If technology took a giant leap forward and cyber-jacks were available tomorrow, would you signup to get one implanted? What if the maker of the the cyber-jack was Microsoft?
For those who might not know what I am talking about, the idea of a cyber-jack is popular in near-future science fiction games. A cyber-jack is basically a port that is connected directly to your brain so that all you have to do is "plug-in," and your mind can literally surf the cyber-net waves -- no keyboard, no monitor, just a straight up direct connection.
I just can't see myself doing it. It would be cool as hell--wait a second, hell isn't cool, what am I saying--but, I just couldn't take the nestea-plunge and let someone put something in my head. What happens when it crashes? and what about those famous "memory dumps" that happen when Windows dies? Ack!
I'd go for the wireless model with optional expansions. Technology advances so much, so quickly, that I'd have to wait for version 2.1 or later to work out the bugs and get the better features.
Any aversion to this technology would soon pass, but there are always those that hold out. I know some people that refuse to have anything to do with a computer. Back in the day there were those that wanted nothing to do with those evil printed books. Why use paper when stone tablets work so much better? Not to mention Letters. There were those that knew letters and the alphabet would never catch on.
I read that last year (Apr/2005) the technology was used in a successful test that allowed a machine to read a person's mind to the degree that the machine could tell if you were looking at vertical lines or horizontal lines. It's pretty basic, but it's a step in what many would call a very scary direction.
I'd have to go with a wireless model as well, but I think I'd be waiting for one 2 or 3 versions down the road, waiting for the bugs to get worked out as well. But I'd have to make sure the damn thing couldn't write data into my brain only read data!
Edit: Oh and that would only be data I allowed it to read!
I've got to say that I've always liked the idea of it ever since I started playing Cyber Punk, and I would definitely pick one up, wireless or not. I do have to agree with everyone else out there and say that I would probably not be an early adopter, however I do think that I would pick it up earlier than most. I also kind of like the idea of having an actual plug in port rather than wireless, first of all because of the ascetic appeal, and also because of the ability I would have to drop the connection by simply unplugging.
This is a good jump-off point for information on wetware.
I also remember something on the discovery channel (back when it was actually about science and discovery instead of motorcycle and house builders) that illustrated something about how neural tissues actually bonded/grew onto a microchip and utilized its pathways. The experiment took place in a lab with stem cell to neurological tissues.
But be it known, that if the religious reich has their way, we'll never have stem cell research to develop this technology to any functionality or purpose.
So if we actually want to be able to jack into the internet using wetware, then vote for science and progress, not mythology.
"So if we actually want to be able to jack into the internet using wetware, then vote for science and progress, not mythology."
-- Political ad paid for by the Cyberpunks FTW Foundation.
I don't think I will be getting this if it is invented in my lifetime. I believe the human body is flawless in its design already. I do not think implants and plugs are much needed.
If the human body was truly flawless, then we wouldn't have flaws, nor would we be vulnerable to said conditions. We would be a being of pure energy without disruption.
Nah there ain't no flawless going on around here, we've got another few million years of evolutionary cooking to go.
As a side note, if you're speaking of the Innate, that's just an idea that the body may have about perfection, but see the line above, maybe one day in the year 4.6 million CE. That is if we've not killed ourselves off yet.
Last edited by Moritz; 10-26-2006 at 11:22 AM.
Well maybe perfection does not mean immune to disease and other maladies. People die. Any changes for better in the life cycle of humans would throw off the balance of the world.
Absolutely I'd - well, I'd certainly consider one. My interest however would be in reprogramming my own brain, the ultimate body hack. Imagine thinking faster, better, and more accurately. Imagine if the quality of the thinking could be improved.
If Microsoft built it? Despite being a hardcore Linux user, I'd still consider it.
Evil Math Ogre Kgh-Ra
Not all technology is always good. i would wait a while see how it goes then decide. kinda like lasiks at first they were messing peoples eyes up now that rarely happens.I have to Wait and see where it went.
In other words: not really. The thing to note is that as life expectancy goes up, generally you find that the birth rate goes down. People who are expecting to live a long time, and who aren't expecting to need bunches of children to support them in their old age, generally have few (or no) children. (This is currently Europe's problem; the birth rate in many countries is actually below the rate needed for replacement.)
I'm also not sure what you mean by "balance of the world". If you mean that we won't be able to grow enough food to feed everyone, again that's unlikely. For one thing, we already produce huge surpluses of food that just rot in silos and warehouses (or are thrown away). The reason we have starving people is not because we can't produce the food, it's because we can't get the food to those who need it (due to foolish legal restrictions (like banning GM food), or corrupt governments, or war/natural disaster situations). There's no reason to think that we'll be unable to produce even more food in the future, as technology continues to advance.
Not to say there aren't challenges associated with technological advances, because there are a lot. But it's far from clear that major advances in medicine and technology necessarily lead to bad scenarios rather than good ones.