The comment was playing on how much more efficient biological components are compared to digital ones. An actual attempt to answer your question. Currently it

The comment was playing on how much more efficient biological components are compared to digital ones. An actual attempt to answer your question. Currently it takes quite a lot of computation to detect outlines of objects in a raster image. This is an ability innate to many animals. Suppose we had the technology to keep individual brain cells of an insect alive, and ability to interface with biological neurons, we could pass visual data through, say, an insect's eyes and brain, and get a signal on the other end that corresponds to vectors and lines that describe the object in the visual data. The insect brain is able to process images orders of magnitudes more efficiently than modern computers. Or we could make some sort of Dog helmet, hopefully without a physical connection, that somehow transmit the vector data inside the Dog's brain to our computers. Anyways, all of this looks almost impossible. We simply don't have the technology to interface with the detailed and intricate data that is present our bodies, as our brain process the world around us. I do think one day we will be overlaying data in our own eyes using some sort of neural implant. That device will probably rely on existing vision-related, biological, computational infrastructure in our minds. I wouldn't be surprised if it's two hundreds years away. P.S. Here's an article relating to the idea of putting insect brains in robots: http://www.kurzweilai.net/robots-with-insect-brains http://www.kurzweilai.net/robots-with-insect-brains It's talking about a replicated insect brain on digital hardware though.