Connect with us

Published

on

Elon Musk’s Neuralink received approval last week from the US Food and Drug Administration to conduct human clinical trials, which one former FDA official called “really a big deal.” I do not disagree, but I am skeptical that this technology will “change everything.” Not every profound technological advance has broad social and economic implications.

With Neuralink’s device, a robot surgically inserts a device into the brain that can then decode some brain activity and connect the brain signals to computers and other machines. A person paralyzed from the neck down, for example, could use the interface to manipulate her physical environment, as well as to write and communicate.

This would indeed be a breakthrough — for people with paralysis or traumatic brain injuries. For others, I am not so sure. For purposes of argument, as there are many companies working in this space, assume this technology works as advertised. Who exactly will want to use it?

One fear is that the brain-machine connections will be expensive and that only the wealthy will be able to afford them. These people will become a new class of “super-thinkers,” lording over us with their superior intellects.

I do not think that this scenario is likely. If I were offered $100 million for a permanent brain-computer connection, I would not accept it, if only because of fear of side effects and possible neurological damage. And I would want to know for sure that the nexus of control goes from me to the computer, not vice versa.

Besides, there are other ways of augmenting my intelligence with computers, most notably the recent AI innovations. It is true that I can think faster than I can speak or type, but — I’m just not in that much of a hurry. I would rather learn how to type on my phone as fast as a teenager does.

A related vision of direct brain-computer interface is that computers will be able to rapidly inject useful knowledge into our brains. Imagine going to bed, turning on your brain device, and waking up knowing Chinese. Sounds amazing — yet if that were possible, so would all sorts of other scenarios, not all of them benign, where a computer can alter or control our brains.

I also view this scenario as remote — unlike using your brain to manipulate objects, it seems true science fiction. Current technologies read brain signals but do not control them.

Another vision for this technology is that the owners of computers will want to “rent out” the powers of human brains, much the way companies rent out space today in the cloud. Software programs are not good at some skills, such as identifying unacceptable speech or images. In this scenario, the connected brains come largely from low-wage laborers, just as both social media companies and OpenAI have used low-wage labor in Kenya to grade the quality of output or to help make content decisions.

Those investments may be good for raising the wages of those people. Many observers may object, however, that a new and more insidious class distinction will have been created — between those who have to hook up to machines to make a living, and those who do not.

Might there be scenarios where higher-wage workers wish to be hooked up to the machine? Wouldn’t it be helpful for a spy or a corporate negotiator to receive computer intelligence in real-time while making decisions? Would professional sports allow such brain-computer interfaces? They might be useful in telling a baseball player when to swing and when not to.

The more I ponder these options, the more skeptical I become about large-scale uses of brain-computer interfaces for the non-disabled. Artificial intelligence has been progressing at an amazing pace, and it doesn’t require any intrusion into our bodies, much less our brains. There are always earplugs and some future version of Google Glass.

The main advantage of the direct brain-computer interface seems to be speed. But extreme speed is important in only a limited class of circumstances, many of them competitions and zero-sum endeavors, such as sports and games.

Of course, companies such as Neuralink may prove me wrong. But for the moment I am keeping my bets on artificial intelligence and large language models, which sit a comfortable few inches away from me as I write this. 

© 2023 Bloomberg LP


Samsung Galaxy A34 5G was recently launched by the company in India alongside the more expensive Galaxy A54 5G smartphone. How does this phone fare against the Nothing Phone 1 and the iQoo Neo 7? We discuss this and more on Orbital, the Gadgets 360 podcast. Orbital is available on Spotify, Gaana, JioSaavn, Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music and wherever you get your podcasts.
Affiliate links may be automatically generated – see our ethics statement for details.

Continue Reading

Science

Moon’s Deepest Canyons Formed in Minutes by High-Speed Impact Debris

Published

on

By

Moon’s Deepest Canyons Formed in Minutes by High-Speed Impact Debris

Two colossal canyons on the moon, both deeper than the Grand Canyon, were formed in under ten minutes by surges of high-speed rock debris, as per reports. These valleys, named Vallis Schrödinger and Vallis Planck, extend for 270 kilometres and 280 kilometres, respectively, with depths of up to 3.5 kilometres. Comparatively, the Grand Canyon reaches a maximum depth of approximately 1.9 kilometres. The canyons are located near the Schrödinger impact basin in the lunar south polar region, an area marked by towering mountains and deep craters.

Impact that shaped the lunar landscape

According to the study published in Nature Communications, these canyons are part of several valleys that formed from the debris ejected during the impact that created Schrödinger basin, a 320-kilometre-wide crater formed around 3.81 billion years ago. The basin is positioned on the outer edge of the South Pole–Aitken basin, the moon’s largest and oldest remaining impact structure, which dates back more than 4.2 billion years.

Unprecedented energy levels behind the canyons

As per findings, rocky debris from the impact travelled at speeds ranging between 3,420 and 4,600 kilometres per hour. In comparison, a bullet from a 9mm handgun reaches speeds of about 2,200 kilometres per hour. The force required to carve these canyons is estimated to have been over 130 times greater than the total energy stored in the current global nuclear arsenal.

Key insights for future lunar exploration

Speaking to Space.com, David Kring, a geologist at the Lunar and Planetary Institute, highlighted that unlike the Grand Canyon, which was shaped by water over millions of years, these lunar canyons were formed in a matter of minutes by rock flows. The distribution of impact debris also suggests that astronauts landing near the South Pole–Aitken basin may find better access to some of the moon’s oldest geological samples. These insights contribute to ongoing research on potential landing sites for future lunar missions.

Continue Reading

Science

NASA Looks for Private Partners To Revive VIPER Moon Rover Mission

Published

on

By

NASA Looks for Private Partners To Revive VIPER Moon Rover Mission

NASA is inviting U.S. companies to collaborate on the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER), a mission initially halted due to budget constraints. Designed to search for water ice near the lunar south pole, VIPER was originally planned as a $450 million project. The agency had cancelled the mission in July 2024, citing cost-saving measures. Now, a fresh call has been made to private firms willing to take on the challenge of delivering the rover to the Moon, conducting exploration, and sharing scientific data. A final decision is expected in the coming months.

VIPER’s Role in Lunar Exploration

According to NASA’s announcement, VIPER was designed to support Artemis program objectives by locating potential water ice deposits. These resources are crucial for future human missions and lunar surface operations. Initially set to launch aboard the Griffin lander by Astrobotic Technology, the mission was shelved before its deployment. Following interest from private firms, NASA has decided to explore new avenues for its deployment while ensuring that the scientific goals remain intact.

Proposals and Selection Process

NASA officials have confirmed that responses from interested companies must be submitted by February 20, 2025. Selected candidates will be invited to provide more detailed proposals, with final selections anticipated by mid-year. The agency has clarified that while VIPER will be handed over in its current state, modifications involving dismantling its instruments for use on other spacecraft will not be permitted. Companies will be required to manage landing operations, conduct scientific research, and ensure data dissemination as part of the agreement.

Potential Benefits for Private Firms

In a statement in an official press release by NASA, Joel Kearns, Deputy Associate Administrator for Exploration in NASA’s Science Mission Directorate, stated that the partnership would provide significant opportunities for private firms looking to advance their lunar surface capabilities. He emphasised that VIPER’s deployment could mark a critical step toward commercial involvement in lunar exploration, reinforcing NASA’s commitment to fostering public-private collaborations.

Future of Lunar Resource Exploration

As NASA continues to push for sustainable lunar exploration, the integration of private-sector capabilities is seen as a key element in reducing costs and expanding mission possibilities. With lunar resource utilisation playing a major role in future space endeavours, the agency remains focused on ensuring that scientific objectives are met while advancing commercial lunar operations. The final selection of partners for VIPER is expected to set the stage for upcoming exploration missions and resource prospecting efforts on the Moon.

Continue Reading

Science

Microplastics Found in Human Brain Tissue, Study Shows Rising Levels

Published

on

By

Microplastics Found in Human Brain Tissue, Study Shows Rising Levels

Tiny plastic particles have been found in human brain tissue, raising concerns over their impact on health. Scientists have detected a significant increase in microplastics and nanoplastics (MNPs) in the brain over the past decades. The particles, commonly present in air, water, and food, have now been identified within human tissue, challenging previous assumptions about the brain’s protective barriers. Researchers are working to understand the long-term consequences of this plastic infiltration.

Rising Plastic Levels in Brain Tissue

According to the study published in Nature Medicine, 91 brain samples collected from individuals who died between 1997 and 2024 were analysed. Reports indicate a 50 percent increase in MNP concentrations from 2016 to 2024, with median levels rising from 3,345 micrograms per gram to 4,917 micrograms per gram. Andrew West, a neuroscientist at Duke University, told Science News that the sheer quantity of plastic detected was unexpected, stating that he didn’t believe it until he saw all the data.

Unexpected Particle Shapes and Sources

Findings suggest that the plastic particles are not uniform. Many were thin, sharp fragments rather than the engineered beads often studied in labs. Richard Thompson, a microplastic pollution expert at the University of Plymouth, told Science News that these plastics originate from everyday products such as grocery bags and bottles. Polystyrene, frequently used in medical and food industries, was found in lower amounts compared to polyethylene.

Higher MNP levels were found in the brains of 12 individuals diagnosed with dementia, but researchers have not confirmed a direct causal link. Some scientists speculate that neurological changes associated with dementia may increase plastic accumulation. Phoebe Stapleton, a toxicologist at Rutgers University, told Nature Medicine that further research is required to understand the biological impact, stating, that the next steps will be to understand what they are doing in the brain and how the body responds to them.

Continue Reading

Trending