3 ms·

I still fail to see how that's possible since it is assumed every brain "encodes" data uniquely. Communication between computers is possible because we have agr

I still fail to see how that's possible since it is assumed every brain "encodes" data uniquely. Communication between computers is possible because we have agreed upon standards. If every computer encoded characters differently, no communication would be possible. Without agreed upon ports or agreed upon mechanism to agree upon ports one computer could not communicate with another. So how can brain-to-brain communication work given that encoding/communication "standards" are impossible since each brain is different? For example, I see a tree and my brain generates a unique signal/encoding/storage representing the tree. Another person sees the tree and generates a unique signal/encoding/storage representing the tree. How would my brain communicate "tree" to his brain since both our "trees" are unique to our brains? My brain device reads my brain signal "1010101" for tree. My friend's device reads brain signal "1011101" for tree. How could we possibly map 1010101 to 1011101. Or is the assumption that human brains have identical signals/encoding for each thought.

goopypoop 1y ago
I already learned to interpret touch, taste, smision etc. when I was just a baby. How hard can a new one be?
- hearsathought 1y ago
  Did you even read my comment? I'm not talking about your brain's ability. I'm talking about how a device can interpret your brain signals and transfer it to another brain to have actual communication when both brains essentially have their own internal "language". How your brain "stores" the idea of tree is entirely different from how I "store" the idea of a tree. Different neurons, different location in the brain and different signals. Do you know computers, networks and communications work? It's all bound by artificial standards we agreed upon a priori. The only way I see is by textual or auditory mechanism between people who speak the same language ( standards agreed upon a priori ). But that wouldn't be brain to brain. It would be brain to text/speech to eyes/ears to brain.
  - goopypoop 1y ago
    I'm saying it's clearly possible to develop from scratch the framework with which to learn to interpret each individual remote machine's raw data stream. Your intermediate protocol woes are a red herring.

goopypoop 1y ago

I already learned to interpret touch, taste, smision etc. when I was just a baby. How hard can a new one be?

hearsathought 1y ago
Did you even read my comment? I'm not talking about your brain's ability. I'm talking about how a device can interpret your brain signals and transfer it to another brain to have actual communication when both brains essentially have their own internal "language". How your brain "stores" the idea of tree is entirely different from how I "store" the idea of a tree. Different neurons, different location in the brain and different signals. Do you know computers, networks and communications work? It's all bound by artificial standards we agreed upon a priori. The only way I see is by textual or auditory mechanism between people who speak the same language ( standards agreed upon a priori ). But that wouldn't be brain to brain. It would be brain to text/speech to eyes/ears to brain.
- goopypoop 1y ago
  I'm saying it's clearly possible to develop from scratch the framework with which to learn to interpret each individual remote machine's raw data stream. Your intermediate protocol woes are a red herring.