Exactly. And the potential for VR and total immersion development. Thinking things into existence. The art people could make from pure imagination. A real metaverse.
I was thinking more along the lines of "Oh, this will make my legs work again!" or "This chip bypasses the damage done by [horrible brain disease] allowing you to reclaim some significant percentage of functionality"
Meh, I think the concept of interfacing directly with the brain is really interesting, I just don't know if an Elon company is the one I want doing it.
Of course I'd rather have a brain interface that I didn't have to implant though.
I agree, but even if I did have to replace it, say, once a decade, it would make the surgery much more likely to be a success. When you can control the restriction of blood flow using the bodies own mechanisms, shut off the immune response within that area to remove rejection, and control the pain with targeted painkillers all automatically, the chances of dying on the table go away down. Not to mention the possible benefits of controlling your perspective of time, controlling emotions, having a perfect memory, being able to experience perfect VR, being able to remotely control machines, learning instantly via a download, automated control of replacement/additional limbs, and elimination of exhaustion all make it pretty attractive.
I agree that the concept is interesting, but honestly the damage that could be done with something like that is just not worth it.
With corporate greed you can't be sure what weird step they decide to do next. And everything they do directly affects you.
Not to speak of the possibility of getting hacked and having a weird version of the bee movie play in your head on loop.
Companies know best what is good for us and people crave stuff with a micro- prefix, like microplastics (yummy), microtransactions (funny), microbial infections (it's like a pet), microwaves in your brain (tickles), etc.
We can hardly get our self-designed computer systems to adequately communicate with each other or function. How confident are you that we can design an appropriate interface with our brain? Something which we still have yet to fully decipher?
In no way do I want venture capitalists and tech bros fucking fumbling around in my brain with hardware designed and constructed by the lowest bidder.
Wait, you mean I can let the guy who invented a shittier version of a subway train (the tunnel has colorful LEDs though) and routinely bitches about safety regulations put computer chips in my brain?! Woah, sign me up for the future!
Not only that, but burning aggressively. I've seen my share of car fires, having worked in EMS for 12 years, there's no such thing as a gentle car fire; if they burned any more aggressively, they'd basically just explode. Well, something about the lithium makes these fires fucking rip and they're a nightmare to put out. I just did some quick googling, and supposedly Li-ion battery fires are able to supply their own oxygen (holy shit), so you can't put a lithium battery fire out by smothering it with water or foam. Maybe I'm wrong and someone who isn't an Internet idiot (it's me, I'm the idiot) can correct me, but that sounds hella bad, and like of one of those cars caught fire in that tunnel, that fire just flat out isn't getting put out.
There is a long list of legit and or cook reasons to have a microchip in a brain. Controlling or assisting damaged brain structures, you can mitigate the symptoms.of Parkinsons, give vision to a blind person.. but I also think the cool parts van be nice and probably are inevitable. Being able to communicate in your head, that sort of thing. I see it as something that will happen and people WILL do it.
Also, who do you think will make these chips? A fairy? Of course companies will (and already do) make them.
I think instead of screaming NONONO we should start thinking about what rules your any such companies to follow. Maybe have the design schematics be open source. A hard "off" button, somehow. A ban on ads and tracking (in combination with the hard off)
Yeah there are very start things possible, doesn't mean it has to be like that
Yeah, what is this meme? Like I get Elon is a douche. But I mean where do people think deep brain simulation and things that help tons of people already come from? We even have implantable devices that can record seizures directly from the brain surface and generate electric impulses to disrupt them. Not to mention pacemakers, spinal cord stimulators, etc. All these things have quite a lot of regulatory hurdles before reaching market. Obviously want to make sure that framework stays strong so no dystopian nonsense down the line happens. Once we get to the level of consumer grade brainchips, then I'll start to worry.
Alright, we'll just rip the implants keeping patients seizure free out of their heads and tell everyone with Parkinson's sorry, brain implants have to be removed now, go back to being frozen. Saying we can't use a technology because someone might do something bad with it someday could apply to literally any technology.
Or are you proposing getting rid of legal frameworks and regulation of medications would improve them somehow? Just let big pharma go realky wild? Strengthen our regulatory frameworks by all means, stop regulatory capture and all that, but an unbridled free for all with big pharma allowed to do, sell, and say whatever it wants about its products sounds horrific. I think you're right to think the fda may have gotten a little too lenient with some approvals lately, but that's an argument for stengthening the regulations not getting rid of them.
But yeah Elon isn't allowed to sell this shit yet, and people have to elect to be involved in any trials. It's their choice. If he ever tries to sell it, he'll have to prove efficacy and safety. Without that regulatory framework he wouldn't need to do even that, could just immediately launch it and lie about the capabilities a la tesla auto pilot, duping and killing a bunch of people likely.
Even with consumer grade brain chips, the risk isn't a bit thing until there is a direct interface and even then it's a question of what it can interface with. And even then it's a matter of good design. Some hardware off switch would be a basic requirement, but also software firewalling would be a very basic requirement.
Interfaces, if done right, should not have to be a dystopian future, we won't become the Borg just bectof some implant somewhere
If I can play videogames in my head while I'm at work, great. If my addict dopamine brain gets highjacked so that I don't know how to do anything except consume ads then bad.
Given how big corpos are already fucking up the job market due to AI, it's not such a good idea to go all in with cutting edge technologies right from the get-go
They usually have no security at all though for some reason, maybe for the same reason viruses spread like crazy in the early days of the internet, people didn't consider that and assumed everyone was acting in good faith
Making a secure device isn't reeeally that hard these days, as long as you don't also have to consider physical access (which, if someone has access to physically probe the chip in your brain, you have bigger problems)
I can see them being a game changer for the medical industry, but before I'd trust putting them into anyone's brains they need to be regulated into the ground first.
It'll never happen. As long as there is any kind of economy there will be some greedy fuck running nike ads in your brain every time you think about shoes.
PC parts can’t even go few years without losing backwards compatibility (e.g. cpu sockets changing every few years). Last thing I need is for my physical body to incompatible with the newest and best stuff because I got a permanent implant when the tech wasn’t as evolved. This will always be the problem with invasive technology in my opinion.
Even that wouldn't be unworkable, it would be worse if you're stuck with the brain equivalent of serial ports just before everyone switches to the USB standard.
Don't forget Elon Musk is a big fan of the game franchise Deux Ex. And that's an insanely distopian future. That's the kind of dark hellish world that whiny little manchild wants.
If it is advertised well, it will be the same as with smartphones nowadays. Companies won't plant chips into human brains, people will pay to have chips planted into their brains and pay even more for yearly upgrades.
Depends on the use case and the oversight. If I lose the ability to walk and an implant can make it easier I'll take the implant. It's unfortunate this type of technology didn't exist for Hawking. With what he had he could only write a sentence a minute IIRC.
If this were a thing, I would have wasted years of my life learning musical instruments and foreign languages. The reason those skills are rewarding to have is because you have to work for them. My skill levels in these things are a reflection of how I spend my time and who I am as a person. If that was just erased, and everyone could be good at everything, then I wouldn't be anyone anymore.
That's kind of the sad truth of it though, once it is a useful and safe enough thing, you either pay for it or get left behind, it's dystopian as fuck, but it will significantly increase the utility of those who can get it.
Why not? Transhumanism is cool. It would take a lot of convincing for me to be sure that it is safe, but I also roll the dice every time I drive to work or take a pill so whatever.
Because this is all sci-fi woo woo and the honest truth is that we have no fucking clue how memory storage, learning, experience, or recollection actually mechanically work in the mind. At least relative to how an electronic device could interface with, let alone, augment or manipulate those mechanisms.
On top of that, our current system has proven time and again that you cannot trust an entity whose sole purpose for existence is to extract wealth from the resources around it (i.e. people). Not especially for something like this. It will need to be regulated, standardized, limited, and controlled by an external coalition.
Don't get me wrong, there's absolutely zero chance I'd sign up for Elon Musk's shit, but this kind of augmentation is very likely to be cellphone tech levels of disruptive - you'll wake up one day and it's going to be ubiquitous. Nerve interfaces for prosthetics are already becoming commonplace, and cochlear implants even more so. I truly expect that all of this "mystery" is going to be uncovered quite quick once commercial viability is demonstrated.
The devices need FDA approval and some safeguards. A neurosurgeon needs to assess the risk vs benefit for the patient and they need to come to an agreement on whether it's the right treatment. Problems with these devices are strokes, bleeds, infection, swelling in the brain, etc. which while fairly rare aren't insignificant.
Aside from that general statement on risks of brain implants and brain surgery, the other big issue is whether or not they will be supported in 10-15 years or will Elon Musk flush that company down the drain as well? There was a company making implants that helped patients see that just shuttered it's doors and said "whelp, sorry folks, no one can help you with your implant now".
Yes, medical technology needs an umbrella insurance plan to cover cases where a company is not fiscally viable but still has to remain responsible for the lifetime service of the device. Like a bond or something.
Nobody fearmongering in this thread seems to have any idea how it works.
A brain chip would connect to a specific region of your brain. For example, in the case of a physical disability it would only need to connect to your motor neurons using read-only connectors.
If you specifically had them implant read/write connections into your visual cortex, then sure, someone could hack it and play ads in your head but that's kind of on you at that point.
There is no such thing as a "read-only connector." Electrical signals can go down a wire both ways. It is up to the manufacturer of the chip to decide what pins are read and write, which is up to the governing body to regulate and restrict.
Not to mention that we are 10-20 years out from that kind of tech as development has been drastically slowing down in general. The best we can do as humans so far with the funds we put into this is stimulate general areas with current pulses to essentially cover up or stimulate the area's nervous response to relieve pain. We can't even accurately measure brain signals yet with fine enough detail to do much more than control a direction. Though that is coming along better.
The other applications close to this are for controlling muscles for sleep apnea, limb motor skills, heart muscles, etc... and are even "easier" to control.
If the tech becomes available to effect the video and audio brain receptors directly and is owned by corporations, you can bet your sweet ass they will make everything read/write and blast that thing so full of ads and harvest every bit of data they can to make a profit.
Source: electronic engineer working in the implantable device medical field
Yes, something could be done... by the exact company who has a direct incentive to serve ads in the first place. Are you going to install a 2nd chip made to block outgoing signals in the 1st chip?
It will never ever be solved by trusting the company who designs it to do the right thing.
Sure, I'm wrong about something that wasn't even the argument and I already clarified is possible, technically, but completely impractical for the application and does not exist.
By all means, send me the part number of a read-only connector. That would probably be very useful ti my work.
Why couldn't you build a "read only" connector? I mean sure, wires conduct both ways obviously, but diodes and other one-way conductors are a thing right?
The other point of only putting the implant in the place it's needed and where it can't make you see and hear things seems valid too.
I'm not saying there wouldn't be other risks and issues with the whole thing, but I feel like the "they'll put ads in your brain" thing is kind of a ridiculous fear.
No, because brain signals are so low voltage compared to silicon voltage thresholds that if you put a diode in to block outgoing signal, it would just reduce all incoming signal to noise. On an IC where there is very fine silicon property control it is probably possible though.
Let's say that it is possible, it would still have to be implemented on the PCB or more likely, the IC itself. Guess who's literal job it is to design and make all of the decisions on what is possible would be? The exact same people who would benefit financially from enabling that functionality and serving ads. The point of all of this is that there are 1000 ways to make that functionality not be available on the design, but the decision to make it available or not is made by the people who would earn a lot of money from it and benefit directly.
Every single major technology that has the ability to display ads eventually does, without fail. Every single one. Why would an implanted chip made by the same companies be any different?
Again, I think it will be a VERY long time before we have the sort of fine control and deep understanding of the brain to effectively control sight and sound. I think 20 years might have actually be generous and it might be 30-40 unless we hit a breakthrough in biological computing or something.
Until then, there would be absolutely nothing to worry about. Musty's "brain chip" would never have this capability and would be much more likely in causing strokes than any other danger.
The problem is that if it is unquestioned, implemented, and normalized that "everyone has a brain chip" then, just like smart phones, they will slowly change until the tech does become available and maybe they just have an ad on startup, maybe they just have an ad here or there, until the entire thing just becomes a vehicle for ads like smartphones are now.
I'm convinced that the Neuralink is the dumbest idea ever, but I've come to the conclusion that it's better for people to just learn the hard way. Like, it's so obviously stupid that anyone who's still going for it cannot be helped.
until it becomes the new mobile phone, and anyone who doesnt have the Chip™ is an outlier. i dont think this is likely, but it is most definitely possible
I've thought about it and I've decided that I can live with that. Besides, I don't think it will make it to that level of popularity before "the incident" that shocks everyone and triggers a senate inquiry.
Either there will be horrific side effects or Musk will cut quality or make an 'executive decision' that beams ads into everyone's head. I don't know the final implementation, but I think they won't resist the temptation to make the firmware up-gradable remotely, and once they have that, they won't resist the temptation to meddle.
What? Why WOULDN'T everybody let the guy whose latest genius idea in a stunning sequence of brilliant business decisions was squeezing every twitter user for money in a service they previously got for free implant hardware into their brain? It'll be just like a tesla: automated driving available next year since like 2010 or so (assuming it doesn't fall apart, run over the elderly or burst into flames) in a hyperloop near you!
Why is art as a reference point for some new technology a bad thing? We can't all get a history degree to understand ancient Egypt, so does everyone need a degree in medicine and computer science to understand neuralink?
I don't really get the meme. Even if the person is too "stupid" to imagine a technology without Black Mirror to do the heavy lifting, it's still a useful metaphor to articulate reasons why.
That's not what flanderisation is. I don't know why you keep repeating this word.
Flanderisation is when a previously varied an complex fictional character gets one or a few of their traits exaggerated more and more over time, until it becomes their entire personality.
E.g. Ned Flanders, who was originally just a foil to Homer Simpson. Friendlier, more devout in belief, less potty-mouthed, physically fitter, nicer (while still attainable) home, untroubled family, etc. He represented what Homer wanted to be and was jealous of.
Over time he was flanderised to just being an uber-religious nut with essentially nothing else to his personality.
Flanderisation is not when people are weary of how technology is being used and will continue to be used by large businesses and governments to track what we do and build extensive profiles on us.
We could also all be living under a social credit score system like in China, but most of us aren't. Just because something could become our reality, doesn't mean we should avoid all progress in that field.
In the end it doesn't matter if it's legal or not. They will do it anyways. Like it was the case with Preditor and the Greek government. Or Pegasus and Mexico. In the case of Pegasus and Mexico, people actually died.
The thing is, vaccines work pretty well, but letting some already corrupt asf corporation (or any entity) implant a microchip in your brain is obviously a bad idea. Please do a favor for yourself and the human race by sitting down for a few minutes and asking yourself: "what could go wrong?".
I have a big brain, so I refuse all microchips. I won't settle for anything less than a macrochip.
they just shove a laptop in your skull
Like a pringle the size of a pool tarp
Time for a megachip
Unfortunately, Robotron went out of business.
“A small microchip about the size of a postcard”
Personally, I think the technology has great potential. But under capitalism? Fuck no.
Gimme open sourced brain chips and I'm in
You are now required to use the command line just to think.
Can you imagine getting stuck in vim?!
I did imagine it.
Yes. Democratically produced and managed
Lol i would say no under any system.
There are legitimate, helpful uses for such technology
Yeah, for example as a coder being able to conjecture code just by thinking it would be magical.
Exactly. And the potential for VR and total immersion development. Thinking things into existence. The art people could make from pure imagination. A real metaverse.
I was thinking more along the lines of "Oh, this will make my legs work again!" or "This chip bypasses the damage done by [horrible brain disease] allowing you to reclaim some significant percentage of functionality"
That is another clear benefit, yes!
to do that with someone's brain would be a nightmare, stray thoughts would fuck up the code and it would take forever to make anything comprehensible
Meh, I think the concept of interfacing directly with the brain is really interesting, I just don't know if an Elon company is the one I want doing it.
Of course I'd rather have a brain interface that I didn't have to implant though.
Even if it's not Elon Musk. Do you want to have brain surgery every 2 years to implant a new chip because the old one is obsolete?
No, the tech needs to be developed such that regular surgery is unnecessary.
I agree, but even if I did have to replace it, say, once a decade, it would make the surgery much more likely to be a success. When you can control the restriction of blood flow using the bodies own mechanisms, shut off the immune response within that area to remove rejection, and control the pain with targeted painkillers all automatically, the chances of dying on the table go away down. Not to mention the possible benefits of controlling your perspective of time, controlling emotions, having a perfect memory, being able to experience perfect VR, being able to remotely control machines, learning instantly via a download, automated control of replacement/additional limbs, and elimination of exhaustion all make it pretty attractive.
I'd be completely fine with a usb port in the back of my skull to update it /s
And now you need to replace usb-c with usb-d, unless you just bought an iPhone 30 then you need a thunderstorm cable (modeled after Steve Jobs dick).
my USB-i’s are up here
That's an impressively small connector!
Ahh a micro-p connector! It’s essentially a smooth surface with a small nub.
Cyberpunk style
Would I be able to use my body as a generator to have my movement create electricity to charge my phone?
If so I am all for it. Just moving my charging mussle.
New green initiative! Jerk off to save the world!
Whoa.
If it was from Apple, you'd end up with all your body parts as dongles. Including, uh, your dongle.
Cyberpenis
I agree that the concept is interesting, but honestly the damage that could be done with something like that is just not worth it.
With corporate greed you can't be sure what weird step they decide to do next. And everything they do directly affects you. Not to speak of the possibility of getting hacked and having a weird version of the bee movie play in your head on loop.
Imagine ransomware for your memories
Either I cough up significantly more resources than I have, or they take decades of trauma away from me forever?
Alternative answer: YES!
Companies know best what is good for us and people crave stuff with a micro- prefix, like microplastics (yummy), microtransactions (funny), microbial infections (it's like a pet), microwaves in your brain (tickles), etc.
^^ the most awesome answer!!! i love consooming!!!
I love my pet bacteria!
I read somewhere that we have more bacteria in/on our bodies than actual cells containing out own DNA, so really, who's the pet here?
micropenis!
We can hardly get our self-designed computer systems to adequately communicate with each other or function. How confident are you that we can design an appropriate interface with our brain? Something which we still have yet to fully decipher?
In no way do I want venture capitalists and tech bros fucking fumbling around in my brain with hardware designed and constructed by the lowest bidder.
There is a non-zero chance that once they have a chip in your brain, they will find a way to stream ads in to it.
For that reason, I'm out.
Why stream ads when they can more-directly influence you?
Waking up with an unavoidable craving to watch "OW! My balls!" I'm in!
/s
Hello You, come CloZer
Wait, you mean I can let the guy who invented a shittier version of a subway train (the tunnel has colorful LEDs though) and routinely bitches about safety regulations put computer chips in my brain?! Woah, sign me up for the future!
i cant believe they actually built that tunnel. they filled a nearly inescapable underground tube with cars known for combusting and burning for ages
Not only that, but burning aggressively. I've seen my share of car fires, having worked in EMS for 12 years, there's no such thing as a gentle car fire; if they burned any more aggressively, they'd basically just explode. Well, something about the lithium makes these fires fucking rip and they're a nightmare to put out. I just did some quick googling, and supposedly Li-ion battery fires are able to supply their own oxygen (holy shit), so you can't put a lithium battery fire out by smothering it with water or foam. Maybe I'm wrong and someone who isn't an Internet idiot (it's me, I'm the idiot) can correct me, but that sounds hella bad, and like of one of those cars caught fire in that tunnel, that fire just flat out isn't getting put out.
ive heard that too
That's fine. That thing is halfway round the globe. I'll be just fine
If the person has a disability and the chip somehow improves the condition, then, under extremely tight legislation, yes. Otherwise, no.
yeah, tons of informed consent too
Until the company shuts down and ends support.
Until legislation prevents this I'm out.
Literally thw movie "upgrade"
Repo men comes to mind
There is a long list of legit and or cook reasons to have a microchip in a brain. Controlling or assisting damaged brain structures, you can mitigate the symptoms.of Parkinsons, give vision to a blind person.. but I also think the cool parts van be nice and probably are inevitable. Being able to communicate in your head, that sort of thing. I see it as something that will happen and people WILL do it.
Also, who do you think will make these chips? A fairy? Of course companies will (and already do) make them.
I think instead of screaming NONONO we should start thinking about what rules your any such companies to follow. Maybe have the design schematics be open source. A hard "off" button, somehow. A ban on ads and tracking (in combination with the hard off)
Yeah there are very start things possible, doesn't mean it has to be like that
"Should doctors implant microchips in people's brains". Is the question, and the answer should be 100% between the doctor and patient.
Yeah, what is this meme? Like I get Elon is a douche. But I mean where do people think deep brain simulation and things that help tons of people already come from? We even have implantable devices that can record seizures directly from the brain surface and generate electric impulses to disrupt them. Not to mention pacemakers, spinal cord stimulators, etc. All these things have quite a lot of regulatory hurdles before reaching market. Obviously want to make sure that framework stays strong so no dystopian nonsense down the line happens. Once we get to the level of consumer grade brainchips, then I'll start to worry.
You should watch less tv, do less internet, and go outside a bit more
Alright, we'll just rip the implants keeping patients seizure free out of their heads and tell everyone with Parkinson's sorry, brain implants have to be removed now, go back to being frozen. Saying we can't use a technology because someone might do something bad with it someday could apply to literally any technology.
Or are you proposing getting rid of legal frameworks and regulation of medications would improve them somehow? Just let big pharma go realky wild? Strengthen our regulatory frameworks by all means, stop regulatory capture and all that, but an unbridled free for all with big pharma allowed to do, sell, and say whatever it wants about its products sounds horrific. I think you're right to think the fda may have gotten a little too lenient with some approvals lately, but that's an argument for stengthening the regulations not getting rid of them.
But yeah Elon isn't allowed to sell this shit yet, and people have to elect to be involved in any trials. It's their choice. If he ever tries to sell it, he'll have to prove efficacy and safety. Without that regulatory framework he wouldn't need to do even that, could just immediately launch it and lie about the capabilities a la tesla auto pilot, duping and killing a bunch of people likely.
Even with consumer grade brain chips, the risk isn't a bit thing until there is a direct interface and even then it's a question of what it can interface with. And even then it's a matter of good design. Some hardware off switch would be a basic requirement, but also software firewalling would be a very basic requirement.
Interfaces, if done right, should not have to be a dystopian future, we won't become the Borg just bectof some implant somewhere
People should watch less tv.
Medical usage is different from the general public and when, not if, someone figures out an exploit, u can bet I'll be glad I never got one.
If I can play videogames in my head while I'm at work, great. If my addict dopamine brain gets highjacked so that I don't know how to do anything except consume ads then bad.
It will be the latter, and if you complain then people will call you a "privacy nutjob" because it will be considered normal
"Experiencing life without the chip is like stealing content"
I can hear it now
thats so true. "no-ones forcing you to get chipped (unless you want to work or buy anything or enter a mall or ...)"
Given how big corpos are already fucking up the job market due to AI, it's not such a good idea to go all in with cutting edge technologies right from the get-go
The job market evolves, you either evolve with it or you don't. What do you think these implants are for? Lmao.
This isn't just about the job market
Life is more than work, you fucking drone
Exactly, life is more than work. These brain implants have the potential to give a lot of people a lot more in life.
Not under the control of capital
You write like a tween who doesn't know what they're talking about
I'm so offended, I think I'll sit in a corner angrily whilest thinking of what you did to me
But the evolution can be guided to go more smoothly.
Aka slowing it down...
Friendly reminder that pacemakers can and do get hacked
They usually have no security at all though for some reason, maybe for the same reason viruses spread like crazy in the early days of the internet, people didn't consider that and assumed everyone was acting in good faith
Making a secure device isn't reeeally that hard these days, as long as you don't also have to consider physical access (which, if someone has access to physically probe the chip in your brain, you have bigger problems)
Security is an illusion a determined hacker will get into the brain chip
I can see them being a game changer for the medical industry, but before I'd trust putting them into anyone's brains they need to be regulated into the ground first.
Should a profit-driven company do it?
HELL NO!
Should it be researched so one day it can be done cheaply, safely, healthily, with absolute control given to the person receiving the hardware?
HELL YES!
It'll never happen. As long as there is any kind of economy there will be some greedy fuck running nike ads in your brain every time you think about shoes.
PC parts can’t even go few years without losing backwards compatibility (e.g. cpu sockets changing every few years). Last thing I need is for my physical body to incompatible with the newest and best stuff because I got a permanent implant when the tech wasn’t as evolved. This will always be the problem with invasive technology in my opinion.
So I have a cat chipped 15 years ago, and she can still operate modern devices with it - open doors, get food from a robot.
Not all tech goes obsolete fast, there are legacy compatibility layers!
There are chips that make cats smart enough to operate doors and robots? That's so cool!
No, the doors and robots have to be smart enough to operate for the cat.
Source: Have a microchip cat door.
Please don't insult cats, it's cats who are smart enough to know how to use their chips! Robots and chips just react as they are programmed.
Cats are already smart enough, they just find it easier to access the technology using their chips.
I think human brain implants might be a bit more complicated than chips for pets.
Yeah but keeping them backwards compatible is gonna be much more important as well
That’s a cable standard. Imagine being stuck with usb 1.
Even that wouldn't be unworkable, it would be worse if you're stuck with the brain equivalent of serial ports just before everyone switches to the USB standard.
I’m theory I don’t oppose it to help regain senses and such. In practice that’s already happened and been a disaster
Hi theory! It's so great to finally meet you!
No. (It's made by Elon Musk, I would not buy it use anything he made if you held a gun to my head)
Don't forget Elon Musk is a big fan of the game franchise Deux Ex. And that's an insanely distopian future. That's the kind of dark hellish world that whiny little manchild wants.
If it is advertised well, it will be the same as with smartphones nowadays. Companies won't plant chips into human brains, people will pay to have chips planted into their brains and pay even more for yearly upgrades.
Amazing article on neural implants for blindness and some of the real world challenges.
Depends on the use case and the oversight. If I lose the ability to walk and an implant can make it easier I'll take the implant. It's unfortunate this type of technology didn't exist for Hawking. With what he had he could only write a sentence a minute IIRC.
RemindMe! 40 years
No remindmebot on lemmy, sad
Well in 40 years there might be
Testing @[email protected] 4 minutes
I'll remind you :)
That's what you think @[email protected] 5 mins @[email protected], @[email protected]
@[email protected] 40 years
@tostiman Ok, I will remind you on Saturday Sep 22, 2063 at 8:39 AM PST.
Noice
I didn't know lemmy.world had one too
@[email protected] 2 minutes
As soon a company offers this shit I am in.
However I need proof that I am the owner and user of the chip. So if Apple would sell it I probably won't buy it, because I wouldn't own what I bought
Pro:
Can find a new proof for Fermat's theorem.
Con:
Suddenly believing in Conservatism.
Why would you get an implant?
Imagine an implant giving you the ability to speak a foreign language? Or code? Or whatever specialized knowledge?
If it was safe I would totally do it. But by that point specialised knowledge X would probably be worthless since anyone can get an implant.
Elon's gonna end up like the tech CEO "Eron Keen" in Upgrade (2018). He's gonna be some rogue AI's bitch.
If this were a thing, I would have wasted years of my life learning musical instruments and foreign languages. The reason those skills are rewarding to have is because you have to work for them. My skill levels in these things are a reflection of how I spend my time and who I am as a person. If that was just erased, and everyone could be good at everything, then I wouldn't be anyone anymore.
That's kind of the sad truth of it though, once it is a useful and safe enough thing, you either pay for it or get left behind, it's dystopian as fuck, but it will significantly increase the utility of those who can get it.
Why not? Transhumanism is cool. It would take a lot of convincing for me to be sure that it is safe, but I also roll the dice every time I drive to work or take a pill so whatever.
Because this is all sci-fi woo woo and the honest truth is that we have no fucking clue how memory storage, learning, experience, or recollection actually mechanically work in the mind. At least relative to how an electronic device could interface with, let alone, augment or manipulate those mechanisms.
On top of that, our current system has proven time and again that you cannot trust an entity whose sole purpose for existence is to extract wealth from the resources around it (i.e. people). Not especially for something like this. It will need to be regulated, standardized, limited, and controlled by an external coalition.
Don't get me wrong, there's absolutely zero chance I'd sign up for Elon Musk's shit, but this kind of augmentation is very likely to be cellphone tech levels of disruptive - you'll wake up one day and it's going to be ubiquitous. Nerve interfaces for prosthetics are already becoming commonplace, and cochlear implants even more so. I truly expect that all of this "mystery" is going to be uncovered quite quick once commercial viability is demonstrated.
It would be one way of correcting at least some medical conditions, such as potential paralysis.
More RAM would be kinda nice though.
Just download more bro
External RAM is cheap. Pen and paper
Ah fuck I forgot where my pen went
The only way I would accept a microchip is if they implant it deep in my ass with a huge cock
Based.
The devices need FDA approval and some safeguards. A neurosurgeon needs to assess the risk vs benefit for the patient and they need to come to an agreement on whether it's the right treatment. Problems with these devices are strokes, bleeds, infection, swelling in the brain, etc. which while fairly rare aren't insignificant.
Aside from that general statement on risks of brain implants and brain surgery, the other big issue is whether or not they will be supported in 10-15 years or will Elon Musk flush that company down the drain as well? There was a company making implants that helped patients see that just shuttered it's doors and said "whelp, sorry folks, no one can help you with your implant now".
Yes, medical technology needs an umbrella insurance plan to cover cases where a company is not fiscally viable but still has to remain responsible for the lifetime service of the device. Like a bond or something.
Common sense can be used to sustain any stupid argument, and it should be disregarded as a valid counterpoint to anything.
Common sense is subjective.
I think in a perfect world it could be really cool
In this one however it'll just be exploited
Could it be so cool that it's worth making the world perfect?
Nobody fearmongering in this thread seems to have any idea how it works.
A brain chip would connect to a specific region of your brain. For example, in the case of a physical disability it would only need to connect to your motor neurons using read-only connectors.
If you specifically had them implant read/write connections into your visual cortex, then sure, someone could hack it and play ads in your head but that's kind of on you at that point.
Also you don't seem to either.
There is no such thing as a "read-only connector." Electrical signals can go down a wire both ways. It is up to the manufacturer of the chip to decide what pins are read and write, which is up to the governing body to regulate and restrict.
Not to mention that we are 10-20 years out from that kind of tech as development has been drastically slowing down in general. The best we can do as humans so far with the funds we put into this is stimulate general areas with current pulses to essentially cover up or stimulate the area's nervous response to relieve pain. We can't even accurately measure brain signals yet with fine enough detail to do much more than control a direction. Though that is coming along better.
The other applications close to this are for controlling muscles for sleep apnea, limb motor skills, heart muscles, etc... and are even "easier" to control.
If the tech becomes available to effect the video and audio brain receptors directly and is owned by corporations, you can bet your sweet ass they will make everything read/write and blast that thing so full of ads and harvest every bit of data they can to make a profit.
Source: electronic engineer working in the implantable device medical field
I'm sure something can be done to prevent outbound signals from the device.
Yes, something could be done... by the exact company who has a direct incentive to serve ads in the first place. Are you going to install a 2nd chip made to block outgoing signals in the 1st chip?
It will never ever be solved by trusting the company who designs it to do the right thing.
That's not the argument, you are saying it's impossible to build a device that has input but no output to the same system. I'm saying you are wrong.
Sure, I'm wrong about something that wasn't even the argument and I already clarified is possible, technically, but completely impractical for the application and does not exist.
By all means, send me the part number of a read-only connector. That would probably be very useful ti my work.
I hope I will duck off before we go full dystopian
Why couldn't you build a "read only" connector? I mean sure, wires conduct both ways obviously, but diodes and other one-way conductors are a thing right?
The other point of only putting the implant in the place it's needed and where it can't make you see and hear things seems valid too.
I'm not saying there wouldn't be other risks and issues with the whole thing, but I feel like the "they'll put ads in your brain" thing is kind of a ridiculous fear.
No, because brain signals are so low voltage compared to silicon voltage thresholds that if you put a diode in to block outgoing signal, it would just reduce all incoming signal to noise. On an IC where there is very fine silicon property control it is probably possible though.
Let's say that it is possible, it would still have to be implemented on the PCB or more likely, the IC itself. Guess who's literal job it is to design and make all of the decisions on what is possible would be? The exact same people who would benefit financially from enabling that functionality and serving ads. The point of all of this is that there are 1000 ways to make that functionality not be available on the design, but the decision to make it available or not is made by the people who would earn a lot of money from it and benefit directly.
Every single major technology that has the ability to display ads eventually does, without fail. Every single one. Why would an implanted chip made by the same companies be any different?
Again, I think it will be a VERY long time before we have the sort of fine control and deep understanding of the brain to effectively control sight and sound. I think 20 years might have actually be generous and it might be 30-40 unless we hit a breakthrough in biological computing or something.
Until then, there would be absolutely nothing to worry about. Musty's "brain chip" would never have this capability and would be much more likely in causing strokes than any other danger.
The problem is that if it is unquestioned, implemented, and normalized that "everyone has a brain chip" then, just like smart phones, they will slowly change until the tech does become available and maybe they just have an ad on startup, maybe they just have an ad here or there, until the entire thing just becomes a vehicle for ads like smartphones are now.
i hate to say this but the last sentence would be victim blaming
Yea, "companies" shouldn't. But I want a computer in my head eventually, so I can be a cyborg.
I'm convinced that the Neuralink is the dumbest idea ever, but I've come to the conclusion that it's better for people to just learn the hard way. Like, it's so obviously stupid that anyone who's still going for it cannot be helped.
until it becomes the new mobile phone, and anyone who doesnt have the Chip™ is an outlier. i dont think this is likely, but it is most definitely possible
I've thought about it and I've decided that I can live with that. Besides, I don't think it will make it to that level of popularity before "the incident" that shocks everyone and triggers a senate inquiry.
Either there will be horrific side effects or Musk will cut quality or make an 'executive decision' that beams ads into everyone's head. I don't know the final implementation, but I think they won't resist the temptation to make the firmware up-gradable remotely, and once they have that, they won't resist the temptation to meddle.
Go easy on your EBE's
What? Why WOULDN'T everybody let the guy whose latest genius idea in a stunning sequence of brilliant business decisions was squeezing every twitter user for money in a service they previously got for free implant hardware into their brain? It'll be just like a tesla: automated driving available next year since like 2010 or so (assuming it doesn't fall apart, run over the elderly or burst into flames) in a hyperloop near you!
Can't wait for evil megacorporations to sell my toughts
Seems really good for prostatics.
I think it could have awesome uses... 50 years from now and designed by colleges on government grants and not companies led by narcissists.
Why is art as a reference point for some new technology a bad thing? We can't all get a history degree to understand ancient Egypt, so does everyone need a degree in medicine and computer science to understand neuralink?
I don't really get the meme. Even if the person is too "stupid" to imagine a technology without Black Mirror to do the heavy lifting, it's still a useful metaphor to articulate reasons why.
Because art is made up and people keep quoting things from it as if they were factual things that have happened.
Philosophy is made up to, so I guess everyone should just stop thinking?
i see your point but have you considered: its a joke
But I don't get it.
Zero issues with the concept of a chip in my head. None.
Not going to do it anytime soon though.
New thing bad!!1!
This is the same argument people use against vaccines.
New thing could become mandatory in a future and give governments direct access to our eyes, thoughts, hearing...
Smart phone tracking would become a joke in comparison.
Do you always take things way further then they'll ever go? It's pretty much blatant flanderazation at this point.
It may or not may happpen, but there's a potential.
Not really.
You're the kind of person that cannot be argued with, but that doesn't imply that you hold the truth.
Lmao, sure pal.
It is called "thinking ahead of the consequences", and it is done with every mayor decision.
Better than waiting until they happen to respond.
Somehow you've conflated risk planning and mitigation with telling random what ifs on the Internet.
Following that line of logic, if the Feds say that we should lower emissions, you’ll cry out about how they’re going to take your car.
It's called flanderization
That's not what flanderisation is. I don't know why you keep repeating this word.
Flanderisation is when a previously varied an complex fictional character gets one or a few of their traits exaggerated more and more over time, until it becomes their entire personality.
E.g. Ned Flanders, who was originally just a foil to Homer Simpson. Friendlier, more devout in belief, less potty-mouthed, physically fitter, nicer (while still attainable) home, untroubled family, etc. He represented what Homer wanted to be and was jealous of.
Over time he was flanderised to just being an uber-religious nut with essentially nothing else to his personality.
Flanderisation is not when people are weary of how technology is being used and will continue to be used by large businesses and governments to track what we do and build extensive profiles on us.
We could also all be living under a social credit score system like in China, but most of us aren't. Just because something could become our reality, doesn't mean we should avoid all progress in that field.
But Smartphones are tracked and hacked by governments. And it is legal in most cases. And people are killed by governments.
the government only ever kills bad people, right? its not like laws will ever change
In the end it doesn't matter if it's legal or not. They will do it anyways. Like it was the case with Preditor and the Greek government. Or Pegasus and Mexico. In the case of Pegasus and Mexico, people actually died.
true.
Who said that? Because I did not
The thing is, vaccines work pretty well, but letting some already corrupt asf corporation (or any entity) implant a microchip in your brain is obviously a bad idea. Please do a favor for yourself and the human race by sitting down for a few minutes and asking yourself: "what could go wrong?".
Seems like young adults are becoming old men, calling the new gimmicky tech thing that hit the market that’s supposedly evil.