why isn’t there a technology in which the brain directly receives information from devices rather than through notifications?

69 views
0

The brain is extremely receptive to input so in theory the technology sounds easy to develop, but what exactly is the reason this still hasn’t been done?

In: 0

Easy to develop? Martian?

Because the ethical hold up of widespread human-brain interface testing. If it were ethical to, say, experiment on millions of people against their will without regard to the safety of human life and psyche, you can learn a lot… such is much of modern medicine and rocket science predicated on information gathered by Nazi experimentation.

The human body (or any animal’s body really) is probably one of the most complex things out there, and the brain is probably the most complex part of it. So not easy to develop at all

Neuralink is pretty much what you are describing, and is, since recently, in a first phase of clinical trials. Give or take a few years, and it should start being in use in medicine.

Because we haven’t yet come up with a technology that works as well as the natural input senses we already have.

It’s easy to wire up one neuron, but what you need is several hundred million firing in a familiar from early childhood learned/response pattern to visually identify an apple.

It’s hard work mastering the feedback from a sense much less actively using a hand. The incredibly complex action of bipedal walking is mindless for most people, we don’t remember how to do it, we just do it. It took hard work to master that skill. It would likely take a similar effort to learn a new sense and relate it to the world.