade? Maybe some Chaplin films?
Re: What could possibly go wrong? by savuporo · 2015-07-09 15:09 · Score: 1

Typical demarchist response.

--
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
Re: What could possibly go wrong? by BarbaraHudson · 2015-07-09 15:27 · Score: 1

That skynet would be a lot easier to defeat because it blends.

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by DroolTwist · 2015-07-09 17:51 · Score: 1

Maybe skynet actually ran on a Beowulf rat cluster.
In this case, wouldn't it be a Beowolf cluster?
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by gstoddart · 2015-07-10 00:09 · Score: 2

Why, no. It would be a Beorat cluster.
Do try to keep up. ;-)

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Number42 · 2015-07-10 01:10 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure one of the comics kept the idea.

Quad core cpu? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 09:26 · Score: 5, Funny

id make a comment about mice being input devices but this is just rediculos

Re: Quad core cpu? by goombah99 · 2015-07-09 09:52 · Score: 2

From the description is sounds like the monkeys were doing Agile programming.

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Re:Quad core cpu? by Grizzlysmit · 2015-07-09 13:46 · Score: 1

oh no a computer that eats it's own wiring

--
in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
Francis Smit
Re:Quad core cpu? by antdude · 2015-07-11 04:26 · Score: 1

Maybe your single core brain needs more cores to fix your grammar issues. :P

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).

Ethics? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 09:26 · Score: 1, Insightful

Anyone?

Re:Ethics? by Opportunist · 2015-07-09 09:30 · Score: 1

Why do you expect from scientists what politicians and economists dumped ages ago? Get with the times!

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Ethics? by Duhavid · 2015-07-09 09:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

Anyfour.
Humor aside,there are serious ethical issues here.
If an alien race as much above us as we are above rats were to come here and began to use Humans in like manner, how would we react/feel/moralize?

--
emt 377 emt 4
Re:Ethics? by random+coward · 2015-07-09 09:40 · Score: 2

Well at least they didn't use human brains. Although I expect I should add Yet to the statement....
Re:Ethics? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 09:43 · Score: 1

The human race, in overwhelming majority, accepts the killing and/or use of animals for various purposes. We do this because they can't fight back. We are apex predators.
Should aliens come and do the same to us, c'est la vie. You win some, you lose some.
Consistency is the primary virtue of ethics. If you're unhappy with that, perhaps you should re-examine your position and admit to yourself that you don't really hold a given position. Hypocrisy is a primary evil.
Re:Ethics? by blue+trane · 2015-07-09 09:44 · Score: 3, Funny

Experiments should require the informed consent of all subjects. Until we can communicate with rats, we should not use them in experiments. Get informed consent from humans. If you can't, then do a non-destructive experiment, a simulation. Do not use live creatures without their consent.
Re:Ethics? by nine-times · 2015-07-09 09:46 · Score: 2

Well maybe they could also put our brains into a kind of simulation, so that we didn't know that they were using us in this way. Like we could be sitting in little pods, wired up to drive their computing power, while we think we're walking around in the world, living our lives. In that case, we wouldn't feel anything about it.
That is, we wouldn't feel anything about it until Keanu Reeves liberates us using magic kung fu.
Re:Ethics? by alvinrod · 2015-07-09 09:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

I take it you won't be using any antibiotics or other medication anytime soon then. No one seemed to ask those poor bacteria or viruses if they consented. If you have an issue with that, why is your arbitrary line that covers rats any better than the one I've suggested?
Re:Ethics? by gurps_npc · 2015-07-09 10:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

What makes you think aliens aren't doing it already? If they are doing it, we wouldn't care. Because we couldn't notice - anymore than the rats do. Those rats will definitely do a lot better than the rats that I called the exterminator on last week.
The main problem with your argument is that you are granting greater capabilities to the rats than they have. I'm not talking about hypothetical souls, I'm talking about comprehensive power. The rats are not smart enough to understand any of what we are proposing doing to them.
Secondly, as below, as above fails many ways. It is not transitive. Just as humans ascribe greater rights to a intellectually challenged human than we do to mammals and greater rights to mammals than we do to bacteria (you don't hear about bacteria abuse cases), intelligent aliens should grant greater rights a talking, tool using humans than they do to non-talking, non-tool using mammals. If they don't, then they are no better than criminals that abuse animals.
Rights are not an all or nothing affair - they are granted based on various factors, including intelligence.

--
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Re:Ethics? by Duhavid · 2015-07-09 10:28 · Score: 2

"What makes you think aliens aren't doing it already?"
A La the Matrix? Perhaps.
"If they are doing it, we wouldn't care."
Once we knew, we would care.
"Because we couldn't notice - anymore than the rats do."
They don't? How do you know?
"Those rats will definitely do a lot better than the rats that I called the exterminator on last week."
Not necessarily. Are they confused, frightened, in pain? Dead might be better.
"The main problem with your argument is that you are granting greater capabilities to the rats than they have. I'm not talking about hypothetical souls, I'm talking about comprehensive power. The rats are not smart enough to understand any of what we are proposing doing to them."
Smart is only part of the issue. What about what happens to them as these things are done to them? What do they experience? Are we right in doing it to them? Why is this needed?
"Secondly, as below, as above fails many ways. It is not transitive. Just as humans ascribe greater rights to a intellectually challenged human than we do to mammals and greater rights to mammals than we do to bacteria (you don't hear about bacteria abuse cases), intelligent aliens should grant greater rights a talking, tool using humans than they do to non-talking, non-tool using mammals. If they don't, then they are no better than criminals that abuse animals."
It succeeds in many ways. And why does it have to be transitive.
We do ascribe greater rights as creatures climb in intellectual capability.
Why should that allow us the right to tamper?
And are we being criminals that abuse animals in doing things like this?
"Rights are not an all or nothing affair - they are granted based on various factors, including intelligence."
I see your point. Pain and discomfort and utility to the species being so used should be part of those "various factors".

--
emt 377 emt 4
Re:Ethics? by Krishnoid · 2015-07-09 10:38 · Score: 3, Interesting

If an alien race as much above us as we are above rats were to come here and began to use Humans in like manner, how would we react/feel/moralize?
Well, there's one way to find out -- keep wiring rat brains together until they become smarter than us, give them instructions on human testing, and see what they come up with and how we feel about it.
Get your paws off me, you damn dirty multirat!
Re:Ethics? by alexgieg · 2015-07-09 10:41 · Score: 2, Informative

The line the OP suggested isn't arbitrary, it's pretty objective. Beings with a nervous system and a brain suffer more than beings with just a nervous system, which in turn suffer more than being with mere nociception, which in turn suffer something, compared to being with none of those, who suffer nothing.
Not harming being who can feel excruciating pain would cause our scientific research to stop? No, it'd just advance at a slight slower speed.
So, why then do we harm them? For most people, because we can. And if "might makes right" is what most go with, all the power to them. When the ethics of might eventually bites them back, it's nothing but their own fault.

--
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Re:Ethics? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 11:05 · Score: 1

If I use your own logic against you: Without communicating with lifeforms who do not have a brain, how do you know they suffer less?
Re:Ethics? by alexgieg · 2015-07-09 11:18 · Score: 1

There's no channel through which nociception can travel.

--
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Re:Ethics? by alvinrod · 2015-07-09 11:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

Suffering is rather subjective and considering that the outcome of a lot of research is the death of the subject, does it matter much whether it was a rat or a paramecium? Neither appear to have shown any sapience so pain is a useless metric unless someone is testing pain responses.

Let's turn the question around and ask how much suffering would you be willing to inflict to rats if it would yield a cure for cancer? Can you contemplate or measure the reduction in suffering that would reduce to humanity? What's 100 years of suffering in millions of rats against the rest of the life of the universe and trillions of humans of suffering prevented?

Obviously we can't know in advance the results of any experiment, but that's what review boards are for. Not every scientist is a Mengele and stopping progress until we have all of the answers is likely objectively worse from the point of amount of suffering inflicted than using animals in laboratory experiments.
Re:Ethics? by alexgieg · 2015-07-09 11:44 · Score: 3, Interesting

The problem with this line of reasoning is that it assumes a linear progression in research, when by all measures it seems to be exponential.
From a certain perspective this might seem like the argument works against my point, because the earlier we do something would mean its result would be multiplied by orders of magnitude later on. However, that'd be a stochastic reasoning, because there's a point at which the result was achieved. Therefore, the distinction is between a linear delay vs. an exponential growth.
In other words, if we wait 50 years because we don't want to cause excessive suffering to animals, the trillions of human beings in our future light cone would most probably "feel" it as a delay of seconds, if that much.
IMHO then, reasoning from the perspective of extremely future benefits isn't useful. At most, only the near future is actually affected. And even that might be just a minor delay, since computation and simulated models are themselves advanced so much that in a few years they'll outpace anything doable by directly manipulating living beings.

--
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Re:Ethics? by CanadianMacFan · 2015-07-09 12:18 · Score: 1

I'm fine with the use of animals in medical research as long as the animals are properly cared for, the minimal number are used, the minimal procedure is used, ethical reviews have been undertaken, the appropriate animals are used, their suffering is minimize, and only when there is absolutely no alternative available. (There's probably a couple more but that's just off the top of my head.) I don't want animal research used for cosmetics, toxicity, or for things just because we can do them. This definitely falls into the last category. This isn't going to help save anyone's life and even if this research were to continue (which I am completely opposed to) it's not like we're going to be building computers in the future by hooking up a bunch of brains together.
Re:Ethics? by sexconker · 2015-07-09 13:08 · Score: 1

Using consenting humans would be far more ethical than using non-consenting animals.
Re:Ethics? by sexconker · 2015-07-09 13:10 · Score: 1

There's no channel through which nociception can travel.
You don't know what any being, or any thing, feels or thinks.
In fact, you don't know that anything other than yourself feels or thinks.
There is no physical explanation for the manifestation of consciousness.
Re:Ethics? by thrich81 · 2015-07-09 13:55 · Score: 1

Right now there is a rat infestation in my yard and house. I don't have any ethical issues with getting rid of them by any manner possible. We tried live traps and got one. Next it is going to be lethal traps and poisons and I am beyond caring about whether the lethal traps are painless or not. So ethically, what's the diff between these lab rats and my pests? Just a rhetorical question, as intuitively it seems there is a difference but I can't figure out what it is.
Re:Ethics? by LesFerg · 2015-07-09 17:18 · Score: 1

I put a trap in my ceiling space to conquer a rat invasion. The first strike was within hours, but the next one I never heard and a few days later when I got up there to check it, there was a scattering of chewed bone pieces around the trap, none larger than a centimetre, and not a trace of anything else, not even fur.
So where is their ethics cut-off, and how to we measure ours against theirs?
Still, I would rather NOT be part of a project which uses coercion (torture?) such as depriving a bunch of rats of water until they do what I want.

--
If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
Re:Ethics? by quenda · 2015-07-09 19:08 · Score: 1

Well at least they didn't use human brains. Although I expect I should add Yet to the statement....
You could study rare naturally occurring two-headed humans, with two brains connected at the spine (so one CNS).
They are able to coordinate surprisingly well.
Unfortunately, all anybody seems to care about is their sex life, which is scientifically dull.
(Except for the original Siamese Twins who had 22 kids between them, so must have been doing something extraordinary.)
Re: Ethics? by AgNO3 · 2015-07-10 00:00 · Score: 1

You must hate that plants feel pain and just playing the sound of a caterpillar eating a leaf causes them to react defensively. Look it up.

--
OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink :-(
Re: Ethics? by alexgieg · 2015-07-10 02:51 · Score: 1

It's always interesting to find someone who doesn't understand the difference between linear growth and S-curved recursive exponential growth, and who also believes in Orgel's Second Rule. Nice try, Anonymous Luddite.

--
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Re:Ethics? by itchybrain · 2015-07-10 03:03 · Score: 1

Ahem.
A virus is not a living organism.
Re:Ethics? by Duhavid · 2015-07-10 03:15 · Score: 2

I understand your dilemma.
I think that part of the difference is
A, the harm they can do to you
B, the inability to have cooperation with them.
If you could negotiate with them ( stay away from the house, I'll refrain from killing you, maybe spend part of the money saved on traps and poisons on some food, left away from the house periodically ), maybe you would. I would. But, we cant. So, what are our alternatives? Kill them, drive them away, or put up with the damage they do, the harm they can do to us and our loved ones.

--
emt 377 emt 4

All hair our new four-brained overlords! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 09:26 · Score: 1

All hair our new four-brained overlords!

Re:All hair our new four-brained overlords! by johanw · 2015-07-09 20:49 · Score: 1

Why stop at only four? 6 billion minds, all acting as one.
Re:All hair our new four-brained overlords! by Demonoid-Penguin · 2015-07-10 01:07 · Score: 1

Why stop at only four? 6 billion minds, all acting as one.
A giant King rat?

imagine by bugs2squash · 2015-07-09 09:29 · Score: 1

imagine a Beowulf cluster of these...

--
Nullius in verba

Re:imagine by Opportunist · 2015-07-09 09:30 · Score: 2

Does it run Natalie ... I mean, Linux?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:imagine by Applehu+Akbar · 2015-07-09 09:40 · Score: 1

If I had a Beowulf cluster of these, I would run my own LexisNexis mirror.
Re:imagine by desdinova+216 · 2015-07-09 09:42 · Score: 1

something something hot grits?
Re:imagine by Dracos · 2015-07-09 09:59 · Score: 5, Funny

Ahem, Beorat cluster.
Re:imagine by Arthur+Dent+'99 · 2015-07-09 10:29 · Score: 1

Better yet, imagine a Beowulf cluster of wolves!
(The Wulfings were a powerful clan in Beowulf, and Wulfings means the "wolf clan".)
Re:imagine by MrKaos · 2015-07-09 16:56 · Score: 1
- Imagine there's no Beowulf cluster,
- it isn't hardware dude,
- no target architecture to compile for
- and no fanbois too
- imagine all the ratbrains
- computing their little peeeeiicccceee
- - whooohoooo
--
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Re:imagine by t_ban · 2015-07-12 05:47 · Score: 1

imagine a Beowulf cluster of these...
It's called a law firm.

--
First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win. -Gandhi

I for one... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 09:29 · Score: 1

.. Welcome our new RatNet overlord.

Mod article by SeaFox · 2015-07-09 09:30 · Score: 3, Insightful

+1, Creepy

Re:Mod article by Type44Q · 2015-07-09 13:12 · Score: 1

There's a special place in hell for those who torture small mammals; it likely resembles the inside of Richard Gere's ass.

I for one ... by Krishnoid · 2015-07-09 09:35 · Score: 1

Welcome our cute and fuzzy, already pretty intelligent long-tail enabled distributed multiprocessing overlords.

Re:I for one ... by MightyMartian · 2015-07-09 09:41 · Score: 2

In Soviet Russia, rats' brains you!

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.

Rat-Borg of Nine by tekrat · 2015-07-09 09:36 · Score: 3, Insightful

Isn't this how the Borg operate? Collective thought working towards a single goal. Interconnected minds sharing problem solving, which is how they quickly adapt.

I for one welcome our new rat overlords....

--
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.

Re:Rat-Borg of Nine by nine-times · 2015-07-09 09:57 · Score: 1

I never thought about it quite like that before, but it makes me wonder: If the Borg operate by using biological brains as processing units, does the nature of the brains have any impact on the outcome of the processing? Like if the Borg assimilated a race with very different brains, might their presence in the collective affect the decisions made by the collective? Could you flood the collective with so many pacifists that the Borg become peaceful?
I guess it applies in real life, to this rat experiment. On either a quantitative or qualitative level, how do the individual rat brains influence the results?
Re:Rat-Borg of Nine by dissy · 2015-07-09 11:45 · Score: 1

Going off of TV episodes, some books, and the borg documentary, the borg queen has said on a few occasions that certain species are put to certain tasks to be most efficient.
The Klingons were assimilated for physical strength requiring tasks, not brain/CPU power.
The Voth however were assimilated for their technology (roughly equal to the borg) and their brain power, and used mainly to advance the borgs theoretical physics and such.
The Voth also had transwarp technology independently developed, and while it may have been ret-con'ed in it was stated this is where the borg got it from too.
The Kazon on the other hand were avoided for assimilation completely, as the species was deemed too stupid and incapable for anything, and their very presence in the borg collective took them that much further away from "perfection"
PS, sorry... </nerd>
Re:Rat-Borg of Nine by nine-times · 2015-07-10 01:24 · Score: 1

Don't apologize for a nerdy post. You're responding to a message on Slashdot where someone's talking about Star Trek. It's a little off topic, but who cares? I started it.
I didn't know all of that, since I just watched the series and have not read the books. Mainly, what struck me was an idea that I only mentioned for a second, which was the idea of giving a poison pill to the Borg. That's essentially what they did when they taught individuality to Hugh, which was successful in disrupting the Borg. However, I imagined a scenario for a Star Trek story that presents the following dilemma: The Borg is destroying the Federation and taking over the galaxy, and the only way to stop it is to feed an empathic pacifist civilization to the Borg and hope that their influence becomes significant.
I guess basically it'd be the same concept as Hugh, but on a large genocidal scale. And I suppose you could muddy the waters a bit by saying, "They're in the Borg's path anyway, and all we need to do is just not try to save them."
Anyway, that's what popped into my head, and I thought, "That's fucked up. But I feel like it could make for a good DS9 episode."

Re:Borg by MightyMartian · 2015-07-09 09:42 · Score: 2

We never were the dominant species. I'd say E. coli, or possibly some underground species of Archae are the dominant life on Earth.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.

Re: Excuse me while I squick out for a moment. by tmosley · 2015-07-09 09:42 · Score: 3, Interesting

Well, they were completing tasks for rewards, so probably not that bad. Worst of it is the electrode implants, which aren't really that bad. Lots of humans have stuff like that.

The linkage is reversable too. Really not that bad. What will be interesting is the human applications once we get non invasive nerve gear. Brain node on an ASI might be an interesting job.

Re:Plot of Sci-Fi by neminem · 2015-07-09 09:47 · Score: 1

It's straight from all sorts of sci-fi - my first thought was Vernor Vinge's Tines from A Fire Upon the Deep (a single Tine has the intelligence of a dog, a half-dozen working together have human-level intelligence, with a spectrum in between), but you could probably find tons of other similar-acting alien life forms in other media, too.

This will be done, says Ship. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 09:50 · Score: 1

Read "Destination Void" by Frank Herbert to see some ways this could go haywire.

Re:This will be done, says Ship. by MightyMartian · 2015-07-09 09:53 · Score: 1

Ah yes, the Organic Mental Cores.
Great novel too.
On Ship's Pandora, Raja Flattery's you!

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.

Re:Borg by newcastlejon · 2015-07-09 09:55 · Score: 1

Add another rat and then we'll see.

--
If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.

How long till someone ports Doom? by Nyder · 2015-07-09 09:57 · Score: 3, Funny

How long will it take someone to port Doom on them/it? I'm sure nothing would go wrong with that.

--
Be seeing you...

Re:How long till someone ports Doom? by ameoba · 2015-07-09 12:15 · Score: 5, Funny

Quake would be a better option. The original Doom had poor mouse support.

--
my sig's at the bottom of the page.

Because no one of us.... by gestalt_n_pepper · 2015-07-09 10:10 · Score: 2

is as dumb as ALL of us. Now the wisdom of crowds can generate tulip manias faster than *ever* before. What a great time to be alive....

--
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.

Re:Because no one of us.... by Some+nick+or+other · 2015-07-09 22:01 · Score: 2

Crowds can go very wrong or very right. Sounds like we need some control of chaos to keep the worst of degradation from happening if we start wiring brains together :)

Game inspired research by Anonymous Coward · 2015-07-09 10:16 · Score: 1

Planescape Torment developers came up with this concept years ago. Individual rats were virtually harmless, but swarm was much more powerful.

Re: Excuse me while I squick out for a moment. by weilawei · 2015-07-09 10:21 · Score: 1

You ought to read Hard-Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World by Murakami. I think you would enjoy it.

Quick summary from Wiki:

The story is split between parallel narratives. The odd-numbered chapters take place in the 'Hard-Boiled Wonderland', although the phrase is not used anywhere in the text, only in page headers. The narrator is a "Calcutec", a human data processor/encryption system who has been trained to use his subconscious as an encryption key. The Calcutecs work for the quasi-governmental System, as opposed to the criminal "Semiotecs" who work for the Factory and who are generally fallen Calcutecs. The relationship between the two groups is simple: the System protects data while the Semiotecs steal it, although it is suggested that one man might be behind both. The narrator completes an assignment for a mysterious scientist, who is exploring "sound removal". He works in a laboratory hidden within an anachronistic version of Tokyo's sewer system. The narrator eventually learns that he only has a day and a half to exist before he leaves the world he knows and delves forever into the world that has been created in his subconscious mind.

Yeah...no by krray · 2015-07-09 10:32 · Score: 3, Insightful

I think they crossed the line. Just wee bit. I mean, I'm not a rat lover or anything. But if kept clean, as in a pet, they are pretty damn cute. Smart too. Not as smart as my dog IMHO -- HEY! Let's wire up four dog brains next! Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket. How about a monkey? Why not!

These animals have a consciousness. You can't deny that. No, it is not at the human level, but a life none-the-less. How fucking freaky cruel is it to take a consciousness and tie it together with three others in some form to just see what happens? How freaked out were these rats in their little disembodied brains.

Cruel.

Re:Yeah...no by Krishnoid · 2015-07-09 10:51 · Score: 1

How fucking freaky cruel is it to take a consciousness and tie it together with three others in some form to just see what happens?
Ask the people who run MMORPGs, I guess.
Re:Yeah...no by Enigma2175 · 2015-07-09 11:55 · Score: 1

I think they crossed the line. Just wee bit. I mean, I'm not a rat lover or anything. But if kept clean, as in a pet, they are pretty damn cute. Smart too. Not as smart as my dog IMHO -- HEY! Let's wire up four dog brains next! Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket. How about a monkey? Why not!
These animals have a consciousness. You can't deny that. No, it is not at the human level, but a life none-the-less. How fucking freaky cruel is it to take a consciousness and tie it together with three others in some form to just see what happens? How freaked out were these rats in their little disembodied brains.
Cruel.
I'm guessing you didn't read the article, the monkeys have already been done:
Nicolelis published a second paper, also in Scientific Reports, describing a Brainet that allows three monkeys connected at the brain to control a virtual arm on screen across three axes.

--
Enigma

Halo Jones... by Dusty101 · 2015-07-09 10:36 · Score: 1

... would disapprove.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:Halo Jones... by mrbester · 2015-07-09 11:41 · Score: 1

"TRUST WE"

--
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"

People will never need more than 640 wired brains by WillAffleckUW · 2015-07-09 10:36 · Score: 1

It's designed for all the rat brains you need. The architecture assumes that nobody will ever need more than 640 wired rat brains.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --

Re:Welcome, Rat Overlords! by WillAffleckUW · 2015-07-09 10:37 · Score: 2

I for one welcome our hyper-intelligent synchronized-brain rat overlords!

Pinky and the Brain.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --

The Answer is by ChadSmith4920 · 2015-07-09 10:51 · Score: 1

42

I, for one.. by kheldan · 2015-07-09 10:58 · Score: 1

..welcome our new Beorat-cluster overlords!

--
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!

Unlikely by robi5 · 2015-07-09 10:59 · Score: 3, Interesting

Of course I haven't yet RTFA but it must be some really smart experimental setup:

1. Given the approximately logarithmic relationship between the number of neurons and capabilities, it's a wonder that scaling from 200 million cells to 800 million brain cells was even detectable...
2. ... especially given that the interface must have been incredibly narrow band, noisy, and in general inferior interconnect among the brains.

Re:Unlikely by dinfinity · 2015-07-09 21:10 · Score: 3, Informative

From the article:
"Then, the monkeys' brains were wired together [...]"
So that doesn't tell us shit. On to the paper:
"Electrophysiological recordings
A Multineuronal Acquisition Processor (64 channels, Plexon Inc, Dallas, TX) was used to record neuronal spikes, as previously described15. Briefly, differentiated neural signals were amplified (20000–32,000×) and digitized at 40kHz. Up to four single neurons per recording channel were sorted online (Sort client 2002, Plexon inc, Dallas, TX).
Intracortical electrical microstimulation
Intracortical electrical microstimulation cues were generated by an electrical microstimulator (Master 8 , AMPI, Jerusalem, Israel) controlled by custom Matlab script (Nattick, USA) receiving information from a Plexon system over the internet. Patterns of 8–20 (bipolar, biphasic, charge balanced; 200sec) pulses at 20–120Hz were delivered to S1. Current intensity varied from 10–100A."
So, we're talking about roughly a maximum of 64 * 4 = 256 neurons (at 40KHz) participating per brain. It's not that many, but also not few for an artificial neural network. Because that's what happened. The researcher trained the mice (via reinforcement learning) on specific problems after interconnection. He didn't interconnect them and immediately let them perform some random complex task:
"In one test, for instance, different rats brains were given different barometric pressure and temperature information, and then the computational power of the Brainet itself was used to calculate the probability that it would rain (given those inputs) at a rate higher than chance.
Nicolelis said that, essentially, he created a "classic artificial neural network using brains." In that sense, it's not artificial at all."

Congress by frnic · 2015-07-09 11:30 · Score: 1, Insightful

Maybe we could replace the US Congress with a bunch of rats wired together, they certainly couldn't do worse than what we have.

Re:Congress by CanadianMacFan · 2015-07-09 12:25 · Score: 1

Don't think you would need to wire them together to do better than Congress (or Parliament Hill in Canada).
Re:Congress by drinkypoo · 2015-07-09 17:36 · Score: 1

Maybe we could replace the US Congress with a bunch of rats wired together,
Done and done.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

Re:Seriously now! by sectokia · 2015-07-09 12:31 · Score: 1

The rats aren't doing a task, they are rewarding the rat based on electrode readings. For example they would shock one part of the brain, and if a certain signal was made in another part, the rat would be rewarded. After time the probability of success increases as the brain learns or gets programmed. So the brain might get rewarded only 50% of the time initially, by pure luck, but would slowly increase to 60%. The 4 brains when hooked up together learnt faster and were successful more often, for example reached 64% quicker than a single one would reach 60%.

M-5 by Sponge+Bath · 2015-07-09 12:36 · Score: 1

Of course! If we imprint the circuits with the neural networks of a rat instead of an unstable madman, we will have fewer fatalities and more cheese. Science!

Reminds me of more than a few of my bosses... by WalrusSlayer · 2015-07-09 13:07 · Score: 1

...just sayin'

Re:I wonder what its like? by GoonDuIO · 2015-07-09 14:44 · Score: 1

Have you ever had thoughts that make you go, "Where the hell did that come from?" I guess it's something like that. Thoughts that appear out of nowhere and makes you confused. Or it could be like schizophrenia.

Re:People will never need more than 640 wired brai by Joosy · 2015-07-09 16:55 · Score: 1

If you had RTFA, the actual quote was "640 rat brains oughta be enough for anybody".

--
I'm sick and tired of these hip, "ironic" sigs. This is an actual, honest-to-goodness no-nonsense sig!

Re:Just wait. by DroolTwist · 2015-07-09 17:57 · Score: 1

This reminds me of the Gw'oth and the formation of the Ol't'ro.

It's a software issue, not a hardware issue by thisisauniqueid · 2015-07-09 18:48 · Score: 1

Unfortunately we don't have good enough compilers yet to generate code for a multi-core brain. They may as well just use one cat brain rather than four rat brains, compiled code will still run faster.

Reads like a joke by perryizgr8 · 2015-07-09 19:57 · Score: 1

In that one, rats were deprived of water and were given it only if they were able to synchronize their brains together to complete a task. From there, Nicolelis essentiality turned these rats into processors.

How can they expect poor thirsty rats to sync their brains?

--
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.

Re:Just wait. by johanw · 2015-07-09 20:46 · Score: 1

Humans acting as one mind. You will be assimilated, resistence is futile. We are superior.

Re: Excuse me while I squick out for a moment. by bazmonkey · 2015-07-09 22:26 · Score: 1

They weren't working for rewards. TFA says they were deprived of water until forced to cooperate. I can totally understand animal experimentation for medical advancement (live saved > lives lost). I can even understand killing rats as pest control (those rats in particular need to leave). THIS, however, was purposely acquiring rats in order to perform this test, in which they were indeed threatened with death lest they perform. Disgusting.

Describe by nospam007 · 2015-07-09 23:04 · Score: 1

"Here, we describe the first experimental demonstration of such a Brainet, built by interconnecting four adult rat brains."

And the description is: Creepy

If you don't feel some horror ... you should by fygment · 2015-07-10 00:04 · Score: 1

Yeah, it's only mice. For now.

Clearly bigger brains would, in principle, allow more complex computations. And while it's animals, I guess we're all cool with that (?). But eventually, they might get to a life form that is less ... compliant. So what other options are there? Well, people can be made to do things they don't want.

But maybe this is all going to go away. Organic brains are slow, and maybe it will become apparent that silica (or black phosphorus) is better for high performance computation. Then the whole brainlet thing will be relegated to powering obedient cyborgs ... till they become less obedient.

Maybe that's it. The new dominant life-form will evolve from this. Animal brain collectives will outsmart the mono-brained monkey descendants, and rise as the dominant life-form that makes first contact with the aliens.

--
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.

This comment is suspiciously stupid... by Tenebrousedge · 2015-07-10 00:36 · Score: 1

Look! The rat brain computer has learned to post on Slashdot!

--
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.

Re: Excuse me (what's the real breakthrough?) by Demonoid-Penguin · 2015-07-10 01:17 · Score: 1

They weren't working for rewards. TFA says they were deprived of water until forced to cooperate. I can totally understand animal experimentation for medical advancement (live saved > lives lost). I can even understand killing rats as pest control (those rats in particular need to leave). THIS, however, was purposely acquiring rats in order to perform this test, in which they were indeed threatened with death lest they perform. Disgusting.

Possibly poor science? I didn't understand the published paper but it seemed like the connected dehydrated rats performed some tasks better than unconnected dehydrated rats... If so I don't know what it proves - being tethered to wires in your head increases adrenaline?

Much of the claimed results were very, um, beyond my understanding my admittedly very (very) basic understanding of neurology - seems to need some fairly advanced knowledge of neural processing. Like how to "pipe" image processing from one brain to another. Big money in that. I'm surprised that is not the break-through.

Ratnet or Monkeynet ? by Vessarion · 2015-07-10 01:23 · Score: 1

Erm so is it rats or monkeys, since here http://www.newscientist.com/ar... we have an article about a monkey brainnet.. And lets be hones monkeynet would be much more impressive :)

Re:Just wait. by KGIII · 2015-07-10 01:55 · Score: 1

I would pay good money to be jacked into the internet. I have said this before and I will say it again. Where is the waiver and who do I pay? They can even stick a wireless nub antenna on the top of my head and an RJ-45 can be fed into my neck.

--
"So long and thanks for all the fish."

Re:Just wait. by frog_strat · 2015-07-10 02:54 · Score: 1

Hmmm. It sounds like you are claiming cognitive intelligence is the only important intelligence. I hope you never have to work at a place that follows this thinking, it can be miserable. The new smart is not just cognitive, but also having an awareness of one's own state, being able to take on the perspective of another, and being able to read, and respond helpfully with, non-verbal communication. Being able to access states beyond the normal (waking, dreaming, sleeping) like non-dual, through practices like exercise, meditation, or yoga gets you bonus points.

Re:Just wait. by TheCarp · 2015-07-10 04:03 · Score: 1

Have you seen this: https://www.ted.com/talks/ray_...

I watched it the other day, and its interesting to think how we might enhance our existing biology. However, if what really makes us so unique is just a paper thin membrane of newly evolved tissue, then.....

It seems even more amazing would be to liberate that membrane from its lizard brain substrate entirely.

--
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"

Re:Just wait. by kaatochacha · 2015-07-10 05:18 · Score: 1

You do have experience with technology, and how it continually fails, right?

Koestlers critique of ratomorphicism seems by ToddInSF · 2015-07-10 07:44 · Score: 1

oddly justified today...

some sci-fi authors are visionaries by t_ban · 2015-07-12 05:41 · Score: 1

Read "The Maxwell Equations" by Anatoly Dneprov: http://www.arvindguptatoys.com...

--
First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win. -Gandhi

practical use by t_ban · 2015-07-12 05:44 · Score: 1

Say, could I make a Beowulf cluster of rats to start my own law firm?

--
First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win. -Gandhi

Re:Just wait. by Insanity+Defense · 2015-07-15 07:46 · Score: 1

Mentor of Arisia.

Slashdot Mirror

An Organic Computer Using Four Wired-Together Rat Brains

115 of 190 comments (clear)