Techno-Telepaths

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

Just had a random thought and it's probably a pretty dumb question. I ask anyway.

Are there any promising theories on working neural implants that can process a concious thought?

For example, you think: "I am hungry."

The implant would be able to recognize it the same way a normal CPU would by entering the words into you computer.

If you get that far, it probably wouldnt' be that difficult to estalish a wireless connection to a data HUB, transfer the thought via a communications network aka The Internet to be received by your pizza delivery service employee to make you favorite pizza ready to deliver right away.

This would effectively be a technological way to achieve telepathy.

Instead with smartphones and computers we would twitter directly by neural interface.

Now there are examples of this in fiction, both positive and negative. The Bynars and Borg come to mind.

Ethical concerns of invading private thoughts and an overriding hivemind aside.

Is this feasable at all?

I believe some companies in the telecommunication industry would be all over this.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I believe we are far from being able to read thoughts, however I believe it's not impossible to connect an implant to some of your nerves, and then to learn to control it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroprosthetics

 

[sojourner]

The problem with implants of this nature is obsolescence. How often are you, as a consumer, willing to get brain surgery to have the latest "iphone" implanted? Also, look at it from the liability standpoint. If something goes wrong the company is going to be wide open to a lawsuit.

No, the only way this is feasible is if they can make it non-invasive. Something that can be worn, like a head band or maybe just a sticky applique at the base of the skull.

 

[FordSVT]

I have no doubt whatsoever that this technology will be possible to implement at some point in the not-so-distant-as-you-might-think future.

Whether or not people will actually go for it is another matter. Then again, with each generation, the norm of what is acceptable changes, maybe people in the future won't have a problem interfacing with computers using a neural interface, communicating with other people, accessing information, etc. I agree with Sojourner though, aside from specialized users like military operatives and the physically and mentally handicapped, I think the general public won't touch this stuff unless it's implemented in a non-invasive manner.

 

[diankra]

Add in as a problem that your example ("I am hungry") isn't a conscious thought: it's a conscious statement of an underlying reaction that's shared by many (apparently) non-sentient species (my dog got hungry, for instance, but did she actually think 'I am hungry', or just follow her ingrained reaction to stomach pain?).

 

[scotpens]

Hell, the phone company was thinking along those lines more than 40 years ago!

The President's Analyst: Cerebrum Communicator

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

I believe we are far from being able to read thoughts, however I believe it's not impossible to connect an implant to some of your nerves, and then to learn to control it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroprosthetics

But would it be so different to train your brain on writing mental tex messages, that we would be able to convert into digital data via such a interface? The real problem I would guess is receiving the message and convert it back into a thought or a simulated audio reception.

The problem with implants of this nature is obsolescence. How often are you, as a consumer, willing to get brain surgery to have the latest "iphone" implanted? Also, look at it from the liability standpoint. If something goes wrong the company is going to be wide open to a lawsuit.

No, the only way this is feasible is if they can make it non-invasive. Something that can be worn, like a head band or maybe just a sticky applique at the base of the skull.

True. Though you woud not need to implant the latest iPhone into your head. Just the interface module. Of course technical servie would be problematic. Today you simply send your defunct phone to the manufacturer...

Add in as a problem that your example ("I am hungry") isn't a conscious thought: it's a conscious statement of an underlying reaction that's shared by many (apparently) non-sentient species (my dog got hungry, for instance, but did she actually think 'I am hungry', or just follow her ingrained reaction to stomach pain?).

It was just a stupid example, that lead me to the pizza delivery guy. Make it "I'd like a big pizza, with bacon and extra cheese!" then. Show me the dog capable of thinking that intuitively.

 

[Silvercrest]

I believe we are far from being able to read thoughts, however I believe it's not impossible to connect an implant to some of your nerves, and then to learn to control it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroprosthetics

But would it be so different to train your brain on writing mental tex messages, that we would be able to convert into digital data via such a interface? The real problem I would guess is receiving the message and convert it back into a thought or a simulated audio reception.

I've had a similar idea since the 1980s. If it was possible to graft a simple off-on switch to your nerves, you could then run it to a radio transmitter. You could send messages in Morse or binary. With the proper converters and interfaces, you could change them to regular speech, or text, and send them wirelessly via phone, network, etc.

Sending directly to other people, i.e. "telepathy", is still a problem. They'd need a headset or Bluetooth or something.

 

[Lindley]

Interpreting brain waves is possible, but only in a limited sense: you can categorize things as simple as "yes" or "no", or "more like it was in situation A than situation B", etc. You might be able to reliably interpret 5-10 specific "messages".

However, even distinguishing 26 letters, much less thousands of possible words, is well beyond our current pattern recognition capabilities.

 

[scotpens]

However, even distinguishing 26 letters, much less thousands of possible words, is well beyond our current pattern recognition capabilities.

Furthermore, we don't normally think in words and letters. We think in images, actions, and abstract concepts. Thus far, we have computers that recognize spoken language, even if they don't always work perfectly. (We've all gnashed our teeth when dealing with automated phone answering systems.) A machine that can read human brainwave patterns for specific meaning would be an advance of several orders of magnitude.

 

[sojourner]

^Don't know about you, but I think pretty much in english. Though when necessary I visualize things.

 

[scotpens]

^^ I think in words and sentences when it's appropriate for a specific task, e.g., typesetting the copy for an ad or brochure. Otherwise, I think pretty much in ideas and pictures. Maybe it's a left brain/right brain thing.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

I'm confident that it can be done; I simply wonder if it should be done

 

[scotpens]

I'm confident that it can be done; I simply wonder if it should be done

Hell, if everyone had that attitude, we would never have discovered fire!

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Scotpens,

I'm not opposed to fire, but there are obviously certain things that probably shouldn't be lit on fire.