Myths of Mind Uploading

Hi Gang,

This weekend alot of my thoughts on the whole topic of mind uploading started to solidify. I realized I don't like that phrase at all because the extraction of all the information that makes up you is not going to be achieveable without knowing the exact position of every single one of the more than 100 trillion connections and the local biochemistry for each part of your brain. My prediciton is that the more likely technology is going to look something like the slow replacement of biological tissue by silicon ideas put forth by Hans Moravec. This is not to say that eventually you won't be able to scan all these positions with robust nanotech, but I don't think this will be the course followed by the majority of people using this technology and robust nanotech is much farther off than the neural interfacing technology that will be available in 10-20 years.

I would like to use this forum to clarify my thoughts on this matter and make my arguments digestible to the general public. I'm quickly becoming an expert on neural interfacing and I am starting to be able to make some fairly reasonable predictions about where the technology is going and how fast it will get there. I would like to get some feedback, questions, or debate about these subjects here.

Best,
Ocsrazor

I think your thoughts on uploading are on the mark. Uploading a full brain into a different substrate is a long way off. Still in the Sci-Fi realm.

As far as nueral interfacing goes I would say we are already there, but we are not using the technology to enhance our mental capabilities yet. There is no reason that a coclear implant could not be fitted with an electromagnetic transciever and digital encoder. At this point in time such a device would be bulky but it would represent a direct connection from the human nervous system to the internet, or to the cell network, or FM/AM radio. One drawback is that the auditory nerve is a one way street so two-way communication would be have to be worked out through other means.

Of course this would be a lot different than having a electronic circuit in the brain but it is a clear step towards interfacing.

As far as making it digestible to the general public...that could be tough...given how hollywood has genrally portrayed cyborgs as evil. Cyborg would probably be a word to avoid. The public seems to accept the use of electronics to help with hearing and sight, so maybe it could be discussed on those terms...helping people realize their full potential.

Hi Mind,

I have already sketched out the schematics for the system you are talking about , it is not possible quite yet but maybe within the year.

See this thread on the implantable cell phone

I'm currently working on the fundamentals of what would be necessary to implant directly to the brain. My estimate is 15-20 years before full-on sensory and motor interfaces will be available. At the conference I attended last week it was pretty clear from recent work in monkeys that adding additional sensory capabilities will not be a problem for the brain.

When I talk to the general public about my work right now, I don't talk about enhancing capabilities. I tend to stick to talking about helping the handicapped. My opinion is that we probably need to stay under the public radar for a while. Terms like mind uploading are inaccurate and tend to make people think you are a little nutty.

Best,
Ocsrazor

When I talk to the general public about my work right now, I don't talk about enhancing capabilities. I tend to stick to talking about helping the handicapped. My opinion is that we probably need to stay under the public radar for a while. Terms like mind uploading are inaccurate and tend to make people think you are a little nutty.

This is very wise and emminently practical. I suggest that more of us would be wise to tone down our rhetoric, or reserve the more aggressive theorizing to our forum and for the pages of Sci-Fi treatises. Here is a quote that perhaps illustrates why.

"A mediocre idea that generates enthusiasm will go further than a great idea that inspires no one."
--Mary Kay Ash

Some of the very best theoretical aspects of scientific speculation over the last two centuries took place in the annals of fictional prose. That many serious scientists were exceptionally bad writers (and only mediocre scientists as well) is evident by the vast quanitity of B and worse grade fiction. But what is more remarkable is that it was the exceptions that have made the rules.

The very best sci-fi of the 20th Century almost universally was produced by trained scientists and physicians and was the baton passed from the Natural Scientific musings of such illustrious originators as Wells, Verne, Huxley, Doyle, and Lovecraft but were contrasted by such venerable thinkers as Twain contemplating the paradoxes and pitfalls of Time Travel.

While I agree completely with Occams implications I also encourage you all to express yourselves through this parallel method as it is also a means of creating memetic paradigms with which the common mind begins the process of assimilating the socio-technological implications of many of the concepts we are addressing.

The baton held in the hands of such wonderful writers as Clarke, Asimov, Heinlein, and others has passed to all to few writers of the caliber of a Michael Crichton. I feel this too is a valid area of endeavor, BUT as scientists we must resist the call of wild imagination as it confuses serious analysis with fanciful speculation, even when crafted as a drab and seemingly standard scientific text.

the extraction of all the information that makes up you is not going to be achieveable without knowing the exact position of every single one of the more than 100 trillion connections

This is wrong. Neurons die fast. Not before long, you'll lose one million of them, maybe get some new - not to mention the connections.

And you don't notice it - at all.

- Thomas

Hi Gang,

LazL - Absolutely, I very much like hashing it out in here, to get my argument straight. I also have a couple of novels in outline form that hopefully I will get around to writing someday, which attack the social issues of the technology I am building.
(btw - I don't enjoy Asimov and Crichton, love Heinlein and Clarke)

Thomas - Please explain how the loss of neurons to cell death doesn't effect your personality. We absolutely do notice their loss, there is a gradual loss of neurons and mental ability with age. A change in the connections results in a change in your mind -different memories, different learning experiences, etc. Neither cell loss, nor changing synapses has anything do with the fact that you still have to map connections to have a picture of a mind.

Best,
Ocsrazor

Please explain how the loss of neurons to cell death doesn't effect your personality.

Eventually - it effects, of course. But you may rewire your brain quite a lot - and fell no difference.

So - this absolute precision you are talking about, is not necessary.

- Thomas

(btw - I don't enjoy Asimov and Crichton, love Heinlein and Clarke)

See how easy it is to establish a spectrum of choice?

Also, my opinion is that mind-uploading is not the "stickiest" issue. The most problematic is indentity and conciousness. If I implant a digital circuit in my brain that allows for direct access to the internet, there is no reason I could not also have a direct connection to another human brains. At this point, will the internet and myself have a shared conciousness? Will I have a shared conciousness with other people with implants?

Our most basic biological instinct is self-preservation. I think most people (at this point in human history) would revolt at the idea of losing control or sharing their conciousness. The idea is even scary to me...but it doesn't stop me from thinking about and preparing for it.

Will I have a shared conciousness with other people with implants?

It's already so. More communication bandwidth with others, will only make this fact apparent.

- Thomas

This has in fact been true since our species created common language. The rate of acceleration just began noticibly increasing after the invention of symoblic language with written forms and now in just a few decades has gone hyperbolic ballistic in this respect for many individuals because of webmind and broader and more comlpex methodologies for comunications.

Freedom is the fantasy of the feral mind, and the Singularity as a consequence of any AI will understand this simple human reality. I think the complications are more significant than a few decades are going to resolve but short of that almost anything goes.

Hop on bozos the bus is about to depart.

You see in evolutionary terms it will all come down to whether as a species we are parasitic or symbiotic, not just how we program AI.

There is no such thing as Original Sin but you do know that all human children are born by definition as parasites and it requires all levels of socializng to make us barely conscience of social responsibility. Our social contract has to be spelled out in detail with good reason.

Yes, Yes...I know that we currently have a low-bandwidth shared conciousness, but it is low enough that people are able to maintain their desired identity (or illusion of identity as some have suggested). Direct "brain to brain" technological telepathy will be a huge step towards a deeper shared conciousness and will raise many questions and fears amongst the general population...that is my point.

And to add to the discussion here is the news fresh off the virtual presses:
http://story.news.ya...cience_brain_dc

Scientists Develop First Artificial Brain Section
Wed Mar 12, 1:59 PM ET

LONDON (Reuters) - Scientists have developed the first artificial region of the brain -- a silicon chip that mimics an area that controls memory, mood and awareness.

Devised by researchers at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, the chip is designed to carry on the functions of the region known as the hippocampus and could one day be used to help people with brain damage.

It will first be tested on tissue from rats' brains, and then on live animals.

"If all goes well, it will then be tested in a way to help people who have suffered brain damage due to stroke, epilepsy or Alzheimer's disease" New Scientist magazine said on Wednesday.

Theodore Berger and his team developed the artificial hippocampus as a test case to see if it could be done. It has taken them nearly 10 years.

First they devised a mathematical model of how the hippocampus performs under all conditions. The next step involved building the model into a silicon chip and then interfacing the chip with the brain in laboratory studies.

"No one understands how the hippocampus encodes information. So the team simply copied its behavior," according to the magazine.

If the initial brain tissue tests are successful, Berger and his colleagues plan to begin trials in live rats within six months and then in monkeys.

"If you lose your hippocampus you only lose the ability to store new memories," Berger told the magazine.

He added that if the chip, which will sit on the outside of the skull, helps someone with a damaged hippocampus regain the ability to store new memories it will be proof that it works.


But the magazine warned that because the device would affect memory and mood, which are fundamental to identity, it raises ethical and consent issues.

"If someone can't form new memories, then to what extent can they give consent to have this implant?" the magazine added.

Hi Gang,

Thomas - from earlier - I'm not saying you need exact precision but you will probably need to map within an order of magnitude of every connection in the brain. I'm making my estimate based on what is currently known about neuronal population coding dynamics. You might be able to get an accurate picture of signalling by looking at a slightly lower number of connections, but you can't zoom out too much. Its going to be resolution issue. Do you want the high resolution or the low resolution version of yourself? [wacko]

Mind - Mind Uploading is a silly semantics issue, that is why I brought it up, it needs to squashed as it too much of fantasy as it is usually stated.

The issue you just raised is a very serious one and a strong possibility in the very near future (weird to think I may be producing the technology that does it [huh] ). I strongly agree with Thomas and Laz that this is a process that has been going on for a very long time and is now accelerating. It is very interesting to watch the current generation of teenagers and their very strong tendencies toward group interaction and constant communication - its already happening. It is an ethical issue that needs to be dealt with, and soon, because based on what is currently going on in the field, implantable extrasensory devices are 20 years away at the most.

I have a ten year plan to start a company to produce exactly the type of devices you are talking about so I am very interested in hashing out the sticky details. I will face some very nasty regulatory issues in trying to get this accomplished but there will also be incredible demand for these devices, especially for military, intelligence, and business applications. I have been trying to explore the broader issues and include them in my planning.

Laz - GRRRREAT Post, Ted Berger's stuff is fantastic, some of my group (the electrical engineers) will get to interact with his group this summer at the Telluride Neuromorphic Engineering Workshop
This type of technology will give an understanding of large scale/low resolution signal flow in a brain, which when combined with the small scale/high resolution stuff we are working on will produce a more complete picture of information processing in brains.

You also just reminded me that I need to add a neuromorpic engineering section to the neural interfacing resources thread.

Best, Peter

As you may know the technology already exists through implantation of simple glass/gold electrodes into the brain to allow "locked in" victims of neurological disorders to communicate with computers via FM radio waves.
In fact, a recent article in the Weekly Planet hailed the CEO of Neural Signals as the "Father of Cyborgs." Dr. Kennedy's most successful patients are able to move a cursor and produce words on a computer screen by merely thinking about them.
One has to wonder how much faster we could advance as a society by pouring in funding for such research. Could the quest for real immortality simply be a matter of refining and expanding upon this research?

One has to wonder how much faster we could advance as a society by pouring in funding for such research. Could the quest for real immortality simply be a matter of refining and expanding upon this research?  

I agree.

I am curious what you might think of the subject I have raised here:

http://www.imminst.o...&f=82&t=977&hl=

along with my suggested applied tech?

Two aspects are enjoined when we discuss cerebral empowerment, one is access to information and the other is communication. Both are directly effected by this avenue of development.

And then comes what you allude to "hyperbolic evolutionary adaptation" resulting from the feedback of heightened intelligence by our symbiotically enhanced organic beings and their interface with each other and their offspring AI.

Hard to say Lazarus, since I never did pick up on Espanol [huh]

Well the gist is I am suggsting a specific application of the Hippocampal Implant that you haven't heard yet and the point of trynig to get you to look at the suggestion in a foreign language is because it is precisely the "effect" I wanted to impress upon the reader. Give it a try and see if you can dicipher a bit and then I will break the suspense.

I was able to understand the general message you made in the thread, but I won't steal your thunder by giving it away. I will say that your idea, if put into general practice, would make the internet a site for global communications in the truest sense.

So does that mean you like the idea and sense the magnitude of its subtle importance?

I actually look forward to the eventual connectivity of minds - AKA, some form of techno-telepathy. And like everyone here has already said, it is simply the logical continuation of a trend already taking place.

My only requirements would be that
1) the connection has an "on-off switch", just like with current technology where I can turn my computer off if I wish to be left alone.

2) Security protocols so I can restrict information that I want to remain confidential.

My second point makes me wonder if one day there may be "mind hackers" who, similar to present day computer hackers, try to hack for restricted access into one's mind. This would elevate the importance of information security to a completely new level.

As far as uploading, correct me if I am wrong but from what I can gather there are two theories on how to go about his. The first is to have a blue print of the brain that is precise even at the atomic level. Then using this blue print and nanotechnology (I presume) we could physically recreate the biological brain.

The second theory on how to upload would be to find out how the brain stores and codes all of its information and then find a way to copy all of that information (which is basically the human soul/essence/being, etc.) so it can be downloaded onto a nonbiological substrate (possibly silicon).

Wouldn't either of these methods also make available light speed travel (sort of like energizing on Star Trek)?