(untitled)

Will cyberbacon be delicious? https://techcrunch.com/2020/08/28/elon-musk-demonstrates-neuralinks-tech-live-using-pigs-with-surgically-implanted-brain-monitoring-devices/

>>19170 no idea

What does Lain think about Neuralink? It seems like mass human/machine biological integration has finally arrived. Given the opportunity, would you choose to have such a device implanted in your brain? I personally would wait for a few versions of the device, and for some more powerful applications to arise from it, until considering having one. And, more importantly, for its security to be proven. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVvmgjBL74w

Oh crap, it seems that the old neuralink thread died off. It's really tempting but I'd probably pass, I avoid close source software at all costs so the idea of having something which is cyberhumped one way or another in my head doesn't seem appealing. Also the fact that it's connected to the internet is like icing on a cake. Now if a FLOSS alternative were to show up I'd most likely give it a go.

>>19142 That is also how I feel, but we've seen nothing so far. Once they create some kind of API, the sky is the limit. Imagine controlling your entire house with your fuarrrking THOUGHTS. Also, imagine being hacked and having someone take control of the chip and frying your brain.

I'm more interested in using EEG to control over my brains functionality. Neurolink is great to help those who are lacking in brain functions, but I take issue with those who use it to enhance that which is also functioning properly. However, I thought it was funny that Elon described using Neurolink to help someone who is a quadriplegic, which is exactly what happens in the movie Upgrade. If Neurolink starts talking to you, that's it. Elon created STEM!

I am cautiously suspicious for two reasons. 1. If neuralink is based on sound science (which it seems to be but I wouldn't know, I don't know anything about medicine and very little about electronics) and a usable product is made, then this company will be at the forefront of this area of technology and will likely closely guard it's knowledge, which is scary for reasons I don't think I have to explain. 2. It might be snake oil. Musk has previously started companies/enterprises promising great things (hyperloop, boring company, to a certain extent spacex) that in the end either don't deliver at all or deliver underwhelming results (compared to what was initially claimed but not necessarily unimpressive). He's a genius startupper and businessman. Great at securing large initial investments for well presented and advertised enterprises.

>>19141 >And, more importantly, for its security to be proven. How would you prove that? I would be more afraid, that it will have the same fate as the oculus rift. It was a great product at first, then facebook bought the company and now they announced that you will not be able to use it without a facebook account in the future. Also: it is no secret that facebook wants to read peoples brains. They already bought a company who does almost the same thing as neuralink. https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/23/20881032/facebook-ctrl-labs-acquisition-neural-interface-armband-ar-vr-deal https://www.ctrl-labs.com/ In the end there will be an army of facebook zombies with personal advertising directly into their brains and I don't want to be a part of that.

>botnet bacon

>>19156 Both SpaceX and Tesla have delivered, methinks. Not on the same level he promised, but that's what he does, overpromising to generate hype. Even if the chip itself ends up being underwhelming at first, the potential is there, and there is also the surgeon robot. >>19157 One can hope there's some kind of hardware based killswitch on in. Or maybe, maybe, maybe, people manage to hack it and allow the installation of custom firmware. I'm not even going to try and argue that people wouldn't allow ads to be directly injected in their breains, that's exactly what's going to happen.

>>19158 >Both SpaceX and Tesla have delivered, methinks. sure, but Tesla is way behind schedule and the cars are too over-engineered to be produced quickly for cheap. The moderate business/technological success of Musk does not match his cult of personality. >I'm not even going to try and argue that people wouldn't allow ads to be directly injected in their breains, that's exactly what's going to happen. They already practically do. The other day I passed a guy jogging down the road, he was listening to music or something on a device, but while I was passing him his device was instead blasting an ad into his ears. This guy was jogging around on a beautiful day listening to an ad, and even worse, he made me listen to it too. It was so annoying.

>>19158 >Or maybe, maybe, maybe, people manage to hack it and allow the installation of custom firmware. I have worked as an embedded software developer in the vehicle industry. I worked on software, that meets the highest safety standards (ISO 26262 ASIL-D), meaning that peoples lifes depend on the correct functioning of the software. The quality of that software is still way worse than the average person would believe. I would never ever install a device, that can be wirelessly accessed, into my brain if it wasn't absolutely nessessary to survive.

>>19159 Spotify is fuarrrking cancer, I cannot understand how people use the free version, at all. Why not download the music, or simply... pay and have no ads? >>19160 What if it vastly improves your performance in certain areas? What if it allows you to put an end to 'bad' behaviors such as anxiety or ADHD?

>>19158 2 sd IQ boost paid monthly subscription! Tesla cars have in app purchases why not neuralink?

>>19162 im just gonna have to wait for the fsf certified brain implant that respects your freedom

Does it run free and open source software? I think the biohacking community will love to mess with it.

>>19170 >deactivate stress through implant >optimize hormonal secretions Potentially yes

base human is safe against emp. I wonder if this would allow you to fry someone. Note its build to be charged wireless so the attack vector exists already by its nature.

>>19165 I would hope they would be designed with low enough voltages to not be capable of causing injury. Though my big fear isn't so much someone being able to kill you with one, it'd be someone managing to induce extreme pain or delusions to the point that you do the job for them.

>>19168 It's not only the voltage it uses that could harm you. If you overload the coil, or somehow trigger a battery failure, it could burn/explode, and it's right >in< your brain. I think that's what >>19165 was talking about.

>>19168 The idea is to overload it. EMP is just a short quick intense burst of energy that overloads the circuit and melts it thereby. This works for any circuit as any wire itself is already receptacle to induction. An antenna is simply amplifying this effect and wireless charging is the same which means its just easier to fry through it. Whats important here is how close you would need to get to cause real harm. If you need to touch his head you might as well stab him which means it doesnt add additional danger to the already existing risk, if you can do it however remote without getting caught on camera you got a real issue.

>>19174 Even scarier... The concept is to be eternally connected to the wired. Imagine the feeling of loosing that connectivity after years- eventually even your entire life once the technology gets good enough. Assuming this is the wonder enhancement of the century that it claims to be, it will still be extremely dangerous both physically as pointed out or psychologically. Most humans are addicted to the connectivity and hormone releases created by their cellular devices. Imagine how at a certain point the system becomes an electronic extension of the body. An EMP would be like blinding someone from their senses. People using it as performance enhancement would effectively loose any edge they have and emotion would rush back and focus would instantly drop. I only say this because people think that it is funny to use lasers on people as a joke and blind them all the time. I think that it is the worst part of every dystopian cyberpunk fantasy.

What did you think of their demonstration? Looks very useful. Reliable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOr8dln2c5k

>>19141 The only device I ever have put in my brain would need to be built by me, from raw materials I verify, using infrastructure I control to transform them, and there'd need to be a true need which can't be solved with the much more reasonable handheld device, which is another way of writing there's little chance I'd ever have something implanted in my brain. If most people have a device implanted in them, that gives others power over them. Imagine a future where people just faint when trying to harm another person, like near the end of Manna, so most physical security is removed; that would give someone without the implant an advantage. In Ghost in the Shell, two men the laughing man couldn't stop from seeing his face were homeless men without any cybernetic implants and, while I dislike referencing anime, it's a good example of a potential future and the advantages of going without, even when almost everyone else isn't.

I'm keeping any microchip/implants far away from me, especially my brain. While some beneficial applications exist especially for disabled people, in any other case the consequences far out way the convenience. This seems like another invention for upper middle class people that want to ooh and ahh at turning lights on and off with their thoughts. The same kind of people who pack their home with cameras, talking assistance thingeys and whatever. I'll stick to 'dumb' things. I'll admit that I didn't watch the video but that's because I couldn't care less about musk and their wacky inventions.

>>19200 Maybe the men aren't without implants because they are homeless but they are homeless because they rejected implants. Once normalized and standardized as the new interface to interact with tech the normal human will be unable to work in the new enviroment.

I like the idea but it will be tainted by elon and corporate interests I want to get as far away from humanity as possible. Make me into an near-AI cyborg already. Please.

Can I take it out?

Brain-machine interfaces are still godtech and anyone who sells something saying otherwise is a charlatan. Maybe you could train a diffuse cloud of synapses somewhere in your motor cortex to generate signals that are readable by a very primitive EEG and that thing can use these low-complexity trends to manipulate a few variables and, say, move a cursor across a screen in two or three dimensions. Or maybe you can type. That's about all we're looking at now. No two-way interfacing... At least nothing more sophisticated than implants for the deaf to feed some lo-fi audio right into the temporal lobe. But frontal lobe ѕһіt? Not a chance, not at least for a few decades. No, AI and Moore's law will not change this for a good while. Pray that it stays that way. A true, bidirectional BMI would be something worse than a rogue H-bomb. It would be possibly the most dangerous and dehumanizing piece of technology that humanity ever develops. If anyone demonstrates credible evidence of such a device existing, they should be physically attacked and all their research destroyed instantly. That kind of development would not be a joke. It would very quickly lead to the most rapid reduction in human dignity we've seen in history. Advanced BMI is evil. It might theoretically have potential that is neutral and could be directed towards good—but in practice it will be enormously evil. Because of the resources required to create it, the parties that would have those resources in the near future, and the power potential it would have in our current culture. Please don't contribute to this kind of development or mess with such awful things just out of some consumerist curiosity. I know how we developers can be. Such a thing exists in a wider, holistic system of human technological power! It can't just exist as a clever gizmo. It will be exploited.

>>19225 lol you can take the external interface off, but the implant under the skull will be part of you forever. It's only designed to use NFC... hopefully ;) Hope you have a good relationship with your friendly local neurosurgeon. Wouldn't want them slipping anything else in... Keep in mind the tendencies of the corporations developing this stuff and their obsession with tracking and addicting the brains of every human being on earth. Do you want them messing around with your CNS? Are you very fuсking sure? At least reconsider being an early adopter.

>>19227 nfc doesn't require touch. A good example are the hacks reading out card data being only close to the people carrying their cards. You simply put more juice into it to get more distance.

>>19227 Do you think blackmarket brainware would be any better?

Too bad that Elon seems too wrapped with muh sci fi, can be this things undoing from producing actually useful stuff.

>>19227 Since their intention is to install the chips in as many people as possible, all surgeries will be done by a robot. Musk says so during the presentation, and the robot is also there.

>>19226 Beautifully said. Do you think it will be possible to stop it, though? I feel like 'progress' is often ruthless.

>>19178 Unless society collapses what would stop people from just having the chip replaced? If you blindfold someone or they temporarily lose a current sense they are not driven insane straight away.

>>19254 >Do you think it will be possible to stop it, though? I feel like 'progress' is often ruthless. normal people might jump on a bandwagon, but it will have to have some kind of incentive that people will want, remember how google glass fell apart outside of niche uses. Leave it up to the sales department or musk himself to try to get it adopted on the large scale, the secret lies in the marketing. >>19258 Assuming the chip damage did not also cause grey-matter damage, nothing, but imagine just for a moment the shock of being without your sight or hearing even for a few hours. One would start to wonder if it would ever come back.

>>19141 >Unairgaping your brain ISHYGDDT

>>19145 > Also, imagine being hacked and having someone take control of the chip and frying your brain This is the basis of Drugs and Wires: https://www.drugsandwires.fail

>>19261 It'll become ubiquitous the exact same way they got the cell phone refuseniks in the nineties and aughts. They will use it to enable frivolous convenience at first, then all work and socialization will tighten up that slack and make it so it imposes a totally undue burden on people who try to compete and interact without mediation through the matchine. Try and see how hard it is to secure employment in most industries if you tell them you refuse to carry a phone or sign into botnet spyware services and apps. The idea that it's just for fun or novelty will be a red herring; a pleasant-sounding justification. "You can just say no." "You didn't have to sign the TOS." "It's just a tool." The usual ratfuckery. If it is built, it will ruin the rest of our lives. Therefore it must not be built. >>19254 There are ways. We got rid of tetraethyl lead, aesbesthos, all sorts of other things in history. It's difficult, but don't give up hope. We must say no. We do have power if we are organized. Keep in mind you stand here at the present within history with a survivorship bias: all the progress and technologies around you are ones that survived and proliferated. You aren't seeing the ones that were successfully pushed back. There are always going to be more than you can easily see now. And be skeptical of the mindset that "progress" is monolithic and must include by default every horror and crock that mankind can shoddily staple together. We can choose what to take and what to leave if we are serious and persistent. These things are separated, and progressive ideologues use this method of bundling it all together into a fatalistic, undifferentiated whole as a form of coercion. And again, progress isn't a straight line from alpha to omega. It's a multidimensional field of space full of different directions and outcomes. The only rule is that we can't stay stationary. Change is fundamental. But we can choose where to go and reject the blinders offered to us by villains and cons.

>>19462 Yeah, love the way you put that lol. Really saved a lot of words. Anybody should see that this is a disastrous error.

>>19141 i hope it enhance and my dumb brain if i could afford it or is it even possible

>>19913 It wouldn't do anything that you can't do with a smartphone now, it'd just be faster by skipping the interface

>>19913 That'll cost $5000/yr for the license to "BigBrain™ Pro©".

>>19915 i hate reading and articulating my thoughts

>>19141 Chip is small and should be used as bridge. It will look like a simple point on your head, that allows to make a connection between two devices: helmet and your brain. This way it will look like sao-helmet. So, chip should be FOSS/safety and easibly to read/modificate/audit. Of course there still should be argue about security, to prove security, Elon should have each-month code audit and FOSS his product.

Ever played Deus Ex? Well, i think unironically thtat elon musk is bob page in other words, in the dystopia we're living, implying that neuralink won't be backdoored is very utopic