Survey on Cybernetics

[pitou777]

Hello,

 

I'm doing a survey on cybernetics for my thesis for school.

I would be very pleased if you would fill in my survey, and I thank you in advance for doing so. It's not long, it should barely take two minutes!

here's the link:

http://www.polldaddy.com/s/0C8FA2CABDD037E8/

[Mr Skeptic]

You're welcome, but don't be surprised if us science lovers are far more accepting of the idea than the general population.

[pitou777]

you have a point there, I must admit.

On the other hand, when i posted it in the "survey" category on yahoo answers, most people didn't understand what i was talking about, so...

I figured it would be better to ask people interested in science.

Should I make it a little more accessible?

Thank you for completing my survey!

[iNow]

That last question is rather thought provoking (unless you have them randomized, in which case, you have no idea which question to which I'm referring). That could be its own thread.

[pitou777]

The answers are not randomized, so i know what you mean

the question could indeed be worthy of its own topic on this forum lol

I'm glad that a lot of people don't reject this idea as being a fantasy from a movielover or something. I'm not saying this society thing I mention will certainly happen, but with the rapid evolution of technology, it's certainly not a complete fantasy.

[padren]

The answers are not randomized, so i know what you mean

the question could indeed be worthy of its own topic on this forum lol

 

I absolutely agree too. Personally I'd want to be sure an implant had been tested for some time, and 1) was completely standalone (could connect, but could store large amounts of data separately, perform math functions etc) and was designed to last a human lifespan without servicing in 99% of cases.

 

Considering the effect of calculators on my math skills or keyboards on my writing, I really wonder what impact it would have if the system went offline unexpectedly. Being biologically susceptible to an EMP seems almost as unnerving as having part of my brain dependent on a corporation's ability to avoid bankruptcy.

Secondarily, it would be interesting to see what age laws would go into effect, since a brain that learns to use such an implant while still developing could suffer major stunting of growth in natural centers that normally through stress learn to perform certain tasks.

[pitou777]

Thank you for sharing your point of view:-) You are right to think so, and in my thesis I have a part about the consequences of having a chip implanted. Imagine hackers taking control of your body, by sending thoughts or impulses to your brain (assuming it's connected to a network). They could use you to do the dirty work (robbing a bank or something, i don't know ) then reap the rewards.

[padren]

Thank you for sharing your point of view:-) You are right to think so, and in my thesis I have a part about the consequences of having a chip implanted. Imagine hackers taking control of your body, by sending thoughts or impulses to your brain (assuming it's connected to a network). They could use you to do the dirty work (robbing a bank or something, i don't know ) then reap the rewards.

 

Well, it really depends on what it's wired into. The safest chip would only supply sensory data, so you could say, run a query, and get back visual data in the form of text. If you wanted video or pictures, the sensory data would include a border or superimposed visual identifier to show it's incoming data, and you are not seeing something real. Audio would be trickier, but you could include a sensation of some sort that basically lets you know what sort of stream is coming in. The key would be in that you could not get chip code updates online, only data - so any input would have to be in an acceptable sensory format or just not be permitted entry via the chip. This would be basically the equivalent of the "firewall" to prevent abuse.

 

As you "assimilate" visual sensory data, it becomes "recognized" as knowledge in your mind. If the chip skipped your own sensory layer of data assimilation there could be a lot more room for abuse as the user may be sent "facts" that feel certain but have not actually been evaluated by the mind. I suspect that may be more difficult technologically as I am not 100% sure if any two minds really assimilate data the same way, or if the mind adapts until it has found a solution to that problem during early years of development.

 

Also, to control a person, you need a lot of data - meaning a lot of data would have to be outbound as well as inbound, which a security layer could detect and trigger a temporary lock down, allowing the user to clear the security concern or report the infraction.

 

If the chip would allow emotional stimulation it would probably sell well (electronic drugs) but could also be abused - someone hacks a chip to hit input that could stimulate endorphins for instance, then have a back door create false emotional stimulation to create irrational senses of trust or loyalty.

Of course this all would be highly theoretical and depend on facts that are far from established so really it's all pure speculation at this point. I do think though, the first sort of chips of this nature may be at most, capable of giving you a visual impression of a mathematical result or type with your thoughts.

 

If you haven't seen it yet you may find this thread interesting:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=37192

 

They aren't implants, but sensors that allow for some pretty interesting "thought controlled interfaces" even in kid toys hitting the market this year.

[bascule]

That last question is rather thought provoking (unless you have them randomized, in which case, you have no idea which question to which I'm referring). That could be its own thread.

 

I'll wait for noninvasive means, thanks.

[pitou777]

@ padren

wow, i have to say, i'm impressed. Have you been thinking about chip implants before? you seem to know a lot about it. You easily map the consequences of having your brain connected to the internet or other networks. Do you have a background in computer sciences or something?

(i made the topic on the last question btw )

[bascule]

pitou777: Read about this stuff:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain-computer_interface

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

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

 

And note that a bidirectional interface between the brain and a computer need not involve getting "chipped". Most brain computer interfaces today are passive and use technologies like EEG. I expect it will stay that way for awhile. I don't think anyone wants to undergo invasive brain surgery

[pitou777]

Thanks for the links, interesting! Maybe the best thing is the semi-invasive technology then: keep the signals clear, while not having a deep brain implant. I had already read about the singularity point, it's actually what we should prevent with the help of cybernetics: if computers get way smarter than humans, this could threaten the humans. The best thing to do is co-operate with "the enemy" (computers).

[pitou777]

hello,

these are the temporary results for my survey, (you can still complete it)

 

http://www.sumopaint.com/web/#/image/78623/

http://www.sumopaint.com/web/#/image/78624/

http://www.sumopaint.com/web/#/image/78625/