 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Origin >
Living Forever >
We Are Becoming Cyborgs
Permanent link to this article: http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=/articles/art0449.html
Printable Version |
|
| |
|
We Are Becoming Cyborgs
The union of human and machine is well on its way. Almost every part of the body can already be enhanced or replaced, even some of our brain functions. Subminiature drug delivery systems can now precisely target tumors or individual cells. Within two to three decades, our brains will have been "reverse-engineered": nanobots will give us full-immersion virtual reality and direct brain connection with the Internet. Soon after, we will vastly expand our intellect as we merge our biological brains with non-biological intelligence.
Published March 15, 2002
We are growing more intimate with our technology. Computers started
out as large remote machines in air-conditioned rooms tended by
white coated technicians. Subsequently they moved onto our desks,
then under our arms, and now in our pockets. Soon, we'll routinely
put them inside our bodies and brains. Ultimately we will become
more nonbiological than biological.
We already have devices to replace our hips, knees, shoulders,
elbows, wrists, jaws, teeth, skin, arteries, veins, heart valves,
arms, legs, feet, fingers, and toes. Systems to replace more complex
organs (e.g., our hearts) are starting to work.
The age of neural implants is well under way. We have brain implants
based on "neuromorphic" modeling (i.e., reverse engineering
of the human brain and nervous system) for a rapidly growing list
of brain regions. A friend of mine who became deaf while an adult
can now engage in telephone conversations again because of his cochlear
implant, a device which interfaces directly with his auditory cortex.
He plans to replace it with a new model with a thousand levels of
frequency discrimination, which will enable him to hear music once
again. He has had the same melodies playing in his head for the
past fifteen years, he laments, and is looking forward to hearing
some new tunes. A future generation of cochlear implants now on
the drawing board will provide levels of frequency discrimination
that go significantly beyond that of "normal" hearing.
Researchers at MIT and Harvard are developing neural implants to
replace damaged retinas. There are brain implants for Parkinson's
patients that communicate directly with the ventral posterior nucleus
and subthalmic nucleus regions of the brain to reverse the most
devastating symptoms of this disease. An implant for people with
cerebral palsy and multiple sclerosis communicates with the ventral
lateral thalamus and has been effective in controlling tremors.
"Rather than treat the brain like soup, adding chemicals that
enhance or suppress certain neurotransmitters," says Rick Trosch,
an American physician helping to pioneer these therapies, "we're
now treating it like circuitry."
A variety of techniques are being developed to provide the communications
bridge between the wet analog world of biological information processing
and digital electronics. Researchers at Germany's Max Planck Institute
have developed noninvasive devices that can communicate with neurons
in both directions. They demonstrated their "neuron transistor"
by controlling the movements of a living leech from a personal computer.
Similar technology has been used to reconnect leech neurons and
to coax them to perform simple logical and arithmetic problems.
Scientists are now experimenting with a new design called "quantum
dots," which uses tiny crystals of semiconductor material to
connect electronic devices with neurons.
These developments provide the promise of reconnecting broken neural
pathways for people with nerve damage and spinal cord injuries.
It has long been thought that recreating these pathways would only
be feasible for recently injured patients because nerves gradually
deteriorate when unused. A recent discovery, however, shows the
feasibility of a neuroprosthetic system for patients with long-standing
spinal cord injuries. Researchers at the University of Utah asked
a group of long-term quadriplegic patients to move their limbs in
a variety of ways and then observed the response of their brains
using magnetic resonance imaging. Although the neural pathways to
their limbs had been inactive for many years, the pattern of their
brain activity when attempting to move their limbs was very close
to that observed in non-disabled persons. We will, therefore, be
able to place sensors in the brain of a paralyzed person (e.g.,
Christopher Reeve), which will be programmed to recognize the brain
patterns associated with intended movements, and then stimulate
the appropriate sequence of muscle movements. For those patients
whose muscles no longer function, there are already designs for
"nanoelectromechanical" systems (NEMS) that can expand
and contract to replace damaged muscles and that can be activated
by either real or artificial nerves.
Intelligent machines are already making their way into our blood
stream. There are dozens of projects underway to create blood stream-based
"biological microelectromechanical systems" (bioMEMS)
to intelligently scout out pathogens and deliver medications in
very precise ways. For example, a researcher at the University of
Illinois at Chicago has created a tiny capsule with pores measuring
only 7 nanometers. The pores let insulin out in a controlled manner
but prevent antibodies from invading the capsule. These capsules
have cured rats with type I Diabetes. Similar systems could precisely
deliver dopamine to the brain for Parkinson's patients, provide
blood-clotting factors for patients with hemophilia, and deliver
cancer drugs directly to tumor sites. A new design provides up to
20 substance-containing reservoirs that can release their cargo
at programmed times and locations in the body.
Kensall Wise, an electrical engineer at the University of Michigan
has developed a tiny neural probe that can provide precise monitoring
of the electrical activity of patients with neural diseases. Future
designs are expected to also deliver drugs to precise locations
in the brain. Kazushi Ishiyama at Tohoku University in Japan has
developed micromachines that use microscopic sized spinning screws
to deliver drugs to small cancer tumors. A particularly innovative
micromachine developed by Sandia National Labs has actual microteeth
with a jaw that opens and closes to trap individual cells and then
implant them with substances such as DNA, proteins or drugs. There
are already at least four major scientific conferences on bioMEMS
and other approaches to developing micro and nano scale machines
to go into the body and blood stream.
One of the leading proponents of "nanomedicine," and
author of a book with the same name is Robert Freitas, Research
Scientist at nanotechnology firm Zyvex Corp. Freitas' ambitious
manuscript is a comprehensive road map to rearchitecting our biological
heritage. One of Freitas' designs is to replace (or augment) our
red blood cells with artificial "respirocytes," that would
enable us to hold our breath for four hours, or to do a top-speed
sprint for 15 minutes without taking a breath (another formidable
challenge for athletic contest drug tests). He envisions micron-size
artificial platelets which could achieve hemostatis (bleeding control)
up to 1,000 times faster than biological platelets. Freitas describes
nanorobotic microbivores that will download software to destroy
specific infections hundreds of times faster than antibiotics, and
that will be effective against all bacterial, viral and fungal infections
with no limitations of drug resistance.
The coming merger of human and machine. The compelling benefits
in overcoming profound diseases and disabilities will keep these
technologies on a rapid course, but medical applications represent
only the early adoption phase. As the technologies become established,
there will be no barriers to using them for the expansion of human
potential. Moreover, all of the underlying technologies are accelerating.
The power of computation has grown at a double exponential rate
for all of the past century, and will continue to do so well into
this century through the power of three-dimensional computing. Communication
bandwidths and the pace of brain reverse engineering are also quickening.
Meanwhile, according to my models, the size of technology is shrinking
at a rate of 5.6 per linear dimension per decade, which will make
nanotechnology ubiquitous during the 2020s.
By the end of this decade, computing will disappear as a discrete
technology that we need to carry with us. We'll routinely have high-resolution
images encompassing the entire visual field written directly to
our retinas from our eyeglasses and contact lenses (DoD is already
using technology along these lines from Microvision, a company based
in Bothell, Washington). We'll have very high-speed wireless connection
to the Internet at all times. The electronics for all of this will
be embedded in our clothing. These very personal computers circa
2010 will enable us to meet with each other in full immersion, visual-auditory,
virtual reality environments as well as augment our vision with
location and time specific information at all times.
By 2030, electronics will utilize molecule-sized circuits, the
reverse engineering of the human brain will have been completed,
and bioMEMS will have evolved into bioNEMS (biological nanoelectromechanical
systems). It will be routine to have billions of nanobots (i.e.,
nano-scale robots) coursing through the capillaries of our brains,
communicating with each other (over a wireless local area network),
as well as with our biological neurons and with the Internet. One
application will be to provide full immersion virtual reality that
encompasses all of our senses. When we want to enter a virtual reality
environment, the nanobots replace the signals from our real senses
with the signals that our brain would receive if we were actually
in the virtual environment.
We will have a panoply of virtual environments to choose from,
including Earthly worlds that we are familiar with, as well as those
with no Earthly counterpart. We will be able to go to these virtual
places, and have any kind of interaction with other real (as well
as simulated) people, ranging from business negotiations to sensual
encounters. In virtual reality, we won't be restricted to a single
personality as we will be able to change our appearance and become
other people.
"Experience beamers" will beam their entire flow of sensory
experiences as well as the neurological correlates of their emotional
reactions out on the web just as people today beam their bedroom
images from their web cams. A popular pastime will be to plug in
to someone else's sensory-emotional beam and experience what it's
like to be someone else, à la the plot concept of the movie
"Being John Malkovich." There will also be a vast selection
of archived experiences to choose from. The design of virtual environments,
and the creation of archived full-immersion experiences will become
new art forms.
The most important application of circa 2030 nanobots will be to
literally expand our minds. We're limited today to a mere hundred
trillion interneuronal connections, which we will be able to augment
by adding virtual connections via nanobot communication. This will
provide us with the opportunity to vastly expand our pattern recognition
abilities, memories, and overall thinking capacity as well as to
directly interface with powerful forms of nonbiological intelligence.
It's important to note that once nonbiological intelligence gets
a foothold in our brains (a threshold we've already passed), it
will grow exponentially, as is the accelerating nature of information-based
technologies. Note that a one inch cube of nanotube circuitry (which
is already working at small scales in laboratories) will be at least
a million times more powerful than the human brain. By 2040, the
nonbiological portion of our intelligence will be far more powerful
than the biological portion. It will, however, still be part of
the human-machine civilization, having been derived from human intelligence,
i.e., created by humans (or machines created by humans) and based
at least in part on the reverse engineering of the human nervous
system.
Stephen Hawking recently commented in the German magazine Focus
that computer intelligence will surpass that of humans within a
few decades. He advocated that we "develop as quickly as possible
technologies that make possible a direct connection between brain
and computer, so that artificial brains contribute to human intelligence
rather than opposing it." Hawking can take comfort that the
development program he is recommending is well under way.
| | Join the discussion about this article on Mind·X! | |
|
| |
Mind·X Discussion About This Article:
 |
|
|
 |
Re: We Are Becoming Cyborgs
|
|
 |
|
The diffience between Man and Machine is The Soul.
Man has a Soul that will Live Forever.
The Point is - where will this Soul Live?
The Soul of Man, which is the true being, can spend eternity in a place known as Heaven or a place known as Hell.
The key to going to Heaven when we leave this life is knowing Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ is The Door to Heaven.
Jesus said,:I am The Way, The Truth, and The Life, no man can come to The Father, GOD but by Me.
I've always considered concepts of heaven and hell and such statements as "you must become as a child" and "It is harder for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven" as metaphors to help you live better happier lives, not deaths.
By promising better treatment after death and the pleasure/ displeasure of an invisible god, religions are able to make promises that there is absolutely no way of making good on.
You can't see, hear or touch God so you only have imagination (and the priesthood) to tell you if 'He's' happy, and I've never yet managed to have a conversation with a dead person to confirm the whole heaven/hell deal either.
The whole thing when taken like that is a confidence scam, with no pay out.. which is a damn shame because if you sift the pearls from the pigshit there is some really usefull stuff in religion.
in short Get well soon hun |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Re: We Are Becoming Cyborgs
|
|
|
|
I feel as though I must comment on this entry, though I am aware that my post is coming long after imara's initial response.
For anyone who may lay their eyes upon this, I would like to state, that when it comes to talking about truth and philosophy and speaking objectively, it is important to understand that belief is nothing more than a subjective understanding. It is a fact that one can believe in something that in reality can be far from what is "real," thus leading me to tie this in to imara's post.
Religion is a well organized system of belief, it is not know or proven to be truth. To bring religion into a topic such as this might very well be exposing a limited train of thought. To solicit beliefs in "Jesus" and the "Bible" you are no longer participating in this discussion in hopes to build on a theory, but more so trying to impose your beliefs on others.
Most intellectuals know that in order to objectively address an issue, you must look at the phenomena from all sides, this includes not basing an argument on an assumption that is "The Bible," or any other unproven belief for that matter. We are all aware that no matter how many people believe it, or how much a person might feel it, the fact is that it might just be a large misunderstanding, and that is something that we must all accept if we are to live humbly amongst one another.
If you would like to put in a word to an objective thread, please state your argument in a form of logic, something that can be explained, observed, and tested. If your argument does not hold any solid variables that are of use to the human mind in establishing an understanding over the matter, please do reconsider participating in these types of discussion... for you might end up frustrating those who would like to build on a philosophy or idea, especially those who are sensitive over the topic of religion.
May your arguments be as organized and objective as feasibly possible, good day. - GIL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: We Are Becoming Cyborgs
|
|
|
|
STORY FROM SEATTLE'S "TABLET" NEWSPAPER
JANUARY 2003
POLITICS
Illustration by Anton Bogaty
DR TOMORROW's PRESCRIPTION FOR THE FUTURE
by De Kwok
For Dr. Tomorrow, the future is now. The Vancouver, B.C. resident has been tracking, informing and thinking about the future for a majority of his time on earth. Born Frank Ogden, he has written numerous books, such as This Is The Last Book You Will Ever Read and Navigating in Cyberspace, pontificating on how human beings will live in the near future. But Dr. Tomorrow believes life is best lived and has dedicated himself to traveling, meeting and talking to people around the world. Dr. Tomorrow never stopped living for the future.
In his online digital diary, Dr. Tomorrow presents Ogden's Laws, a series of points on how to exist for maximum life satisfaction ' from the clever ("In times of panic, chaos or rapid change, the bizarre rapidly become acceptable") to the controversial ("The American Constitution is wrong"). Dr. Tomorrow's laws were written 15 years ago and still remain his tenets today. His intelligent assessment of what the future might bring gives us a present day blueprint of how to live our lives.
Not deterred by age ' he is in his seventies ' Dr. Tomorrow embraces the advantages of what medicine, computers, and technology will bring. Although I do not always agree with his assertion, he is one of the most interesting visionaries I've met. One thing is for sure: Dr. Tomorrow will always keep his cyborg eyes clearly aimed at the future.
Tablet: What would you say Dr Tomorrow's agenda is?
Dr Tomorrow: Rather than tell you, let me point out a few examples. Everybody in the world it seems has an agenda. At an early age, from where I know not, I decided I would not follow any conventional path. So far it's working. I have no formal educational qualifications whatsoever. Today, this is my biggest asset. I have always found a way around traditional roadblocks, laws and regulations. Not by avoiding them but by going around, under, through or dissolving them. Example: I read a magazine article about this West Coast hospital doing some early work with psychedelics. It intrigued me.
I went to the hospital, asked to see the Medical Director, and told him I liked what I had read about what they are doing with these new, radical and unusual chemicals and, I wanted to work with him. He asked, "Are you an M.D.? Psychiatrist? Male Nurse? Orderly?" I told him, "None of the above." He pointed out this was a hospital and they did need help in what they were doing, but only medically-skilled people could understand what was happening in this new field. I suggested I would work for him for three months for free and then we both could see if he could afford me. I also pointed out that any new field is like a jungle to most white men. There are no signs, no trails, and no manual. They needed an explorer. I could see the "work free" bit hit one of his hot buttons and my arrogance in pointing out the new field theory caused him to think.
He was J. Ross MacLean and he owned this, the largest psychiatric hospital in western Canada. He had been around, had lots of routine medical experience and in the year prior to my arrival was following orthodox medical principles. They weren't working. I was "in." Not only in right then, but in three weeks I was on the payroll. A monthly contract [and payscale] was agreed upon. And, fire me, if he wished at the end of each, every and any month. I got permission to use the hospital medical library and read through most of it in the two weeks.
Instead of hurdles and problems I see everything and anything as an opportunity. I stayed with the hospital for seven years. I left because a prominent broadcaster that owned 100 percent of 14 radio and television stations heard about me, came to the West Coast to see me and asked what I knew about radio. I told him, "they have two knobs and one vertical stick. One knob turns the radio on and makes noises as you rotate the knob. The other knob moves the stick and the noise changes." "Is that all you know?" That's all I have to know, I'm just listening.
"I want to make you president of my flagship stations in Montreal." The stations went from the bottom to the top of the ratings in the city in the first year.
Tablet: Can you briefly tell us about Ogden's Laws?
DT: [Ogden's Laws] are 40 of my personal axioms pointing out something usually known that is presented in different or unusual ways. I consider them triggers for thinking.
Tablet: Can technology be harmful to human beings?
DT: Yes. An axe is technology. If used to cut firewood and keep one warm that is usually beneficial. If used to chop someone up that might be considered harmful to humans. The same applies to all technology. An airplane is usually considered beneficial if it carries you from A to B. If it crashes (and you live) you may have a different viewpoint.
Tablet: What everyday items do you see becoming obsolete?
DT: All. Twenty years ago I said that 90 percent of the technologies one utilized that day would be obsolete in 20 years. Today, things move faster.
Tablet: Human beings haven't always been so enamored with technology and advancement. Do you think that we are becoming more trusting of technology?
DT: No. It's more seductive. Example: Thirteen years ago I was going blind. My right eye was 20/300. Left eye 20/200. That's white cane country anyway you look at it. I found an opthamologist that was doing some exploratory work in that field and talked my way into being his guinea pig. He did my right eye first and a year later my still deteriorating left eye (years interval minimized potential infection to the optic nerve).
What he "did" was to remove my natural lens which is in a tiny purse-like object next to the retina and then surgically-insert an intra ocular lens (looks like a pin-head of plastic). The day after the first eye was done my vision was 20/30. Over a couple of years both eyes improved from 20/30 to 20/15.
In fact, in 1992, I got back my airplane, helicopter, glider and balloon licenses. You can say I am biased over technology. I am now trying to talk them into doing a retrofit on my left eye. There is ample room in the "purse" to hold two pin-heads. Each lens has two "spider-like legs" that initially hold the lens in place. I want them to tie the "leg" from the second "lens" to the muscle in the corner of my left eye. Then when I wink the second lens will rotate providing a "zoom shot." Wouldn't that be great for the beach?
Tablet: Are you pessimistic or optimistic about the future?
DT: I am very positive about the future. I believe continually facing new challenges is what prods evolution. With lots of prodding [there is] no telling where we'll go. I am currently involved in the Human Consciousness Project. Just as an electroencephlagram can be put on your head enabling the doctor to "read" your brain, Roger Nelson of Princeton University came up with the idea to do something similar and read the planet's brain with an EGG or ElectronicGaiaGram.
Tablet: What do you think is the future of race relations?
DT: The world today is a vortex, a sort of MixMaster. When it stops spinning the world will be light-chocolate.
Tablet: Is age a factor in how people access technology?
DT: Not in accessing the technology; but in their attitude to it. Obviously if you grow up with snakes (like me, I used to sleep with them) you grew up understanding them and feel comfortable with them. Ditto airplanes. After six wartime years living with airplanes, you think everybody's done that. I think computers (and Apple iBooks at that) should be mandatory in all homes for seniors.
Tablet: What is your favorite technological advancement and why?
DT: Well personally, my cyborg eyes. Outside of that: the Internet. Nothing, nothing has affected so many, so quickly, in such depth over a wide area at such relative minimal cost. It is more important today to be computer-literate than it was to be able to read and write in the industrial age.
Tablet: What do you think of genetically-altered foods and should we be afraid of them?
DT: I think they are great. Most people have been using spices in the last four years. They've all been radiated since then with no troubles except lasting longer. I'll eat any radiated meal you will pay for. Radiation will prolong fruit, retarding microbial action for extended periods. Gives longer shelf life so mangos can come from Sri Lanka or Haiti.
Tablet: Do you think that, with the advancement of monitoring devices, we are losing our privacy?
DT: You haven't had any for years. Did you miss the Rodney King clips? There is no privacy. Period. There is no security. Period. Learn to live with it. Sleep with it. If you become "anchored" to anything, that restricts movement.
Tablet: In the future, do you think people will live longer or forever? If so, will this be a good or a bad thing?
DT: I just had my 82nd birthday. I still lecture (7 countries and 17 cities this year) and fly all the time. Anybody can do it once they accept [that] they can do more than they ever imagined. There are no restrictions today. None. I can see living to 120 (after all there are now 72 body parts you can get off the shelf). More cyborgian parts are coming out every day: hip replacements, knee replacements, heart valves. Once the demand appears, the solution will soon follow. Something like the Viagra story.
For more on Dr. Tomorrow and his writing, go to drtomorrow.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can Cyborgs beat the laws of evolution?
|
|
|
|
Can Cyborgs beat the laws of evolution?
I will attempt to draw a relationship between the possible evolution of cyborgs and the bigger picture rules of nature and evolution
Cancer is the uncontrolled growth of cells without a master control. This uncontrolled growth is the opposite of life, which has evolved great order to enable it to function. When a systems justs starts to go without control it often signals the end of life for that organism.
There are 2 areas that I see with similar dynamics today: 1) The earth in general, with various governments, corporations, idealogies & of course technologies moving very fast. 2) Our "cyborg" relationship with technology & computers.
It is important to look at nature, because although we are playing god and recreating ourselves, the basic BIG rules of the game may not have changed. There may need to be some form of control, or global nervous and immune system in place to control the whole gaia organism, or pockets of rapid growth (technoterrorists).
Our current system of control, a semi-transparent democracy using free market economies & freedom of trade should be looked at to see if they comply with natural evolved systems or are they completely un-natural. There also needs to be 100% compliance, imagine if your foot deceided it did not want to be controlled by you. Right now, if earth were a organism, it would be moving in many different directions at once, and defacating in its own bed.
As I think the Nano people are finding, there are a lot of good nano ideas in nature to emulate with MEMS (ATP motors, ion pumps etc.), there are probably good ideas to emulate from natural systems as well.
So yes, i agree that we must start engineering or choosing how our interaction should be with the machines now. Let biological evolutionists take a crack at it rather than business people, politicians & engineers.
Erik Sayle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your individuality is breaking my Spirit.
|
|
|
|
Someone mentioned earlier that when machines combine with humans there would be a loss of individuality.
'A popular pastime will be to plug in to someone else's sensory-emotional beam and experience that it's like to be someone else'
One has to wonder, is this necessarily a bad thing? The ability to "walk a mile in another's shoes" would enable us to finally feel true empathy for our fellow human beings. Pride, crime, poverty, war and endless other negative words would be a thing of the past. Ultimately, human beings would know the true meaning of the word morality instead of pretending to give a damn.
I am all for it! Individuality is a curse, not a blessing. If we can break down the walls of individualism and share thoughts, feelings etc., our technology, standard of living and other things will improve exponentially. I, personally, crave knowledge and would like to see this technology in effect before I die.
Here's to the greater mind.
P.S. There is a movie called 'Waking Life.' WATCH IT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Your individuality is breaking my Spirit.
|
|
|
|
poped,
Nice, but we are mixing a few metaphors here.
Perhaps our sense of being individuals is merely that, a "sensation". If we break down the walls, however, we will not learn what it is like to "be in the other person's shoes", because there would be no _other_ persons.
If you could "plug in to someone else's sensory-emotional beam", so to completely "feel" what it feels like to "be them", you would ... BE THEM. You could NOT be retaining some part of you that "knows you are you, experiencing them", because that is not what they are experiencing.
And when you "became them", and they just happened to be a hermit-type that hates "plugging in to someone else", you would never again plug into someone else, right?
Toy with the idea of a super-AI "sys-op", and instruct it: "Let me experience this other person for 1 minute, then snap me back to "me" again."
So, you are this other person for a minute. After you "snap back", what will you remember? Either you will remember nothing (in which case, there is really no point) or you will (via the sys-op) be installed with some kind of amalgamated "you plus them" memory, that you can access while still knowing "you are really you". But that is NOT the true memory/person you experienced, it is instead some hybridized thing that may bear no particular insight into that "other person" or yourself.
(I'll watch for "Waking Life". Thanks!)
Cheers! ____tony b____ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
