4 ms·
That's ridiculous. Get the treatment you need, don't hold out for fictional technologies. As a neuroscientist, it is hard to overstate just how incredibly far
by andbberger 6y ago
That's ridiculous. Get the treatment you need, don't hold out for fictional technologies.
As a neuroscientist, it is hard to overstate just how incredibly far away we are from 'supplying processed audio signal directly to the brain'.
For some perspective, c. elegans has 302 neurons which have been intensely studied for decades, yet we don't have anything approaching a systematic understanding of what they all do and how they interact. The human brain has something like 85 billion.
Not to mention the techno-utopian pretension of thinking that we can somehow do better than the brain - why would you want to bypass your audio processing circuits??
In almost any way we have characterized it, the brain turns out to be nearly optimal. Wiring length, not encoding redundant information (it is not a coincidence that the receptive fields of CNNs strongly resemble that of V1 simple cells - gabor filters are optimal for vision).... I could go on.
I'm so tired of the techno-utopian musk cult - how incredibly boring. I get it, you have a hammer. Good for you. Maybe learn to use another tool though?
- rowanG077 6y agoI don't think anyone is making the case here that computers beat the brain at any thing the brain is evolved to do. But there are uncountable tasks computers are better at then brains.
- rini17 6y agoCochlear implant is complicated procedure with chance of side effects. I personally know people that got it taken away again. And it has only 30 or so channels, enough for speech but not sure it's better than my current hearing with aids(I love music). It is far from sure thing that the cochlea is the best place to stimulate te nerves.