For those who don’t know much about this field, this seems incredible. The reality is that this a tech demo that Neuralink is using to practice the basics. For other research groups in this field, this is tech from 20 years ago.<p>The current state of the art is humans, mostly quadriplegic people, with chips which let them control robot arms with enough accuracy to pick up small delicate objects, play games, and type by thinking words. Current state of the art implants let people get tactile feedback too - they can intuitively know the position of the arm they’re controlling and feel the amount of pressure on each finger tip.<p>I had the pleasure of meeting a man with an implant in 2016 and the technology he was using was incredible. He could pick up a grape with his arm without crushing it and then eat it. If the arm was in another room, he could feel around with it to find objects. He described how the arm just felt like a part of his body when it’s turned on.<p>To use SpaceX as an analogy: this isn’t a first flight. This is more like a static test fire. If Neuralink follows the SpaceX trajectory of driving down cost/increasing innovation, it results will be really out of this world. Stuff that would just sound bonkers right now.
This seems to be very similar to the early 2000s demos at Brown University/Cyberkinetics[1]. In 2008 they demonstrated it in humans[2] after lots of work getting FDA approval. The core difference here (from my non-expert reading) seem to be electrodes are along a thread rather than on a chip.<p>See <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJJPbpHoPWo" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJJPbpHoPWo</a> for a video of the pong demo in humans.<p>The motor cortex seems to have a clear, learnable signal though it is rather noisy sampling <1000 locations.<p>Mary Lou Jepsen at Open Water has ideas about how to do this non-invasively [3].<p>[1] <a href="https://www.braingate.org/publications/" rel="nofollow">https://www.braingate.org/publications/</a><p>[2] <a href="https://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bureau/2006-07/06-002.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bureau/2006-07/06-...</a><p>[3] <a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/mary_lou_jepsen_how_we_can_use_light_to_see_deep_inside_our_bodies_and_brains" rel="nofollow">https://www.ted.com/talks/mary_lou_jepsen_how_we_can_use_lig...</a>
That was difficult to watch. While the technology is impressive, it is sickening to watch. The part where they can pair the phone via bluetooth made me want to vomit. It is obviously unnatural, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Something about seeing that animal, oblivious to what's happening, and that implant with the ability to directly record thoughts and/or remote control. The whole thing doesn't sit well with me.
Here is the ultimate question....<p>What smoothing algorithms did they use to guess the 'certainty' of the 'intended' movement in a Y-Plane game vs. the X,Y grid they learned from?<p>Having researched in this space, you don't get better results from 'training' on a X,Y space and reducing that training to a Y-grid predictor.<p>There is a ton of smoothing going on in the video... or the metal conductor plays a huge role in the electrical signals they get from the implanted electrodes. I once blew up a demo because of something like this metal stick as a constant I didn't think to consider.
I don't understand how you can gather such a targeted signal by sticking wires in just a few places.<p>Like, you can't just tape a metal coat hanger to an iPhone and start getting text messages through it.<p>But somehow you can put some wires just as few mm into the surface of a brain and extract fine motor signals??
I cannot imagine any future in which this is not terribly abused or otherwise going wrong.<p>People invading other people's minds, Borg-like clusters of minds outsmarting anyone who is not connected with others, forcing others to play along to stay competitive. Maybe entities that even never grew up as unaugmented, unconnected persons because they were already linked in young age - one mind with different bodies.<p>It is absurd to try to protect humankind against a perceived existential threat by AGI by developing a technology that would also destroy humanity if it works as advertised. Add to all that the cases in which it doesn't work properly. Developing inflammation around the implants, transmitter breaking, batteries running out, losing wireless connection, ... if you think dead zones while hiking are infuriating then wait until your cognitive capabilities depend on a network connection.<p>I am afraid that all the good that SpaceX or Tesla have achieved so far will be undone by the damage that NeuraLink's technology will do to humankind one day.
This is honest-to-god magic. Some cyberpunk, neuromancer, hardcore reality-bending shit. The brain is the final frontier, if technology gets a foothold in there things are going to get WILD.<p>Also, as this stuff gets further along, there's going to be large incentives for unethical testing. Rockets can be tested with unmanned flights, but you can't really dry run brain implants.
This particular exercise could've been done with EEG. Where Neuralink excels is in having a much higher possible bitrate.<p>Pong is the absolute POC. Neuralink will most likely be able to achieve higher differentiability and thus be able to complete tasks of higher complexity, so stay tuned for even more impressive tasks. EEG can't get past pong; it's limited by physics itself. The solution <i>is</i> to put the electrodes in the brain, and there is likely no other solution.<p>Looking forward to the future.
The next step for Neuralink is write mode. No, not writing memories, but reprogramming motor function. If you can capture the signals of limb movement synapses for say, a paraplegic, you can read those signals and convert them into write signals in another part of the brain responsible for the actual motor function. Over time, that neuron pathway gets reinforced and could potentially teach a person how to walk again.<p>It’s exciting stuff and I’m sure there are concerns to be addressed down the line wrt altering perception, but let’s not put the cart before the horse. That would be like worrying about impending AI drones in the 70s.
Super cringy banana quip.<p>Also, as this comment suggests, it seems to be more of an advance in wireless data transfer than neuroscience: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26746553" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26746553</a>.<p>I hope I'm wrong, but Muskuito's misleading marketing is never far on the horizon.
I'm convinced that this type of technology + some advancements in kinetic technology will allow for artificial telekinesis in the future. I don't know if it will be in my lifetime, but I would love to control it.<p>It could be billed based on the energy required to translate the objects.
Tangent: Dating myself here, but this demo just triggered a childhood memory of the movie Project X (1987, starring Mathew Broderick).<p><a href="https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T0de66wOE4Y" rel="nofollow">https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T0de66wOE4Y</a>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPbtR4vorgY" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPbtR4vorgY</a><p>Two years ago without a brain implant.
I thought one of the biggest problems with brain-computer interfaces is our bodies creating scarring tissue around electrodes[1]. Have they solved that?<p>[1]: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/huge-problem-with-brain-implants-causing-scarring-2015-6" rel="nofollow">https://www.businessinsider.com/huge-problem-with-brain-impl...</a>
"What better reward for a monkey, than a banana"? what about FREEDOM?<p>I am not a vegan/whatever/animal activist, but maybe we should allow terminally-ill or death-row volunteers for this kind of experiment... With good money for the family, and I think some people would like to help mankind in the end. It is better than dying without accomplishing anything in life.<p>So, you have at most one year with an inoperable tumor, and you will not travel because you want to be close to your family. Would you be a volunteer for this research, for 500 thousand dollars? (monkeys are cheaper, but you are the real deal)
Our brain interface tech is so primitive, but it holds incredible promise if we're able to solve it.<p>Imagine being able to virtualize consciousness, back up memories, live forever...<p>The problem is how invasive it is, and how little reward there is initially. We have to solve the chicken and egg problem, but unfortunately cracking open the skull and sticking electrodes into the brain is not something one typically wants to do if they're conscious about their health.<p>I hope we can gain traction with medical applications and then begin to make steady advances. It'd be neat to have fully virtual, synthetic senses before we die.
>>> Our first goal is to give people with paralysis their digital freedom back<p>PKD's "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale" notwithstanding, "Consumer Neurotech" feels like one of those categories that even the most visionary of sci-fi writers failed to build into all aspects of human existence in the future ;)
So we directly connect to the blood and tissue CPU and enable things not possible before like bringing mind control to paraplegics and avenues for brain ransomware. Imagine the future.
I can't wait to see this technology be immediately used for nefarious purposes by dictatorships and power drunk governments.<p>No need to waterboard prisoners for information anymore when you can just suck data from their brains.<p>In most judicial systems, you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself. With this technology, I really worry that that right will slip away.<p>This feels like the precipice before dystopian hell, to me.
I know I'm conforming to a stereotype by saying this, but I cant stop thinking about how this could be the premise of a Black Mirror Episode.<p>I also think we should restrict such technology. Without restrictions we can play God, and I am in no way approving of doing anyhting similar to that.<p>The part about pairing the monkeys NeuraLink Device "like you do with a speaker" made me laugh. Not becuase it's funny, but because it is so incredibly absurd. I dont know wether to feel good about how far technology has come, or to feel terrified about all the implications.<p>(I can't help myself; Nietzsche once said (or wrote) "God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?")
The most amazing thing in this video is <i>NOT</i> how we can read signals from the monkey brain, but how a monkey brain can learn to generate signals to control the cursor. I think it is remarkable that a brain can learn to have such fine control of its neural activities.
Poor monkey. It should belong to the forest or other natural environment it was took from. I don't get it why there are still tests run on animals. The first what technology should bring is a replacement for every animal test subject.
Absolutely horrifying. A digital interface to the human brain is the most dangerous thing to possibly exist. Thank god I was born early enough that I'll die before this technology becomes widespread. I hope.
This innovation opens up new ways of UX and human machine interaction. Just curious about the long term effects of externally controlling neuron signals.
Has anyone mentioned this footage being shot over green screen and a jungle composited in the background?<p>Gotta love this addition to make it seem like this monkey is living the life.<p>"Bananas and video games in its natural habitat! This monkey is living the dream."
Human/animal ethics is a minefield of hypocrisy. Why are we mostly comfortable with performing these types of experiments on other lower-IQ species but would baulk at doing them on intellectually-handicapped children for instance?<p>I believe our morality base for these types of decisions is mostly based on the religious traditions of humans somehow being 'special' in the scheme of things. Domestic pets also partially fall into this category.