7 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
7 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Amazing, But Scary. Who Will Control This Technology?

by thunderbird
5 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
    • |

Doctor Michio Kaku (theoretical physicist):
"in Los Angeles scientists trained rats to perform a certain task they tape-recorded the impulses in the hippocampus of the mind, their brains, and then replayed these thoughts and back into their brains, and sure enough they recall but past that they had learned
this is amazing this is the first time in world history that scientists have been able to record
apart I memory of something play it back and the mouse relearn the task in the
future we will have the ability to have a motion picture of your thoughts and in fact motion picture of your dreams. "

"At the University of California at Berkeley I went to the laboratory there where they have an MRI machine that takes all your thoughts breaks up into thirty thousand dots then there's a computer program that interprets the 30,000 dots and creates and image what you're looking at the images rather crude but the very fact that we can do it is incredible...."

Sorry for flaws in the transcription of Dr. Michio Kato's words. Software transcribed it.
  • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
    I like listening to Kaku. I think I mentioned it in another thread that I'm planning to read his new book when it comes out.

    I wonder if they tried playing back the recorded thoughts to mice that hadn't learned the tasks. If those mice would have did whatever the task was because a recorded thought was played in their brain, now that would have really been interested . . . and dangerous technology in the wrong hands.
    Signature

    Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8826859].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

      I like listening to Kaku. I think I mentioned it in another thread that I'm planning to read his new book when it comes out.

      I wonder if they tried playing back the recorded thoughts to mice that hadn't learned the tasks. If those mice would have did whatever the task was because a recorded thought was played in their brain, now that would have really been interested . . . and dangerous technology in the wrong hands.
      I wonder if they could even play the information back to OTHER mice that had learned the task.

      Frankly, I wonder about the veracity of ALL of it.

      steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8827749].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
      Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

      I like listening to Kaku. I think I mentioned it in another thread that I'm planning to read his new book when it comes out.

      I wonder if they tried playing back the recorded thoughts to mice that hadn't learned the tasks. If those mice would have did whatever the task was because a recorded thought was played in their brain, now that would have really been interested . . . and dangerous technology in the wrong hands.
      Yes, transferring an image may be far easier than learning by this method. I saw an image using the same technology..recreating an image of what someone was thinking about. It was very crude, basically a few shadows. But it showed promise.

      What we consider "Thought" is far far more complex than what a mouse thinks. And an image is static, thoughts are dynamic. It may be a huge step to transfer actual complex thoughts.

      And there is the problem of what thought is conscious, and the other millions of thoughts that are going on in our brain at the same time on an unconscious level. Each thought is a result of millions of connections, or proto-thoughts, that lead to that conscious thought. Separating all this may be a problem.

      Holding an image bypasses much of this. It's why Savants can sometimes draw an extremely complex image, like a city-scape, from a moment's look. But they have little understanding of what any of it means.

      So they can sort of reproduce a blurry image. A huge accomplishment, but mind control is way way off in the future, if ever.

      Although additional memory on a chip, placed in the brain, may be right around the corner.

      Oh, and Kaku is one of the few people that can say Quantum Physics...and have any idea what it means. I'll get his book.
      Signature
      One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

      What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8827800].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
        Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

        <snip>
        Holding an image bypasses much of this. It's why Savants can sometimes draw an extremely complex image, like a city-scape, from a moment's look. But they have little understanding of what any of it means.<snip>
        <snip>
        Maybe some savants don't understand what it means though they can memorize it from a single view. However, there are savants such as Jacob Barnett who not only can visually memorize elaborate city-scapes and even complex mathematical concepts, but understand and explore what it means from multiple perspectives.
        Signature

        Project HERE.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8828457].message }}

Trending Topics