You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

KatjaGrace comments on SRG 4: Biological Cognition, BCIs, Organizations - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: KatjaGrace 07 October 2014 01:00AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (139)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: KatjaGrace 07 October 2014 01:29:26AM 1 point [-]

Bostrom is pessimistic about brain-computer interfaces. (p48) Do you agree with his arguments?

Comment author: diegocaleiro 07 October 2014 01:52:32AM 2 points [-]

These arguments have been made by quite a few authors over the years at the Edge question. The most robust prediction is that we won't defeat evolution in energy efficiency to absorb content. We will not create machine interfaces so good that they beat our sense organs.

Comment author: TRIZ-Ingenieur 09 October 2014 12:16:43AM 0 points [-]

Ramez Naam wrote two Sci-Fi novels on that issue: Nexus and Crux. Drinking a silvery liquid of communicative nanobots is enough. The bots autonomously find their way into the brain and connect to neural cells.

Regarding non-invasiveness this vision might get acceptance. Unsolved technical issues are: building such nano bots, supplying energy and dynamic long range communication. I fully agree with Bostrums scepticism.

Low social acceptance of Google glass shows that humans with brain interconnection might face similar repercussions. Via BCI you could 'videotape' what you see with your eyes. A BCI will probably not be so easy deactivated than switching off your Google glass.