Post: #1

Interesting stuff here.

Researcher controls colleague’s motions in 1st human brain-to-brain interface

Quote:University of Washington researchers have performed what they believe is the first noninvasive human-to-human brain interface, with one researcher able to send a brain signal via the Internet to control the hand motions of a fellow researcher.

Using electrical brain recordings and a form of magnetic stimulation, Rajesh Rao sent a brain signal to Andrea Stocco on the other side of the UW campus, causing Stocco’s finger to move on a keyboard.

While researchers at Duke University have demonstrated brain-to-brain communication between two rats, and Harvard researchers have demonstrated it between a human and a rat, Rao and Stocco believe this is the first demonstration of human-to-human brain interfacing.

“The Internet was a way to connect computers, and now it can be a way to connect brains,” Stocco said. “We want to take the knowledge of a brain and transmit it directly from brain to brain.”[...]

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/2...Researcher controls colleague’s motions in 1st human brain-to-brain interface

Post: #2

Extremely unscientific study. Where's the control, the repeated experiments, and use of different subjects?

Post: #3

(08-28-2013 10:17 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Extremely unscientific study. Where's the control, the repeated experiments, and use of different subjects?

I don't know about that, Samseau.

It's one thing to say that further experiments need to be done, but it's another huge jump entirely to say you honestly believe this was completely fabricated. This isn't just some random group on the Internet; we're talking about the University of Washington here, and according to the article, the research is backed by the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Army Research Office, and the National Institutes of Health.

While I certainly encourage critical thinking about these things and was only sharing the article as a possible subject of interest, I think throwing up a B.S. flag is a little premature without looking further into the matter first.

You'll also note that the researchers go to great pains to warn against reading too much into what the technology is capable of, especially at this stage. This was just a first experiment with interesting results - of course more work is needed, a lot more. If you've investigated further into exactly how the study was conducted and why and have additional information this article doesn't provide, then maybe I can understand your reaction and invite you to share, but otherwise I think you may be jumping the gun a tad bit.

They do seem to imply there were strict controls put in place, so it'd be worth it for an interested part to find out more before drawing conclusions, in my opinion. I'm sure the researchers are well aware that far more discerning minds than are own have their eyes on them and how they proceed, especially if they're using their findings to get at some research money.

Post: #4

(08-28-2013 10:56 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  [..], the U.S. Army Research Office, [..]

You'll also note that the researchers go to great pains to warn against reading too much into what the technology is capable of, especially at this stage.

I'm probably getting way too paranoid, but is anyone else a little concerned by this development?

Post: #5

(08-28-2013 11:01 AM)Architekt Wrote:  

(08-28-2013 10:56 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  [..], the U.S. Army Research Office, [..]

You'll also note that the researchers go to great pains to warn against reading too much into what the technology is capable of, especially at this stage.

I'm probably getting way too paranoid, but is anyone else a little concerned by this development?

Yes. Creepy stuff for sure even if it is interesting. Especially knowing how technologies evolve over time. It may be primitive now but what about in a few decades?

"Oh don't worry - we'll only use it for good things..."

Post: #6

Samseau: the measures taken to ensure the effect was genuine are detailed in the article. While it wouldn't have hurt to try it on more subjects, I'm not too concerned about that. After all, we can be reasonably sure that the two test subjects do not share a special telepathic connection .

The formula of 'controls, repeated experiments' etc. Is actually rarely necessary in science. What IS necessary is a clear demonstration that the evidence supports the conclusions, and reading through the main article, I can't find any obvious problems in that regard. The movements of the controller were carried out by a computer program out of his control, and the receiver had no reasonable way of knowing when the finger movements should have happened.

(08-28-2013 11:01 AM)Architekt Wrote:  

(08-28-2013 10:56 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  [..], the U.S. Army Research Office, [..]

You'll also note that the researchers go to great pains to warn against reading too much into what the technology is capable of, especially at this stage.

I'm probably getting way too paranoid, but is anyone else a little concerned by this development?

Yes this is a problem, but it's because scientists want funding and don't want to be called kooks. So speculation is frowned upon. I agree though that it's irresponsible to deny having debates about the potential for misuse of technology.

Post: #7

can you imagine this technology being secretly put into some sort of implanted Federal ID chip? The president could halt riots from his desk and make everyone do the thriller zombie dance.

Post: #8

They should have done it while she was asleep or unconscious or something, so they can be sure that the hand motions weren't her own doing. I'm still skeptical.