Future Brain Implant Will Allow User to Remotely Control Computer

Are you tired of having to use a mouse, keyboard, touch-screen interface, etc. to operate your personal devices? Well, Intel is well on its way to creating a brain implant that will allow users to operate their computers using only their brainwaves. It isn’t clear when this brain implant will be ready, but Intel claims it will have the implants operational by the year 2020. If this is true, that is, if Intel is able to create a brain implant that can reliably enable humans to remotely operate their computers, the implications are enormous and far-reaching. And we’ve all wanted psychic abilities at one point or another, right?

Dean Pomerleau, a research scientist at Intel, claims that the implant will be able to sense the brain waves generated by the human brain and interpret those brain waves into commands. I presume the chip will also be able to send the signals to a remote receiver built into, or plugged into, a PC.

To achieve this goal, Pomerleau and his colleagues have used FMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) to determine where the blood flows when the subject thinks of certain things. Exactly how this data will be used to measure and interpret brainwaves isn’t specified in the article.

Before the implant is created, however, Pomerleau intends to build the brain-wave sensing technology into a headset that could be used to control a computer. Head-wear that detects brainwaves isn’t anything too new. Necomimi Cat Ears have been around for a few years and they operate by analyzing and interpreting brainwaves. Necomimi Cat Ears reflect the moods of the user by either perking up (focused state), wiggling up and down (“In the zone”), or dropping down (relaxed state). These states of mind correspond with known brainwave patterns: beta, beta, and alpha/theta, respectively.

But the basic sensing capabilities of the Necomimi Cat Ears are a far cry from a brain implant that can precisely identify not only brainwaves but also commands given by those brainwaves AND send those commands to remotely operate a computer.

Pomerleau isn’t worried, though. Pomerleau has confirmed that various research facilities are developing technology to precisely measure brain activity. As for turning brainwaves into commands, two years ago, professor of neurobiology Miguel Nicolelis led a team of scientists in their effort to have a monkey brain control a robot. The project was a success. Additionally, a month before that, another scientist at the University of Arizona made the claim that he had used a moths eyes and brain to guide a robot.

It seems that scientists are making serious inroads into interpreting brain functions into commands, so it isn’t surprising that Pomerleau is confident about his work.

Pomerleau’s ultimate goal is to build a brain implant that can detect and interpret brainwaves AND send commands to a computer. When this is achieved, imagine the social, political, and security repercussions. Just imagine them for now. I’ll talk about the potential repercussions in a future article. Yes, yes, I’m lazy, but this article isn’t about the repercussions. It’s about the technology, itself.

One final thought. When (yes, not if, when) Pomerleau’s implant is created, this will be a huge leap toward another technology that will be exploited to hell and back: a technology that allows for the mass learning of information via uploading it into your brain. If Pomerleau’s implant can send out commands, how long before we have the ability to beam information into someone’s mind? The brain is a very complex thing and, while brains are structurally similar, no two brains are exactly alike (not even the brains of identical twins). However, our understanding of the brain is growing every day, how long before we can directly upload something into someone’s brain? And just what will be uploaded? Just something to think about.

Stand Alone Complexes: Copies Without an Original

I just finished watching the “1st gig”  of Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex and all I’ve got to say is “WOW”. I remember catching a few episodes of the series when I was in my teens. It’s a shame that I didn’t watch it in full, back then. It was just one of those shows that didn’t grab my attention and it was too confusing. I didn’t understand it back then, and I still don’t fully understand it right now. But I understand enough of the plot and themes to form an opinion on it. It’s an excellent series. It’s one of those series that just keeps on giving no matter how many times you watch it. There’s just so much to it.

But this article isn’t about the series (I could write an entire series of articles about the series). This article is about one of the primary themes within the series. A theme (phenomenon) that currently effects society today and will become more prevalent in the future. This phenomenon is the stand alone complex. To get started, let’s define what a “stand alone complex” is.

Officially, a stand alone complex is a series of unrelated, yet similar actions, based on an action that never occurred, performed by unconnected individuals which give the appearance of a concerted effort.

That’s quite a mouthful (and a mindful), so I’ll clarify what I mean by “stand alone complex” by comparing it to another phenomenon: copycat behavior.

Emergent copycat behavior is a phenomenon that involves the occurrence of a specific event and a series of related events that occur after the initial event. For example, news of an arson inspires other people, the copycats, to also commit arson.

So, a stand alone complex IS emergent copycat behavior with one difference: the triggering event in a stand alone complex never actually occurred. It is only believed to have occurred. Copies without an original.

To use the arson example again, a stand alone complex would have occurred if copycats committed arson when the initial, triggering, arson never occurred, but was believed to have occurred.

Why do I believe that stand alone complexes will become more common in the future? Allow me to list and explain my reasons:

• - Ubiquity of Information and information channels
• - Mutability of information
• - People trust their news sources

Ubiquity of Information and Information Channels

Information, more so than ever, has become increasingly accessible, ubiquitous, and (at times) absolutely unavoidable. There is simply no escape. Think of all the information channels that you encounter every day: television, radio, computers, smartphones (and dumb phones), word-of-mouth communication, billboards, books, smart watches/bands, etc. These channels, and the information that flows through these channels, grow every day.

Mutability of Information

Mutability of information goes hand-in-hand with the previous point. Consider how easy it is to change/alter/modify information. Additionally, consider how easy it is to add information to the sea of information. Just about anyone can add information to the total aggregate of information. It’s easy. I’m doing it right now and I don’t even have a degree in a field of study or an ounce of credibility. Stunning huh?

People Trust their News Sources

Yes, people have a natural trust in their news providers. After all, if the people didn’t trust the source, they wouldn’t get their news from it. And if the source were untrustworthy, people wouldn’t listen to it. Can’t beat that logic! Yeah, yeah, the logic isn’t perfect, but it is perfectly reflective of how most people view their news sources. The sea of information is so vast, so complex, that most people don’t have time to sift through it. They want a news provider that can break down the information and serve it to them in a 30 second sound byte. Okay, perhaps the sound bytes cap-out at 10 seconds these days.

But let’s face it, its often difficult and time-consuming to verify every piece of information that floats our way. That’s another reason people listen to their “trusted” news sources. They trust their news sources to be both honest and competent. That’s one hell of a relationship.

This is turning into quite the perfect storm. Let’s see, what do we have here. We have a large populace that is constantly bombarded by mutable information from a multitude of channels. The populace, therefore, places all their trust in their preferred news sources to sort and dispense the information to them. That sounds like a recipe for a stand alone complex if I ever heard one.

What makes this issue all the more troublesome is that the major, and minor, news sources seem to copy one another in their reporting. That is, news sources occasionally report the same false information!

So, considering all of the above, what would happen if a news source got a hold of a piece of information claiming that a hacker group attacked a certain institution when no such event occurred? My guess, as you may guess, is that there would be many copycat attackers who follow suit, a stand alone complex would form out of the blue.

But, you may say, wouldn’t the multitude of other news sources work to counterbalance the false piece of information. Yes, but remember, people trust their preferred news source, so they may not believe a competing news source. Additionally, a counter balance may occur and may prevent emergent copycat behavior (or a stand alone complex), but consider the number of people who watch the news. We’re talking about millions and millions of people. If only 17 people were to form the stand alone complex and become copycats, it would only add weight to the belief that the initial incident did occur.

This all seems really dire, now, doesn’t it? How do we prevent dangerous, as opposed to benign, stand alone complexes? I guess they can be prevented by circulating the truth. If a hacking attack never occurred, while news sources claim that it did, circulate that truth as widely as you possibly can. And remember, only you can prevent forest fi- dangerous stand alone complexes.

Dead Drops: The Future is Offline?

With all the fear and uncertainty created by the NSA’s pushes into the privacy of every day life, it is understandable that someone would think of a way to share information in an offline manner. Well, that may not be the intended purpose of the Dead Drop Project, but I like to believe that the project fulfills that role. For those of you who don’t know what a Dead Drop is, a Dead Drop is a storage device, typically a USB drive, that is embedded in a wall and acts as a site where anyone can drop off files or upload the files stored on the drive.

The purpose of the Dead Drop Project is kind of obscure. The author of the project, Aram Bartholl, only hints at it in his manifesto.

Dead Drops is an anonymous, offline, peer to peer file-sharing network in public space. Anyone can access a Dead Drop and everyone may install a Dead Drop in their neighborhood/city. A Dead Drop must be public accessible. A Dead Drop inside closed buildings or private places with limited or temporary access is not a Dead Drop. A real Dead Drop mounts as  read and writeable mass storage drive without any custom software. Dead Drops don’t need to be synced or connected to each other. Each Dead Drop is singular in its existence. A very beautiful Dead Drop shows only the metal sheath enclosed type-A USB plug and is cemented into walls.You would hardly notice it. Dead Drops don’t need any cables or wireless technology. Your knees on the ground or a dirty jacket on the wall is what it takes share files offline. A Dead Drop is a naked piece of passively powered Universal Serial Bus technology embedded into the city, the only true public space. In an era of growing clouds and fancy new devices without access to local files we need to rethink the freedom and distribution of data. The Dead Drops movement is on its way for change!

Catch all that? He uses a lot of words to explain what a Dead Drop is and only suggests the project’s purpose at the very end.

In an era of growing clouds and fancy new devices without access to local files we need to rethink the freedom and distribution of data. The Dead Drops movement is on its way for change!

This can be taken in a few different ways. I wish the author had been more specific as to the purpose of the project, but where’s the fun in that? Now we get to have fun interpreting what the project’s purpose is. And, truly, there is a difference between the project’s purpose and the actual consequences stemming from the project. This only adds to the excitement.

So, let me give my interpretation of the above quote. It seems that Aram Bartholl wants to create a storage space apart from clouds where people can freely access and share localized files. Sounds simple enough. But what about the Dead Drop itself?

A Dead Drop is invulnerable to hacking attempts via wireless signal. Unfortunately, it is vulnerable to ill-tempered people with hammers. Don’t think plugging a Dead Drop drive into your device is perfectly safe. Unscrupulous people are sure to have thought of all kinds of nasty ways to ruin your device or steal your information, so plug in at your own risk.

Still, I like the idea, or my interpreted idea, behind the project. Additionally, remember what I said about the actual consequences as opposed to the intended consequences of the project? Here is just one consequence, intended or otherwise, stemming from the implementation of Dead Drops.

Today, and increasingly so, the harboring and spread of certain ideas has severe social and financial repercussions. People are fired from their jobs, harassed, and even socially ostracized for possessing unpopular ideas. Therefore, a high premium is paid for anonymity. People want to be free to express themselves and share their ideas. Dead drops are a perfect way to do so and, unlike online dropboxes and pastebins, dead drops are far more anonymous. This isn’t to say that pastebins don’t offer a fair level of anonymity; I’m just saying that dead drops have the potential to be far more anonymous.

That’s what I believe this project is all about: the free spread and possession of ideas and information in an anonymous fashion.

So, is the future offline? Well, not entirely, but I’m glad the option is out there. Free thought is dangerous to the powers that be. We need a safe and secure way to spread our information and ideas. I believe that the Dead Drop Project is just the beginning, or simply a continuance, of a collective endeavor to create as many information channels as possible.

Cyberpunk Now?

Is it really that hard to imagine that modern cities are facing the prospect of becoming cyberpunk metropolises? For the readers who don’t know what I mean by “cyberpunk”, Lawrence Person defines “cyberpunk” by describing the genre of cyberpunk fiction. Person said, “Classic cyberpunk characters were marginalized, alienated loners who lived on the edge of society in generally dystopic futures where daily life was impacted by rapid technological change, an ubiquitous datasphere of computerized information, and invasive modification of the human body.”
So, do modern day cities meet the description of a cyberpunk city? Let’s take a look at a modern city like New York.

Are there marginalized, alienated loners living on the fringe of New York society?

Check, a definite check.

Can New York be described as dystopic?

Check

Is New York subject to rapid technological change?

Check

Does New York possess a large, ubiquitous datasphere of computerized information?

Check

Does invasive modification of the human occur in New York?

Not quite

Four out of five isn’t bad. To be clear, body modification does occur in New York, but it tends to be in the area of artistic expression rather than in biological enhancement.

Okay, so New York doesn’t quite fit the bill. But, keep in mind that New York isn’t the most modern of the modern cities. What about Tokyo or other modern Japanese cities. As William Gibson, the disputed father of cyberpunk said, “Modern Japan simply was Cyberpunk”. It isn’t clear when he said this, but I imagine it was a few years ago. So, it is fairly safe to say that Modern Japan has progressed into an even more cyberpunk metropolis.

But what about that invasive body modification criterion? Modern Japan still doesn’t quite meet that criterion (unless we’re talking about artistic expression). Not to worry, though. Prosthetic arms and legs have been around for quite a long time. And recent improvements in prosthetic limbs have lifted them to the level of cyberpunk fiction. My guess is that, as the science advances and prosthetic limbs begin to offer physical enhancements, the widespread use of these limbs will begin. Perhaps, one day, people will sever their limbs in order to be fitted with a prosthetic implement. That’s probably a bit extreme. The likelier case is that people will use exoskeletons to boost their physical capacities. Prosthetic limbs aren’t the only technology to recently undergo rapid progress. Visual prosthesis, or bionic eyes, have made leaps and bounds in development and implementation.

All of this prosthesis technology doesn’t quite equate to physical augmentation. However, the fact that this technology has been developed is a major stepping stone to physical augmentation. Simply said, improvement in mechanical prosthetics will lead to the improvement in mechanical augmentation which, in turn, will lead to the widespread use of mechanical augmentation. Provided the technology is affordable.

New York, and all other modern cities, may still have their cyberpunk day.