How long until keyboards/mice are obsolete?

[Pseudoswallo]

Well, at what point can you say "replaced"? They have already replaced keyboards/mice for paralized people, as seen in the article, but have yet to enter the home or workplace.

[insane_alien]

there are the keyboards(i use that term loosely here) that are actually small laser projectors and will project the layout onto any surface and you just hit the part of the table that is marked as a key to type. not strictly a keyboard and they exist today.

[reor]

Yeah, but it's the same concept, or is it?

[bascule]

Well, at what point can you say "replaced"? They have already replaced keyboards/mice for paralized people, as seen in the article, but have yet to enter the home or workplace.

 

I use "replaced" here in the context of a new technology becoming the de facto standard

[The Thing]

I can type a word much faster than I can spell it out in my brain and I think many people can type faster than they can spell with their minds too. And it is so much easier to think in words than to think in letters, not to mention having random thoughts like "this is stupid" floating around. So the thoughts-recognition softwares would have to do similar tasks as voic recognition softwares because most people think in complete words and have other background thoughts.

[bascule]

I can type a word much faster than I can spell it out in my brain

 

When you type, you're still spelling the word out... but you're still missing how this operates. You don't "say" the word in your brain, it uses the same sort of mechanical actuation as typing does. The difference is that you aren't limited by the speed at which your fingers can move. Look at how much that impacts the speed of Dvorak vs. Qwerty typing.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Look at how much that impacts the speed of Dvorak vs. Qwerty typing.

Not much, really. Nobody has actually proved that Dvorak is any faster than QWERTY, though it is more comfortable to use.

[bascule]

Not much, really. Nobody has actually proved that Dvorak is any faster than QWERTY, though it is more comfortable to use.

 

What about Barbara Blackburn?

[reor]

I can type a word much faster than I can spell it out in my brain and I think many people can type faster than they can spell with their minds too. And it is so much easier to think in words than to think in letters, not to mention having random thoughts like "this is stupid" floating around. So the thoughts-recognition softwares would have to do similar tasks as voic recognition softwares because most people think in complete words and have other background thoughts.

You Sir, are either a godly typer and i bow before your arts, or you are a slow thinker and have no imagination. (No insults intended!)

 

But considering most people are exaggerating, let's meet somewhere in the middle, where I still envy your typing skills.

I can visualize whole words and sentences in virtually no time. Can you really beat that by typing?

 

EDIT: I can't type QWERTZ faster than DVORAK without messing it up. (Mind my german keyboard...)

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

What about Barbara Blackburn[/url']?

That's hardly proof that QWERTY is slower, only that Barbara Blackburn is better at Dvorak.

[ecoli]

The question is when will keyboards and mice become obsolete. I believe that 'brain-interface technology' will become common long before keyboards and mice become obsolete.

[The Thing]

You Sir' date=' are either a godly typer and i bow before your arts, or you are a slow thinker and have no imagination. (No insults intended!)

 

But considering most people are exaggerating, let's meet somewhere in the middle, where I still envy your typing skills.

I can visualize whole words and sentences in virtually no time. Can you really beat that by typing?

 

EDIT: I can't type QWERTZ faster than DVORAK without messing it up. (Mind my german keyboard...)[/quote']

 

I don't get your point and I'm not sure you get mine.

 

I'm pointing out that any thought-recognition software used, say, for typing would have to do a task that's similar to voice recognition: that is to spell out a word just from the voice in our heads amid other background thoughts. I'm saying that we think in whole words and sentences, not in individual letters, so a thought-recognition software has to recognize words, not just letters. Say I want to type Bonjour, I'd think the word "Bonjour", and the software will have to recognize that word, and spell it out. But if the software only recognizes individual letters, then I'd have to spell out "B-O-N-J-O-U-R" and frankly, I can't think-spell that faster than I can type. It takes much more time for me to consciously read the letters and spell them out in my head, concentrating on each letter, than simply typing them out.

[reor]

Yes, that makes sense. I simply forgot about the recognition issue. :/

Computers are still thinking binary, but my vision is, that, by courtesy of holographic data storage (and transfer?) technology, binary will be replaced and thoughts will be read (directly?).

Wow, that sounds far away...

[Sisyphus]

I don't get your point and I'm not sure you get mine.

 

I'm pointing out that any thought-recognition software used' date=' say, for typing would have to do a task that's similar to voice recognition: that is to spell out a word just from the voice in our heads amid other background thoughts. I'm saying that we think in whole words and sentences, not in individual letters, so a thought-recognition software has to recognize words, not just letters. Say I want to type Bonjour, I'd think the word "Bonjour", and the software will have to recognize that word, and spell it out. But if the software only recognizes individual letters, then I'd have to spell out "B-O-N-J-O-U-R" and frankly, I can't think-spell that faster than I can type. It takes much more time for me to consciously read the letters and spell them out in my head, concentrating on each letter, than simply typing them out.[/quote']

 

That's assuming "thought-reading" software would require you to be that deliberate. But remember, even if, when typing, you think in words, on some level your brain is still doing individual letters and sending highly complex messages to your fingers to make them type those letters. When you first learn to type, this is obvious, but eventually it becomes automatic and even subconscious. Personally, I see no reason why a brain interface wouldn't be analogous to typing in that way, only even easier.

[bascule]

I'm pointing out that any thought-recognition software used, say, for typing would have to do a task that's similar to voice recognition: that is to spell out a word just from the voice in our heads amid other background thoughts. I'm saying that we think in whole words and sentences, not in individual letters, so a thought-recognition software has to recognize words, not just letters. Say I want to type Bonjour, I'd think the word "Bonjour", and the software will have to recognize that word, and spell it out.

 

Please RTFA instead of pulling stuff out of your ass.

 

These systems recognize thought patterns in the motor cortex. They don't tap into your internal monologue. You train your brain to generate the patterns these systems are designed to recognize.

 

But if the software only recognizes individual letters, then I'd have to spell out "B-O-N-J-O-U-R" and frankly, I can't think-spell that faster than I can type.

 

Once again, you don't get it. You've trained your motor cortex to spell out words through your fingers, have you not? The process becomes automatic through repetition. This is no different, except for that you are no longer limited by physical motion of your fingers.

[Skye]

Nature has put a grouped a bunch of free access articles about the paper on its site.

 

http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/brain/index.html

[Callipygous]

Please RTFA instead of pulling stuff out of your ass.

 

These systems recognize thought patterns in the motor cortex. They don't tap into your internal monologue. You train your brain to generate the patterns these systems are designed to recognize.

 

 

 

Once again' date=' you don't get it. You've trained your motor cortex to spell out words through your fingers, have you not? The process becomes automatic through repetition. This is no different, except for that you are no longer limited by physical motion of your fingers.[/quote']

 

it seems like it might take a while to learn, sort of like training a new muscle isnt it?

 

learning to twitch your ears, or something similar is what i have in mind, except your just making your brain put out certain messages, instead of actually to a muscle.

 

am i making a donkey of myself?