6 ms·

Neuralink is recruiting subjects for the first human trial

Zambyte 3y ago
Preying on the needs of vulnerable people to advance their mind reading and mind control system, aiming for the masses. Can it get any more dystopian than that?
- thefurdrake 3y ago
  That's an interesting narrative to be pushing. Care to back up your claims that this is for mass mind control with evidence/logic/reason/concrete thought, or is the demagoguery the core of your position?
  - Zambyte 3y ago
    > Care to back up your claims that this is for mass mind control with evidence/logic/reason/concrete thought Sure. Elon himself says that the goal of Neuralink is "bidirectional communication" very often. That means reading from and writing to the mind. Obviously he doesn't want to say "mind control" because of the negative connotation, so instead he just describes it. As for the "mass" part, Elon has also claimed many times that the goal of Neuralink is general use, and that medical applications are a stepping stone to that.
    - nynx 3y ago
      Mind control is the last thing elon would want brought into the world. You are purposely misinterpreting his statements.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        Not saying Musk is aiming at mind control here at all -- I don't know what his motivations or goals are -- but why do you think it would be the last thing he would want brought into the world? It doesn't sound like a thing he'd philosophically object to.
      - Zambyte 3y ago
        > You are purposely misinterpreting his statements. What does "bidirectional communication" mean if not read and write? What other directions are there?
        mikecoles 3y ago
        Sight, taste, touch are all inputs. An input doesn't mean it takes control.
        Zambyte 3y ago
        It means it has a non zero amount of control. Consider the following: Google has a collection of computers with inputs. One of those inputs can be accessed via the Google web search interface. When you search a term using the Google web interface, you are requesting control over a very small part of the collection of computers at Google in order to complete your request. When you do this, you do not control all of Google, but you are exercising C2 over a tiny portion of it. Now consider that Google was built on technologies that can precisely reject requests for control per request based on certain conditions. Google can reject requests based on your IP, your personal identity, the contents of the request, etc. The human brain does not have facilities for doing that. It did not evolve with the expectation that it would be valuable to reject neurological patterns that behave like sensory inputs. An example of this would be like taking a psychoactive drug, and then trying to think it's effects away. You can't do it. The difference between a psychoactive drug and a brain to computer interface is that one of them can dynamically impose specific neurological phenomena (what you call inputs) based on the intent of someone else, and the other one will land you in jail for possession.
      - hmcq6 3y ago
        Parasocial delusion. You don't know Elon Musk personally, you can't speak to his character like this. The facts are that if he was so benevolent he wouldn't be a billionaire. End of story.
        ben_w 3y ago
        > The facts are that if he was so benevolent he wouldn't be a billionaire. End of story. I don't trust his benevolence, but that doesn't follow. Money at that level exists as an indicator of the marginal amount someone else will pay to own a right to the expected future 20-ish years of the profits of the companies he owns, multiplied up as if there were enough people to buy all of it. This kind of accounting can easily value the average final year university student in the UK at around a million pounds even if they've never had so much as a summer holiday job. Sometimes this is enough to buy out the business, other times the attempt runs out of buyers and the price crashes part way through. If Alice has a plan to save the world and doing so involves creating a company that someone else thinks can be asset-stripped for a trillion dollars, then Alice will be "worth" a trillion dollars. Of course, I just wrote "Alice" rather than "Musk" because I want to make it clear I don't think Musk is anywhere near this angelic; it's just an illustration.
    - thefurdrake 3y ago
      So, to be clear here: You think that providing input to neurons through an electronic interface is mind control? As in, we're not talking about people doing research on how to leverage the input/output interaction between the brain and these devices to perform manipulation of conscious/subconscious thought? We're literally just talking about being able to talk to neurons at all being mind control? Just so long as I understand where the goalposts are being moved to and we can keep them there. I imagine next we'll hear a slippery slope argument next about how even allowing such communication means it'll be used for mind control?
      - Zambyte 3y ago
        > You think that providing input to neurons through an electronic interface is mind control? Um... yes...? I am really confused why people keep describing mind control as a defense of mind control. > As in, we're not talking about people doing research on how to leverage the input/output interaction between the brain and these devices to perform manipulation of conscious/subconscious thought? Yes, even if we ignore the part of Neuralink where they are working to understand and deploy complex interactions over human brain to computer interfaces, a little bit of mind control is in fact, still mind control. I'm not sure who you think is moving goal posts. Controlling the mind with a direct interface to the mind is mind control. That much is obvious. I also think it's interesting that you dropped the "mind reading" portion of my previous comment. Do you find that harder to refute, or do you think that Elon Musk should be allowed to read peoples thoughts?
        ben_w 3y ago
        > Um... yes...? I am really confused why people keep describing mind control as a defense of mind control. Because at the current state of the art, it's no more "control" than from stimulating cochlear with a cochlear implant. Musk does talk about a Culture-esq Neural Lace (which also covers "mind reading" to the level of being an offsite backup) but the neuroscientists I hear discussing the tech that really exists and that they think is likely to come any time soon regard this as bombastic nonsense. The research into mind reading from (unrelated, human-rated and already placed) implants is interesting, and I think worth caring about with regards to privacy and security: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcfC53c3tSc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcfC53c3tSc
  - 3seashells 3y ago
    And there talks the evidence..
- ben_w 3y ago
  Sure: the guy bankrolling it also has investments in advanced AI, a factory dedicated to building a humanoid robot army, 80% of global space launch capacity by mass, a fleet of orbital space lasers (on a technicality as they're comms not weapons), a major social network, connections to the surveillance sector (via Theil/Palantir), and has tweeted about how its time to treat himself to a secret volcano lair.
- rockemsockem 3y ago
  In the face of a future where AGI is real it seems to me today the best way to keep humans able to move at the same pace as the AGI is brain computer interfaces like Neuralink. We can have a slightly less than AGI AI that we can communicate with instantly just by thinking. You can work through problems with it, offload number crunching, etc. Seems like what we need. If you just don't like Elon, then you can hope with me that this spurs on other companies to do the same so we can get some options!
  - polishdude20 3y ago
    Yeah or the choice is not to hook your brain up or suffer you know?
  - mplewis 3y ago
    Sure, and in the face of a world where yogurt cured cancer, it would be irresponsible not to produce as much Chobani as possible. AGI is a sci-fi story molded into an investment pitch.
  - ooterness 3y ago
    Found Elon Musk's throwaway account.
  - eureka-belief 3y ago
    I would highly doubt that brain computer interfaces will be sophisticated enough to compete with an AGI. The brain is messy and sending large amounts of information from chip to the brain in a way that can be interpreted seems impossible without something really invasive. And if the technology is monetized like most tech, your implant will cost you a monthly subscription service.
  - 3seashells 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - consumer451 3y ago
    The end goal of Neuralink is so short sighted. When Musk proposed it, I first began to question his genius. At its best, Neuralink is supposed to give humans a chance against AI by speeding up human i/o. But if AI continues to expand its capabilities and speed, then that "advantage" will only last for a short time. In exchange, we will give corporations and governments direct read/write access to our brains. Oh, and if AI does take over the world, Neuralink style implants will likely come in very handy to control humans, won't they? This isn't just about Musk. Ideally, nobody should ever do this. This is the final frontier of agency and privacy. How is anyone on-board with this?
onetokeoverthe 3y ago
[dead]
bilekas 3y ago
> The PRIME Study (which apparently stands for Precise Robotically Implanted Brain-Computer Interface Not sure i trust a company with brain implants that can't identify how an acronym is supposed to work...
- jasonjmcghee 3y ago
  Precise Robotically Implanted Mind Enhancer Seems like the obvious choice
- Dig1t 3y ago
  It seems like nit-picking an acronym is maybe just an attempt to detract from someone you don't like. This is cutting edge research with the potential to help people with quadriplegia, a group of people who desperately need focused research. It is only a good thing. The best and brightest researchers in this field are focusing on solving an amazingly hard problem and directly helping people who desperately need it. So why add negativity by nitpicking? Does that really contribute anything substantive or make the world a better place? Here is a link to the actual Neuralink page talking about the PRIME study: https://neuralink.com/blog/first-clinical-trial-open-for-recruitment/ https://neuralink.com/blog/first-clinical-trial-open-for-rec... They highlighted the word for you to see how the acronym works.
  - bilekas 3y ago
    > This is cutting edge research with the potential to help people with quadriplegia, a group of people who desperately need focused research. It is only a good thing. I absolutely agree, I think it could definitely improve countless lives and it certainly is exciting, but it just seems like a petty decision to try to work in an acronym when in reality it doesn't matter what it means.
Dig1t 3y ago
Here is a link to the actual Neuralink site talking about the study: https://neuralink.com/blog/first-clinical-trial-open-for-recruitment/ https://neuralink.com/blog/first-clinical-trial-open-for-rec... This article, which has a lot of bias, doesn't add anything to the announcement other than disparaging it.
scentoni 3y ago
How long until it freezes you until you accept the EULA update? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37587510 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37587510

Preying on the needs of vulnerable people to advance their mind reading and mind control system, aiming for the masses. Can it get any more dystopian than that?

thefurdrake 3y ago
That's an interesting narrative to be pushing. Care to back up your claims that this is for mass mind control with evidence/logic/reason/concrete thought, or is the demagoguery the core of your position?
- Zambyte 3y ago
  > Care to back up your claims that this is for mass mind control with evidence/logic/reason/concrete thought Sure. Elon himself says that the goal of Neuralink is "bidirectional communication" very often. That means reading from and writing to the mind. Obviously he doesn't want to say "mind control" because of the negative connotation, so instead he just describes it. As for the "mass" part, Elon has also claimed many times that the goal of Neuralink is general use, and that medical applications are a stepping stone to that.
  - nynx 3y ago
    Mind control is the last thing elon would want brought into the world. You are purposely misinterpreting his statements.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      Not saying Musk is aiming at mind control here at all -- I don't know what his motivations or goals are -- but why do you think it would be the last thing he would want brought into the world? It doesn't sound like a thing he'd philosophically object to.
    - Zambyte 3y ago
      > You are purposely misinterpreting his statements. What does "bidirectional communication" mean if not read and write? What other directions are there?
      - mikecoles 3y ago
        Sight, taste, touch are all inputs. An input doesn't mean it takes control.
        Zambyte 3y ago
        It means it has a non zero amount of control. Consider the following: Google has a collection of computers with inputs. One of those inputs can be accessed via the Google web search interface. When you search a term using the Google web interface, you are requesting control over a very small part of the collection of computers at Google in order to complete your request. When you do this, you do not control all of Google, but you are exercising C2 over a tiny portion of it. Now consider that Google was built on technologies that can precisely reject requests for control per request based on certain conditions. Google can reject requests based on your IP, your personal identity, the contents of the request, etc. The human brain does not have facilities for doing that. It did not evolve with the expectation that it would be valuable to reject neurological patterns that behave like sensory inputs. An example of this would be like taking a psychoactive drug, and then trying to think it's effects away. You can't do it. The difference between a psychoactive drug and a brain to computer interface is that one of them can dynamically impose specific neurological phenomena (what you call inputs) based on the intent of someone else, and the other one will land you in jail for possession.
    - hmcq6 3y ago
      Parasocial delusion. You don't know Elon Musk personally, you can't speak to his character like this. The facts are that if he was so benevolent he wouldn't be a billionaire. End of story.
      - ben_w 3y ago
        > The facts are that if he was so benevolent he wouldn't be a billionaire. End of story. I don't trust his benevolence, but that doesn't follow. Money at that level exists as an indicator of the marginal amount someone else will pay to own a right to the expected future 20-ish years of the profits of the companies he owns, multiplied up as if there were enough people to buy all of it. This kind of accounting can easily value the average final year university student in the UK at around a million pounds even if they've never had so much as a summer holiday job. Sometimes this is enough to buy out the business, other times the attempt runs out of buyers and the price crashes part way through. If Alice has a plan to save the world and doing so involves creating a company that someone else thinks can be asset-stripped for a trillion dollars, then Alice will be "worth" a trillion dollars. Of course, I just wrote "Alice" rather than "Musk" because I want to make it clear I don't think Musk is anywhere near this angelic; it's just an illustration.
  - thefurdrake 3y ago
    So, to be clear here: You think that providing input to neurons through an electronic interface is mind control? As in, we're not talking about people doing research on how to leverage the input/output interaction between the brain and these devices to perform manipulation of conscious/subconscious thought? We're literally just talking about being able to talk to neurons at all being mind control? Just so long as I understand where the goalposts are being moved to and we can keep them there. I imagine next we'll hear a slippery slope argument next about how even allowing such communication means it'll be used for mind control?
    - Zambyte 3y ago
      > You think that providing input to neurons through an electronic interface is mind control? Um... yes...? I am really confused why people keep describing mind control as a defense of mind control. > As in, we're not talking about people doing research on how to leverage the input/output interaction between the brain and these devices to perform manipulation of conscious/subconscious thought? Yes, even if we ignore the part of Neuralink where they are working to understand and deploy complex interactions over human brain to computer interfaces, a little bit of mind control is in fact, still mind control. I'm not sure who you think is moving goal posts. Controlling the mind with a direct interface to the mind is mind control. That much is obvious. I also think it's interesting that you dropped the "mind reading" portion of my previous comment. Do you find that harder to refute, or do you think that Elon Musk should be allowed to read peoples thoughts?
      - ben_w 3y ago
        > Um... yes...? I am really confused why people keep describing mind control as a defense of mind control. Because at the current state of the art, it's no more "control" than from stimulating cochlear with a cochlear implant. Musk does talk about a Culture-esq Neural Lace (which also covers "mind reading" to the level of being an offsite backup) but the neuroscientists I hear discussing the tech that really exists and that they think is likely to come any time soon regard this as bombastic nonsense. The research into mind reading from (unrelated, human-rated and already placed) implants is interesting, and I think worth caring about with regards to privacy and security: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcfC53c3tSc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcfC53c3tSc
- 3seashells 3y ago
  And there talks the evidence..
ben_w 3y ago
Sure: the guy bankrolling it also has investments in advanced AI, a factory dedicated to building a humanoid robot army, 80% of global space launch capacity by mass, a fleet of orbital space lasers (on a technicality as they're comms not weapons), a major social network, connections to the surveillance sector (via Theil/Palantir), and has tweeted about how its time to treat himself to a secret volcano lair.
rockemsockem 3y ago
In the face of a future where AGI is real it seems to me today the best way to keep humans able to move at the same pace as the AGI is brain computer interfaces like Neuralink. We can have a slightly less than AGI AI that we can communicate with instantly just by thinking. You can work through problems with it, offload number crunching, etc. Seems like what we need. If you just don't like Elon, then you can hope with me that this spurs on other companies to do the same so we can get some options!
- polishdude20 3y ago
  Yeah or the choice is not to hook your brain up or suffer you know?
- mplewis 3y ago
  Sure, and in the face of a world where yogurt cured cancer, it would be irresponsible not to produce as much Chobani as possible. AGI is a sci-fi story molded into an investment pitch.
- ooterness 3y ago
  Found Elon Musk's throwaway account.
- eureka-belief 3y ago
  I would highly doubt that brain computer interfaces will be sophisticated enough to compete with an AGI. The brain is messy and sending large amounts of information from chip to the brain in a way that can be interpreted seems impossible without something really invasive. And if the technology is monetized like most tech, your implant will cost you a monthly subscription service.
- 3seashells 3y ago
  [flagged]
- consumer451 3y ago
  The end goal of Neuralink is so short sighted. When Musk proposed it, I first began to question his genius. At its best, Neuralink is supposed to give humans a chance against AI by speeding up human i/o. But if AI continues to expand its capabilities and speed, then that "advantage" will only last for a short time. In exchange, we will give corporations and governments direct read/write access to our brains. Oh, and if AI does take over the world, Neuralink style implants will likely come in very handy to control humans, won't they? This isn't just about Musk. Ideally, nobody should ever do this. This is the final frontier of agency and privacy. How is anyone on-board with this?

onetokeoverthe 3y ago

[dead]

bilekas 3y ago

> The PRIME Study (which apparently stands for Precise Robotically Implanted Brain-Computer Interface Not sure i trust a company with brain implants that can't identify how an acronym is supposed to work...

jasonjmcghee 3y ago
Precise Robotically Implanted Mind Enhancer Seems like the obvious choice
Dig1t 3y ago
It seems like nit-picking an acronym is maybe just an attempt to detract from someone you don't like. This is cutting edge research with the potential to help people with quadriplegia, a group of people who desperately need focused research. It is only a good thing. The best and brightest researchers in this field are focusing on solving an amazingly hard problem and directly helping people who desperately need it. So why add negativity by nitpicking? Does that really contribute anything substantive or make the world a better place? Here is a link to the actual Neuralink page talking about the PRIME study: https://neuralink.com/blog/first-clinical-trial-open-for-recruitment/ https://neuralink.com/blog/first-clinical-trial-open-for-rec... They highlighted the word for you to see how the acronym works.
- bilekas 3y ago
  > This is cutting edge research with the potential to help people with quadriplegia, a group of people who desperately need focused research. It is only a good thing. I absolutely agree, I think it could definitely improve countless lives and it certainly is exciting, but it just seems like a petty decision to try to work in an acronym when in reality it doesn't matter what it means.

Dig1t 3y ago

Here is a link to the actual Neuralink site talking about the study: https://neuralink.com/blog/first-clinical-trial-open-for-recruitment/ https://neuralink.com/blog/first-clinical-trial-open-for-rec... This article, which has a lot of bias, doesn't add anything to the announcement other than disparaging it.

scentoni 3y ago

How long until it freezes you until you accept the EULA update? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37587510 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37587510