Author Topic: Would a high bandwidth brain to computer interface revolutionize technology?  (Read 3150 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline NiHaoMikeTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9321
  • Country: us
  • "Don't turn it on - Take it apart!"
    • Facebook Page
If there existed some way to quickly send information from the brain to a computer (at a rate a few orders of magnitude faster than existing input devices), how would it revolutionize technology? My thought is that content creation would be radically changed - just imagine something and tell the computer about it. Programming, likewise, would also be vastly accelerated.

I also assume that the technology for that is a long ways off, but just how long off?
Cryptocurrency has taught me to love math and at the same time be baffled by it.

Cryptocurrency lesson 0: Altcoins and Bitcoin are not the same thing.
 
The following users thanked this post: timenutgoblin

Online ataradov

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11905
  • Country: us
    • Personal site
It would not do anything to the programming. When I program, I'm absolutely not limited by the speed of my typing. Majority of the time is spent thinking though the problem, which does not need a computer at all.

And in general, I don't think it would do much if anything at all. It might make existing tasks more convenient and marginally faster, but I doubt it would revolutionize anything.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2022, 03:43:38 am by ataradov »
Alex
 

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12413
  • Country: au
I agree with the programming ... I spend more time thinking about what can go wrong and how to deal with those conditions than actually writing code - sanitising inputs, checking boundary conditions and the like.

I see major hurdles for generic functionality, but even specific functionality hasn't done much lately.  We're only just getting into bionic limb control, much less the scenario of Clint Eastwood in Firefox ... some 40 years ago.

I don't say it's impossible - but it's just that we are so far off from that, we really don't even know what questions to ask.
 

Offline pcprogrammer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4670
  • Country: nl
But if it worked it would pick up on the thinking about a programming problem and might provide the solution :)

That aside, it is in the restoring of lost capabilities that it can work both ways. For instance blind people can get some vision again with signal input into the brain. This has seen some breakthrough recently. https://www.zmescience.com/science/artificial-retina-blindness-882623542/

The other way round is controlling artificial limbs like Brumby mentioned, where the electric impulses found in the body can be used. Don't know the status of this.

Real control of systems based on brain waves, I think is not there yet. I'm sure there will be lots of research done on it.

Offline Bud

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7276
  • Country: ca
Not sure if it would revolutionize anything, but it has killed a few monkies already.

Fortune.com:
Quote
Musk brain-chip company Neuralink admits to killing 8 monkeys in experiments
Facebook-free life and Rigol-free shack.
 

Offline RJSV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2757
  • Country: us
   My opinion, we have to be deliberate about the topic, which if it's exploring 'creativity' that's a very subtle science.  On other hand, more mechanical improvements, such as in real-time control will likely be accomplished first, that being auto-coding certain portions, and using various advanced test and debug functions. Those mostly with reliable or consistent features.
   But the creation thing, that's a tough one.  Could you, as a young person, 'create' a Van Gogh, or Jimi Hendrix ? OR, even predict such originators (a bit, maybe, but not with any real specificity).  As odd as it might sound, some advanced YOGA practices have noted episodes of 'creativity' and in philosophical fields.
A four year old with imagination beats a 40 year old Engineer...well, almost every time, for 'creative' origination, but they lack to experience and language to use that.
 

Online ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7375
  • Country: de
My thought is that content creation would be radically changed - just imagine something and tell the computer about it.

I would probably hate watching content that was created that way.

Even with today's technology, watching videos that consist just of stream-of-consciousness rambling, or unedited footage shot with a hand-held mobile phone, are painful to watch. Imagine watching someone's imaginations raw and unedited -- I guess I would either be bored to death or get sick very quickly...  :-\
 

Offline NiHaoMikeTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9321
  • Country: us
  • "Don't turn it on - Take it apart!"
    • Facebook Page
Even with today's technology, watching videos that consist just of stream-of-consciousness rambling, or unedited footage shot with a hand-held mobile phone, are painful to watch. Imagine watching someone's imaginations raw and unedited -- I guess I would either be bored to death or get sick very quickly...  :-\
I'm thinking that if you could think of an image (any image) and have it appear on the computer in a short time, it will be a whole new paradigm for creating such images. It wouldn't be much of a step to extend it to videos.

It obviously won't solve the problem of knowing how to create good content.
Cryptocurrency has taught me to love math and at the same time be baffled by it.

Cryptocurrency lesson 0: Altcoins and Bitcoin are not the same thing.
 

Online ataradov

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11905
  • Country: us
    • Personal site
I'm thinking that if you could think of an image (any image) and have it appear on the computer in a short time
I don't think it works this way. You don't think of an image all at once, even in your thoughts you "paint" by parts and details.  So, whatever the connection is, it would have to be able to recreate the final result incrementally based on partial information and possibly feedback based on what it painted so far. And it would have to be smart enough to resolve conflicting thoughts.

So, it would still be paining, but with more advanced brushes consisting of entire elements that fit nicely.  And in this case you will probably get better results from things like DALL-E. There is no real need to take instruction from the brain if you can type them. After all, instructions are short.
Alex
 

Offline Circlotron

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3362
  • Country: au
I wish there was something that could turn the music in my head into a MIDI file or some kind of multi track recording.
 

Offline timenutgoblin

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 189
  • Country: au
Would a high bandwidth brain revolutionize computer technology?

Yes, I think so. I wish I had a high bandwidth brain.

Majority of the time is spent thinking though the problem, which does not need a computer at all.

Maybe having a philosophical computer capable of determining whether a problem is worth computing at all as opposed to a computer capable of solving the problem quickly could be more useful.
 

Offline Cyberdragon

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2676
  • Country: us
Even with today's technology, watching videos that consist just of stream-of-consciousness rambling, or unedited footage shot with a hand-held mobile phone, are painful to watch. Imagine watching someone's imaginations raw and unedited -- I guess I would either be bored to death or get sick very quickly...  :-\
I'm thinking that if you could think of an image (any image) and have it appear on the computer in a short time, it will be a whole new paradigm for creating such images. It wouldn't be much of a step to extend it to videos.

It obviously won't solve the problem of knowing how to create good content.

There would also be a major problem due to this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusive_thought if left unfiltered.

Quote
Many people experience the type of bad or unwanted thoughts that people with more troubling intrusive thoughts have, but most people can dismiss these thoughts.[6] For most people, intrusive thoughts are a "fleeting annoyance".[7]   

That is unless you're hooked up to a machine recording your thoughts. You'd have to exibit high self control otherwise random things like "I'm going to throw my kid out a window" "I so want to have sex with [person]" "I hope [person] dies" would get recorded or even broadcast, and no longer easy to just forget about a moment later. So yeah, you'd either get bored to death from someone trying too hard not to think negative that they just barely think of anything, or get sick very quickly from the noise in our fallable meat machine processors.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2022, 08:05:41 am by Cyberdragon »
*BZZZZZZAAAAAP*
Voltamort strikes again!
Explodingus - someone who frequently causes accidental explosions
 
The following users thanked this post: timenutgoblin

Offline pcprogrammer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4670
  • Country: nl
You would probably end up with a lot of "Jackson Pollock" art. Not my thing :o

Offline rstofer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9964
  • Country: us
I don't know if folks can get past the paywall(s) but...

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/24/technology/ai-technology-progress.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/technology/openai-images-dall-e.html

Creativity from an AI is already here.  There are examples like 'draw a picture of 2 cats playing chess' and the output is indeed such a painting and it is very good.

Google search for 'DALL-E' (no quotes)

I don't see much for the AI to gain from connecting to a human brain.  Most people's thought process more closely approximates 'random walk'.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2022, 12:38:37 pm by rstofer »
 

Online tszaboo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8218
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX product design
I'm sure it wouldn't change anything first, and then a decade later Facebook would be using it to download advertisement and the only correct political opinion directly to your cerebral cortex. And junkies would use it to permanently trigger parts of their brain, and make them completely unfunctional in a society.
 

Offline RoGeorge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7012
  • Country: ro
There are many attempts already, probably the most famous is Elon Musk's Neuralink.  Something like this:


(didn't watch this 8 mins, seen some longer couple of hours demo + press conferences some months ago).

Yes, a high bandwidth connection will change the World and how we will interact with each other.  Same about augmenting one's brain with Internet, and AI, and IoT connected straight to neurons.

What it is known for sure (from the prosthetic industry), is that any neural network can adapt itself and can learn how to make sense of any data stream.  Neural networks, including brain cells can adapt to "understand" any data stream.  For example, even a mush of rat brain cells grown in a Petri dish was able to learn how to flight a fighter jet by itself.  The rat brain cells grown in the Petri dish filled with connection wires and interfaced with a PC game learned how to pilot a fighter jet!


« Last Edit: August 29, 2022, 07:01:42 pm by RoGeorge »
 

Offline SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15797
  • Country: fr
One random question: what for?
 

Offline jonpaul

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3656
  • Country: fr
  • Analog, magnetics, Power, HV, Audio, Cinema
    • IEEE Spectrum
High BW achieved in nature by animals and humans over the last 1M yrs evolution...

Bats...Somar
Frogs..FDM, TDM Mxp comms

Sensors:
Eyes, ears,
COMMS: Nerves
CPU/DSP/Image/sound  processor
brain

eg extract voice conversation from noisy crowded room of sound...

eg extract pattern in dark noise image

Your thoughts?

Jon
An Internet Dinosaur...
 

Offline RoGeorge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7012
  • Country: ro
Indeed, also tactile sensing by skin an hair, all these are amazing features we have and take them for granted.



One random question: what for?

Personal belief, there is no meaning in anything.

Things just happen, the Universe unfolds according to the rules of physics, for apparently no reason.  Meaning is a human concept related to our goals of staying alive and multiply.

Or else said, it would be the same "what for" as it was for anything else that already happened since forever.  What for the agriculture, the gun powder, the boats, the electricity, the Internet , or anything else?  Humans and the world were existing just fine without any of these, yet all these new things somehow did happen, and now we have them, weather we like them or not.  :-//

Offline SL4P

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2318
  • Country: au
  • There's more value if you figure it out yourself!
Probably no great advantage - because while every brain is ‘wired’ in much the same way, the data organisation is quite arbitrary - dependent on the individual and their personal journey.

The ability to ‘backup’ a brain for example, is great, but only useful restored into the exact same context.

In a computer for example, the instructions and data are handled and stored separately, but in a brain, they are intermixed on an opportunistic event based structure.

No individual piece of data makes any sense in a different context.
Don't ask a question if you aren't willing to listen to the answer.
 

Offline Ed.Kloonk

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4000
  • Country: au
  • Cat video aficionado
What I notice is that most everyone presumes that the tech is to assist in commanding the robots.

I want it working in the other direction. Like just blinking and then understanding a wall of text. Or like the time Kanuu learned gung-fu.

iratus parum formica
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
I'm sure it would find applications in porn and games, beyond that I don't know, it seems likely to cause a lot more problems than it solves though.
 

Offline pcprogrammer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4670
  • Country: nl
Especially when it would connect our inner thoughts to the internet. Peace would fly out of the window in a heart beat.

Our brain is also a filter when it comes to generating output like speech or writing. When tapped in before this filter it will show a lot of ugliness.

Offline pcprogrammer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4670
  • Country: nl
What I notice is that most everyone presumes that the tech is to assist in commanding the robots.

I want it working in the other direction. Like just blinking and then understanding a wall of text. Or like the time Kanuu learned gung-fu.

That is what is being done to restore vision, like I posted earlier in this thread. Guess it should be possible to extend it to stream data into your brain. Not sure I would like it though. It is busy enough in my head. And no, just a single person in there, not schizophrenic  :-DD

Offline Cyberdragon

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2676
  • Country: us
I'm sure it would find applications in porn and games, beyond that I don't know, it seems likely to cause a lot more problems than it solves though.

Well of couse people use VR for games and porn, it's the 21st century. ::) But it would be less accessable if it involved literal brain surgury. And yes, there's always that sci-fi trope of nefarious people using brain interfaces as some form of mind control/reprogramming (even in my own sci-fi universe). Basically some bad actor always messes with someone's memories and personality, or just to torture/imprison them, like Total Recall, The Matrix, Star Trek (Borg), exc.
*BZZZZZZAAAAAP*
Voltamort strikes again!
Explodingus - someone who frequently causes accidental explosions
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf