Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join Similar Worlds today »
Join Similar Worlds today »
What are your thoughts on this?
Oldest First | Newest First | Top
ArishMell · 61-69, M
[@1029950,SarahPP] Sorry but I have never understood "awesome" so am not sure in which sense to understand the nature of the alleged computer (actually, the computer [i]programme[/i]).
Do we read it as "awe-inspiring" (the original meaning of "awful"), or as "awful" in its modern meaning?
:-)
Do we read it as "awe-inspiring" (the original meaning of "awful"), or as "awful" in its modern meaning?
:-)
softspokenman · M
ArishMell · 61-69, M
Well, they may be reported as having claimed such but I take it with a sizeable few grammes of sodium chloride.
Besides, even if possible, surely it would need sensors attaching to the head to detect whatever are the thought "signals"?
What is your un-cited source? The original in a respected scientific publication or some general journalist mis-representing that?
+++
(Not that most of us would necessarily be able to read the paper even if sufficiently knowledgable. The big publishers like Elsevier have sewn up the scientific-papers trade very tightly and made access extremely expensive. Even many of the scientist authors now complain they are often unable to re-read their own past individual or contributed papers, unless they had ensured from the start, retaining copies privately!)
Besides, even if possible, surely it would need sensors attaching to the head to detect whatever are the thought "signals"?
What is your un-cited source? The original in a respected scientific publication or some general journalist mis-representing that?
+++
(Not that most of us would necessarily be able to read the paper even if sufficiently knowledgable. The big publishers like Elsevier have sewn up the scientific-papers trade very tightly and made access extremely expensive. Even many of the scientist authors now complain they are often unable to re-read their own past individual or contributed papers, unless they had ensured from the start, retaining copies privately!)
helenS · 31-35, F
[@1086573,Adstar] A lot of progress is going on in China. 😐
Adstar · 51-55, M
[@6602,helenS] Yes dictatorship progress.. Surveillance state progress.. Incidentally google has assisted the CCP in providing them top notch surveillance software.. It's all good business $$$$
Picklebobble2 · 56-60, M
If it’s useful to the brain injured or those with trauma affected lives obviously you’d applaud it.
But the cynic in me thinks the only application people would be interested in is some sort of ‘big brother’ application to be used by those with questionable intent.
The suspect fitted with such a device so those in law enforcement determine whether he is telling their idea of the truth.
The crazies currently determining whether you should have the right to vote (witness just about every southern U.S. state in the last twenty years)
However if such a thing should happen, I think a new law would need to be passed insisting that every politician be required to wear it whenever speaking.
But the cynic in me thinks the only application people would be interested in is some sort of ‘big brother’ application to be used by those with questionable intent.
The suspect fitted with such a device so those in law enforcement determine whether he is telling their idea of the truth.
The crazies currently determining whether you should have the right to vote (witness just about every southern U.S. state in the last twenty years)
However if such a thing should happen, I think a new law would need to be passed insisting that every politician be required to wear it whenever speaking.
ArishMell · 61-69, M
[@448576,Picklebobble2] Ah, but before we get too worried... do we know what the researchers themselves [i]really [/i]reported, and where?
Picklebobble2 · 56-60, M
[@519706,ArishMell] A source is always a good indication of the direction of the true intent
gol979 · 41-45, M
[@448576,Picklebobble2] that is how it will be sold "it'll help brain injury" etc. How can you refuse that??
A brief look at recent history shows that tech will enslave us imo
A brief look at recent history shows that tech will enslave us imo
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
If it is this one that you mean: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2027540?query=featured_home
Then doesn't do that. It monitors the parts of the brain that produce the speech not the parts that have the intent.
[quote]We implanted a subdural, high-density, multielectrode array over the area of the [i]sensorimotor cortex that controls speech [/i]in a person with anarthria (the loss of the ability to articulate speech) and spastic quadriparesis caused by a brain-stem stroke. [/quote]
Emphasis mine.
It is not monitoring thoughts but monitoring the part of the brain that articulates those thoughts.
The paper also says:
[quote]We decoded sentences from the participant’s cortical activity in real time at a median rate of 15.2 words per minute, with a median word error rate of 25.6%. In post hoc analyses, we detected 98% of the attempts by the participant to produce individual words, and we classified words with 47.1% accuracy using cortical signals that were stable throughout the 81-week study period.[/quote]
So it's a long way from reading anyone's mind.
Then doesn't do that. It monitors the parts of the brain that produce the speech not the parts that have the intent.
[quote]We implanted a subdural, high-density, multielectrode array over the area of the [i]sensorimotor cortex that controls speech [/i]in a person with anarthria (the loss of the ability to articulate speech) and spastic quadriparesis caused by a brain-stem stroke. [/quote]
Emphasis mine.
It is not monitoring thoughts but monitoring the part of the brain that articulates those thoughts.
The paper also says:
[quote]We decoded sentences from the participant’s cortical activity in real time at a median rate of 15.2 words per minute, with a median word error rate of 25.6%. In post hoc analyses, we detected 98% of the attempts by the participant to produce individual words, and we classified words with 47.1% accuracy using cortical signals that were stable throughout the 81-week study period.[/quote]
So it's a long way from reading anyone's mind.
smiler2012 · 56-60, M
{@keepyoureyespeeled] i cannot see real benefit from it .could be used to invade peoples mind to reveal thoughts and obsevations which someone rather remain as thoughts
ArishMell · 61-69, M
[@3749,smiler2012] I would not worry about it. All we know here is someone seems to have partially quoted a News item report summarising some experiment somewhere, probably reported in a proper journal but not cited.
27463 people following
Miscellaneous Personal Stories, Advice, and Support![]()
New Post Associated Groups Category Members
Miscellaneous Personal Stories, Advice, and Support
