Give That Monkey Brain A Robotic Arm! 148
jeffsenter writes: "The NYTimes (free reg. req.) has a short story about the craziest science since the story on decoding a cat's vision. A monkey at Duke has had its brain wired up to control a robot. However, the robot is at MIT and the signal goes over the Internet. The research offers some hope to paralyzed people."
Re:Free registration crap (Score:1)
Human implementations (Score:2)
54% Slashdot Pure
Re:Other Potential (Score:1)
Seth
Spanking the monkey (Score:1)
Plan for World Domination (Score:2)
Step 1: New, Improved E-Monkey(tm) patent pending
Step 2: Monkey Linux [8m.com]
Step 3: Fle et of unmanned aircraft [boeing.com]
Step 4:Pick Target
Brain. (Score:1)
Better NYTimes story (Score:1)
Re:What the article didn't mention: (Score:1)
Does there really something to be gained by torturing monkeys like this? Is there something to be gained by having your mind "downloaded" out of your body and into a computer?
For more interesting thoughts read: In the Absence of the Sacred, by Jerry Mander
Dupe news! (Score:2)
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/11/15/16123
Re:Disgusting... (Score:1)
Some prices are too high to pay for research. The Nazi's "experiments" on humans were one. Our "experiments" on animals are no better.
cool (Score:1)
Re:Disgusting... (Score:1)
If this was being done to a dog
I'm sure this kind of stuff is done to cats and dogs all the time, but that wouldnt be reported on because it would leave a bad taste in the readers mouth.
I'm conflicted. I do see how a lot of good could be accomplished by animal experiments but I do suspect that a lot of frivilous experiments are conducted on animals too. I feel really bad for these suffering creatures, both the animals and the researchers who have become desensitized.
I wonder how eager scientists are to go right to the lab animal rather than putting it off until the last minute. It would be nice if there was something like a animal experiments ethics department where you had to apply to get a higher animal like a cat or monkey. They would review you experiment for readiness for an animal subject, the suffering you will inflict, and the justification you have for using a live subject. Of course this department would probably end up being corrupt.
Re:Remote admin body parts? (Score:3)
I'll tell you exactly why. Latency. Noone ever seems to stop and think about the latency in these kinds of systems.
It takes radio waves travelling at the speed of light (the speed limit of the univese) several minutes (can't remember exactly) to get from Earth to Mars and back. Now every time you do any action, your poor brain has to wait several minutes for feedback on that. You try putting your foot down to take a step, but don't feel the pressure of the ground on the sole of your foot until a few minutes later. I'm sorry, but that's just not going to work, no matter how much you want it to.
You know those fun things they have at science expos, where you speak into the microphone and it plays it back to you with a 1 second or so delay? Those things are really hard to use, because your brain is used to near-instantaneous feedback. With practice, you can train it to ignore the feedback and just speak.
But this is just speech, you don't really need that feedback (eg. deaf people can speak, particularly if they weren't born deaf). For anything requiring a vague level of dexterity, such as walking, looking, playing sport, music, and doing just about anything with your hands and fingers, I suspect that even 500ms of latency is too much for your brain to handle. Thus it might just work for halfway-round-the-world comms (landline only, no satellites)... maybe.
Telepresence is a nice idea, but should be thought of more as an extension to videoconferencing than as the elaborate setup you're envisaging.
Since you are 'here', communicating with 'there' takes some unavoidable time... The only way to beat that is to go there.
Re:Gaming Applications... (Score:1)
this is sad (Score:1)
most unhappy
Steve
Re:Vice versa (Score:2)
Monkeys would have decided Florida's vote instead of lawyers. Oh, sorry, what am I saying?
Other articles (Score:2)
Also, the login/password "slashdot2000" / "slashdot200" works fine at the NY times.
--
Re:Reverse-engineering the brain (Score:1)
manipulate reality. When we (or the state) can change what people see and hear directly, things begin to get real sticky, real fast.
Isn't that what people are worried about AOL/Time Warner
Monkey brain signals over Internet... (Score:1)
ICANN
Pets.com
slashdot moderation
presidential auction on Ebay
Well time to give /. a rest, banana break.
--
Remote admin body parts? (Score:5)
Whats so importaint about the distance? Do they hope to allow amputies the ablity to control their removed arms thosands of miles away? Sounds like a scary movie idea to me.
--
You've touched my heart. (Score:2)
--------
Re:Tragic (Score:1)
This is so, so sad
Soooo funny. (Score:1)
Re:Boo hoo (Score:2)
I think you would have great difficulty establishing rights for people much less rights for animals. While some dedicated souls might truly believe a rights based approach to morality most people who espouse such an approach don'treally believe it.
The concept of a right is something which is inherintly inalienable not merely a desired state which can be overrideen in a pressing case or when it "conflicts" with other supposed rights (moreover the concept of rights carries with it that these are local moral necessities so one cannot say you have a right for the government to act in a way which maximizes total utility because this would be a non-local concept). Therefore one who truly believes in a rights based system must adhere to these rights in the most pressing of circumstances. For instance if I actually had a right to property and I owned the cure to a worldwide deadly disease a rights based approach would deem it inproper for that cure to be taken from me despite the billions of lives I might save. In this way very few people actually belive in rights (in an extreme enough example they would in actuality favor a more utilitarian approach. Their supposed rights are really just concepts which, because of human psychology, make the world a better place because of there enforcement.
Under this methodology the only reason we don't do this testing on humans is not because the actual testing would be immoral but that the backlashinduced by angry individuals and the inability of people to determine appropriate and inappropriate testing would reduce total utility
Internet...?? (Score:1)
Wire it up to Kevin Warwick (Score:1)
God Sues Over Brain-Patent Violations (Score:1)
The Vatican filed a blanket lawsuit
in the World Court today against all bio-
engineers attempting to reverse-engineer
the brain. Vatican counsel are claiming God
holds a Universal Patent, number
234,597,045,714,510,947,109,571,095,
571,094, on any biological organ that can
cause a living being to think.
The Pope refused comment on advice of
counsel, but sources within the Vatican,
who wished to remain anonymous, said
that the church has no complaints about
the science behind reverse-engineering
the brain, they are "simply trying to make
sure God's duly appointed representatives
on Earth recieve just payment for His hard
work and obvious innovation."
The US Patent and Trade Office only com-
mented that it does not recognize any
Universal Patent Office. Nor is there
any record the USPTO has granted such
a patent, therefore they cannot see how
the Vatican has "a legal leg to stand on."
-Rob
Re:disgusting (Score:1)
Re:monkeybrained robot arm (Score:1)
Then again, what do I know, I'm a simpleton...
Re:disgusting (Score:1)
Unfortunatly, scientists like to make sure things like this have some sort of a basis in reality before they start cutting open the heads of humans (or injecting weird drugs, or any other type of medical experimentation out there).
I'm a vegan, and I won't use cosmetics or soaps that were tested on animals. I won't wear leather from animals if there is anything else to wear, but if I'm dying, and the medicine they give me was perfected on chimps, I'll say a little prayer in my heart for all the animals who died to allow me to live, but I wont refuse that medicine.
Moderation for the sake of morals is good, exclusion of something that could save a life or allow a child to walk again is acceptance of ignorance and refusal to believe that life can be better.
I don't choose to believe that.
Vice versa (Score:3)
Similar to the whole "brain surgeon touches part of a patient's brain, his leg moves" kind of thing.
Sony is doomed... (Score:2)
54% Slashdot Pure
Related annectdote (Score:2)
There was a professor at some university like MIT who embedded a chip into his arm. The chip relayed the nervous signals in his arm back to a computer which recorded them. He was later able to play thos signals back to his arm to reproduce the movements he had made earlier in the day.
Similar idea, slightly different application.
Re:Vice versa (Score:1)
monkey = new Newbie;
Re:Vice versa (Score:2)
Oh yeah! (Score:1)
And now, we can have a room full of monkey brains teleoperate arms typing on typewriters on the exterior of the soon-to-be abandoned space station Mir, working on reproducing the entire works of Shakespeare!
Only this time, in the absence of atmosphere (less drag) and in microgravity! Woooo!
But seriously though, with the advances in neural-interfaces such as this, we might approach Implant technology as in Niven & Pournelle's Oath of Fealty - the ultimate PDA! Palm is doomed when compared with Implants.
ILFM (Score:1)
repost (Score:2)
Re:The obligatory partners link.... (Score:1)
treke
i wonder if it was a barrett robot arm (Score:1)
Whoa, there. Always mount a Scratch Monkey. (Score:2)
'Well, diagnostics for disk drives are designed to shake up the equipment. But monkey brains are not designed to handle the electrical signals they received. You can imagine the convulsions that resulted. Two of the monkeys were stunned, and three died. The Digital engineer needed to be calmed down; he was going to call the Humane Society. This became known as the Great Dead Monkey Project, and it leads of course to the aphorism I use as my motto: You should not conduct tests while valuable monkeys are connected, so "Always mount a scratch monkey."'
On a nearly related note, (Now that I think about it), this year's presedential election could be described as a race between "Curious George and The Man With The Big Yellow Hat."
Logical next step (Score:1)
< humor style=bad>
And if we gave the robot a human-like hand, and taught the monkey to type... (Insert favorite reference to 10,000 monkeys typing randomly for 10,000 years.)(Absolutely do not use the B word).
</humor>
Karl
I'm a slacker? You're the one who waited until now to just sit arround.
A robot arm? (Score:1)
Re:Sony is doomed... (Score:1)
Re:MESSAGE FROM MONKEY (Score:1)
I think the doctor didn't like it and punished you with an Offtopic 8(
Re:disgusting (Score:1)
Mojo Jojo (Score:1)
In an unrelated story... (Score:2)
10 PRINT "This is a"
20 PRINT "Haiku program."
love me not (Score:1)
Re:Vice versa (Score:1)
And while we're at it, how about eliminating space walks? Safe as an EVA suit is, staying inside the shuttle is safer. A good set of VR goggles and a robot running off brain-waves would make a space-walk a lot less dangerous. For that matter, with a high enough bandwidth we could eliminate manned spaceflight altogether, although that's not necessarily such a good idea...
Re:Vice versa (Score:3)
Already, in bionics, machines have been used to replace damaged limbs, joints, and organs (with varying degress of success). But all of these systems I know of involve control of the machine parts by both the brain and a machine, not control of the organic parts by both.
The Duke stuff is particularly interesting because it claims to have success in mapping primate brain signals directly into control signals. This is a big deal. Previous commercial "brainwave" systems such as IBVA, which some may bring up as "been there done that" were not so accurate, they basically were partially successful attempts to match magnetic and electrical patterns in the brain (received through the skull, using sensors attached to the head) into signals. The coolest use for this was making music or trippy graphics based on "thought patterns," for most other things it was not so good. Other systems, such as the Biomuse (which actually is very useful for people with some forms of paralysis, allowing them to control computers with their eyes, or arms - and also used for music, by Atau Tanaka), also used electromagnetic sensors, but on muscle groups.
Lots of interesting work is being done in organism-machine interconnection. Ferdinando A. Mussa-Ivaldi of Northwestern University has a robot controlled by the brain of a lamprey eel (I think that may have been on
Now, the twist on the Duke/MIT research is that the Internet was used as the communications medium between the brain and the robot. While this is not most useful for giving quadropalegics back some motion of themselves (they would be best served through a robotic exoskeleton for this purpose), they could telerobotically control a mobile robot to perform functions in the world for them. For someone who has great difficulties moving (and also for top-secret military experiments, I'm sure...) direct brain control of a telerobotic operator could certainly help in terms of giving them back some autonomy in grocery shopping, buying their medicines, etc. However, I think, psychologically people may have an easier time dealing with someone whose robot stays close to them - or that they wear, or that is attached to their wheelchair - at least in the short-term.
For some interesting philosophical discussions of Cyborgs and human-computer direct interfacing, see, among others, Hans Moravec, Donna Haraway, and the late Alexander Chislenko (http://www.lucifer.com/~sasha/home.html) - all of whom I don't necessarily agree with 100%, but have some interesting things to say...
Here are Dr. Nicolelis' web sites, if you want to read more than just NYT about his work:
http://nicolelis.neuro.duke.edu/
http://www.neuro.duke.edu/faculty/Nicoleli/Nico
...And Dr. Srinivasan at MIT:
http://webrle.mit.edu/rlestaff/p-srin.htm
Yes! (Score:2)
Re:Vice versa (Score:2)
Rami
--
Re:Human implementations (Score:2)
Effective artificial telekenisis.
Excellent!
Rami
--
Other Potential (Score:2)
Then again, I have enough trouble keeping my joystick calibrated... ;)
Need Input (Score:1)
They could have had the monkey in a room with a banana and just monitored its brain signals as it manipulated its arm. That would have correlation.
I'm all for someone electricuting the pleasure center of my brain, where is the sign up sheet?
Re:Vice versa (Score:2)
Boo hoo (Score:2)
We test things on animals so we DONT HURT HUMANS.
If Bobo having wires in his brain puts us closer to helping disabled people then HOOK HIM UP.
Or you can tell the quadraplegics that the reason they still cant do anything, even with all our technology, is because giving them a semi-normal life would hurt an animal.
FunOne
This is the wrong link. (Score:2)
This is the more important part of the project. While only a few people are paralysed, most end up having disobedient children.
Unfortunately, they've been having little success in meeting their first objective: teaching the monkey not to curl up in a little ball and scream every time it's hooked up to the arm.
--------
Probability (Score:3)
Explanation (Score:1)
Re:Vice versa (Score:1)
Re:monkeybrained robot arm (Score:1)
Re:Boo hoo (Score:1)
Severely mentally disabled people can't write bills of rights either, nor understand them. Yet they have rights. According to your argument, they would have no rights. Does this sound like a good system?
Re:Boo hoo (Score:2)
Sureyou might believe that animals have a right to live, etc, but that's your opinion, other people and predators might not give a toss about what you think.
I don't like animal testing just in order to develop some bloody schampoo or something, but this testing got a very valid medical point. and in the end if it's between me and the monkey, I think I'd prefer the monkey to die... Not a nice thought, but if I got to be honest...
Wait a minute... (Score:1)
Re:The obligatory partners link.... (Score:1)
Wait till the Pr0N industry gets ahold of this (Score:1)
E.
Re:Games? (Score:1)
NO! We don't want to be teaching cyborg monkeys how to kill humans! Talk about irresponsible research...
___
But... (Score:2)
(Whistle) Handball!
Oh well, I guess it would be awesome at throw-ins...
Finally! An excuse for sports! (Score:2)
Geek: Are you kidding me? Check this out, I just pinged my arm - what do you expect me to do with a latency like that?
On the other hand... (Score:1)
Re:Vice versa (Score:1)
So how do I have the misfortune of knowing this? Well, let's just allude vaguely to some bet that didn't exist anyway, so hush, and fifty monkeys that wouldn't quite sit and type Shakespeare of their own accord.
I'm not sure why this is big news (Score:2)
What's more amazing... (Score:1)
Is how a geek news website can be operated by thousands of monkey brains every day.
MOFO KNOWS (Score:2)
Stupid monkey-brain-controlled robotic arm. I've seen a gorilla-brain-controlled voice synthesizer with amazing psychic powers, and a dry, sarcastic wit.
BattleBots (Score:2)
---
seumas.com
Lamprey eel brain in a jar drives robot... (Score:2)
This has just got B movie science fiction coolness all over it. I wonder if they can make the saline solution bubble like it did in all the movies of the brains in jars?
(They are mostly studying how to make connections to the brain and how the brain adapts to those connections. The little robot is probably just for media pizzaz or the grad students got drunk and made a bet.)
Whole article is at sciencenews.org [sciencenews.org].
Re:bah! you tricked me (Score:2)
Re:Remote admin body parts? (Score:2)
direct brain control of a telerobotic operator that could certainly help in terms of giving them back some autonomy in grocery shopping, buying their medicines, etc.
The distance work allows for the possibility of decoupling the human from the device that is performing the actions they no longer can. So, a paralyzed person could send out their remote-brain-controlled Waldo to do their shopping, clean their house, whatever. It will help them regain some sense of self-sufficiency - at least they control the robot themselves.
Also, in this experiement they are controlling a robot arm, not an amputated human arm... doing THAT at a great distance certainly is pretty suspect...
Re:Vice versa (Score:3)
Monkey Head Transplant (Score:2)
Most relevant and most interesting of the linked article is the section on Longer Life for the Paralyzed.
Option to ignore NY Times stories on Slashdot? (Score:2)
I'd like the option to exclude stories that refer to articles on the NY Times in my slashdot config please.
Re:Free registration crap (Score:2)
Re:Disgusting... (Score:3)
Actually, they probably will monitor it for a long time to monitor the long-term effects of the electrodes on the monkey's brain.
As for using monkeys instead of humans, there are laws against using humans for high-risk experiments such as this which imply manslaughter to Murder-1. Monkeys, no matter how unfortunate it seems, are not proteced by laws regarding manslaughter. Since primate physiology is the most similar to humans, it makes sence to use a monkey to test the system first. This way they can prove it's relative safety to the Feds before practicing on a human and avoid being attacked for murder by the AMA and FBI.
* * *
If this was being done to a dog, or a *gasp* human...
Are you volunteering? Step up to the plate. If you're going to condemn the scientific community for not being willing to use human subjects, then you had better be willing to be a subject!
This happened once, by the way. There was a doctor by the name of Erich Hippke in the early 1940's, working in a little Bavarian village by the name of Dachau-- perhaps you've heard of it? Jews and political prisoners became the unwilling human subjects of a curious surgeon who wanted to know just how much strain the human body could take before dying.
He exposed his "lab animals" (to use your term) to extreme cold, vacuums, severe impacts, etc., all in the name of science, and for the benefit of the Third Reich. Twins were of special usefulness, because if one died, he would have a second subject who was nearly identical for a control group.
And the most convenient part was, there was no need to euthanize the subjects, because his experiments killed every one sooner or later....
There's a lot to think about before you begin advocating human test subjects!
---------------------
Re:Remote admin body parts? (Score:2)
Re:Remote admin body parts? (Score:2)
Simple. They were just trying to justify having OC3 lines to their desks.
How ironic! (Score:2)
Hey, next, let's wire up a monkey's ass to a minefield... that could prove amusing for at least 5 minutes... or better yet, lets fuckin' wire up a whole bunch of monkeys to Brad Pitt for no good reason at all other than to say that we've done it.
OR... we could wire up some scientists to a high voltage / high amperage source and watch all the fun. And when we're done, we can blame it on PETA as we hit some lame-o corp. CEO in the face with a shit pie!
HUH? What does this research offer? (Score:2)
:|
Re:Vice versa (Score:3)
The computer in question was taking it's cues from the patient's brain waves, though. The armies of monkeys with robotic brains are still a long ways off, mainly due to the difficulties in getting AI systems to do image recognition [uni-koblenz.de], which is quite possibly the most challenging problem in AI research today.
--
The paralysed people are ecstatic! (Score:5)
In the immortal words of Abe Simpson, "Oh son! This monkey's gonna to change my life!
--------
Login/Pass for NYTIMES (Score:2)
login: slashdot2000
password:slashdot2000
Article on same research on WebMD (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re:Boo hoo (Score:2)
Property is not an absolute right. The 5th and 14th amendments allow eminent domain and takings as long as there is just compensation. In your disease example, the government would "purchase" the cure at its fair market value. It happens all the time with less melodramatic examples (like Nixon's papers from his presidency, which were recently bought in a legal settlement with the Federal government).
Even if you think animals merely have a "qualified" prima-facie right to their lives, you still have a burden to show that normal human practices in the absence of great catastrophe or necessity can override those rights. By relegating it to the status of "mere psychological pleasantry, not a right", you're just begging the question as to what sort of rights animals have in the first place.
Re:The paralysed people are ecstatic! (Score:2)
I was searching the web for more info on this story last nite, and entering the keywords "monkey brain robot" into the Duke and MIT search engines. I felt like Homer Simpson let loose on Google.
Oooh, monkey brain robots! Doh!
Monkey monitor (Score:2)
I guess what I am asking is:
Can monkey see what monkey do?
Re: (Score:2)
Reverse-engineering the brain (Score:2)
The thing I don't understand about it is, why is it taking so long? I know that the brain and the nervous system are extraordinarily complex, and that they are analog rather than digital to further complicate things, but we are able to reverse-engineer things like Soviet submarines and other-companies'-microchips relatively quickly and fairly often. These are pretty complex and they don't come with design documents. Why isn't there a larger effort to actually document things like "the optic nerve protocol" or "the spinal cord protocol"? The benefits to having such specifications for the human nervous system would be unimaginable.
Of course, there are a lot of complications involved as well--as soon as you begin to manipulate the nervous system you can begin to manipulate reality. When we (or the state) can change what people see and hear directly, things begin to get real sticky, real fast.
The thing that scares me is that it is inevitable--the nervous system is bound to be cracked someday. What happens when it does? What is going to protect us from sinister uses of the technology? Will the benefits outweigh the risks?
Re:Not the first time (Score:3)
54% Slashdot Pure