Top Tech Voices Podcast S2 E3: Neuro-Tech and Brain Interfaces

I think of consciousness as the awareness that a memory is a memory, but I don't dwell on trying  to define it better. That is a murky rabbit hole.

I find it curious that when recalling a phone number for example, I don't picture the numbers, the number just shows up in my speech buffer ready to be spoken.

I don't know if it works like this for others.

I don't know if I am just weird, but I have found that my brain seems to often work differently from other people I know.

dougw said:

the number just shows up in my speech buffer ready to be spoken.

There are many animals with levels of intelligence that approach our own such as apes, pigs and corvids... but it's our language that gives us an advantage.  Specifically what is often cited is that language provides a means to cooperate in social structures and pass down knowledge from generation to generation.... but probably even more important is the role language plays in helping us with executive functions.  Whenever we carry out a new sequence of tasks more often than not we are verbalizing each step in our head... like the phone number in your speech buffer.... for phone numbers I think I recall from my speech buffer as well but I find it reassuring to see the numbers on my screen as I enter them.... of course this wasn't the case when I was a kid because there were no digital displays.

I dunno that octopi or whales or walruses dont pass on tribal knowledge, they may not value sharing info based on fishing net avoidance or family history , but more on catching the best flavored dinner.  :-) 

Based on a definition of unconsciousness being like a rag on the floor - not aware of surroundings, only involuntary interactions, even some of those involuntary things being minimal - not feeling cold, fighting for breath,  etc   

consciousness is the inverse of unconscious: an organism aware of surroundings, voluntary actions to sensory perceptions, self preservation, pain avoidance: physical comfort, run from danger,  hunt for food 

there is a higher activity level above consciousness that drives altruistic behavior, sensory interpretation, historical decision making, predictive decision making , social behaviors, communication - verbal and non-verbal 

Whales I believe do have the means to communicate through sound.  Whether or not they have the variety in their vocal range to support a rich and varied language is another thing.  Wales and crows are held back by their lack of limbs.  Opposable thumbs are among our gifts.

This episode pretty much shows why folks get caught up in conspiracy theories without much trouble. If our minds are basically just making educated guesses all the time, then it makes sense that once we really believe something, our brains will just keep looking for things that confirm it.

That dress thing, for example, the one I saw as blue and black, really showed how the same thing can look completely different to different people. So, think about news, social media, or even beliefs. Things can really get out of hand quickly in those situations.

I also liked the meditation part; it felt like I was training my brain to stop guessing so much and just focus on what was right there. The BCI part was a little concerning, you know? What if machines start trying to figure out what our messy brain signals mean, and they guess wrong, but people believe what the machine says?

Just a thought, maybe you could put that dress illusion in the post; it usually gets people talking.This didn't just explain things; it made me wonder about how much of what I think I know is actually true. I saw that how is it?

With Neuralink and Synchron moving toward high-volume production this year, we’re crossing a line where our most private thoughts could technically be 'data points.' If a BCI can decode my intent to move a cursor, how long until it can decode my unspoken emotions or political leanings? Do we need a 'Neural Bill of Rights' before this goes mainstream?

have a look what goldmine i found on internet today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBYSpR8N6pc

Very engaging episode, definitely food for thought.

I often use the famous “dress” image in my computer vision lectures as an example of how human perception can mislead us. While it’s commonly described as an illusion, it’s really about interpretation. If you measure the pixel values, for example using ImageJ, you’ll find that in the supposedly “white” regions, the red and green components are actually lower than the blue, indicating that the color is in fact blue. Of course, this doesn’t reveal the true color of the dress, since illumination conditions play a crucial role. The full explanation is well documented on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dress).

Around the 38-minute mark, Anil Seth argues that the brain is not a computer, later refining the comparison by likening it more to an analog system. This brought back memories of early analog computer prototypes I encountered in my youth. Ultimately, digital computers, even those based on vacuum tubes, proved more efficient and scalable. Still, it’s interesting to imagine how analog computing might have evolved if it had kept pace technologically. Neural networks, the backbone of modern AI, largely implemented as software on digital hardware, are relatively inefficient compared to what an analog neural network could achieve, for instance, using operational amplifiers to perform summation and activation functions directly in hardware. Interestingly comparable technology in camera technology, so called neuromorphic cameras are now entering the scene (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_camera).

Finally, I’d like to touch on the discussion of free will at around 24 minutes. This debate goes back centuries. In the 16th century, Martin Luther’s De Servo Arbitrio (“On the Bondage of the Will”) argued that humans cannot freely choose between good and evil, but depend entirely on divine grace for salvation. This was written in response to Erasmus’ earlier defence of free will. That said, Anil Seth seems to approach the concept from a different, less theological perspective (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Bondage_of_the_Will).

Are we going to live long enough to witness that every brain gets its own IP address? The implications of this sounds very much like science fiction for now, but the more time passes the more ideas and dreams of fictional stories in books and movies become reality.

With the recent 'AI' developments, I won't even try to predict the future at all.