World's First Cyborg Speaks Out

The Great JT

New member
Oct 6, 2008
3,721
0
0
I hope cyborg arms and organs are available soon, I want to enter an arm wrestling competition with my robo-arm.
 

Lt._nefarious

New member
Apr 11, 2012
1,285
0
0
I hope everything get's all Deus Ex Human Revolution by 2024 because, and you would too, I'd totally replace my arms with super metal arms that have swords instead of elbows.
 

Toilet

New member
Feb 22, 2012
401
0
0
Yeah nah, this guy isn't a cyborg, he is a pretentious "artist" with a pair of stupid headphones with a camera. This [http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2012/07/18/toronto_cyborg_steve_mann_says_he_was_assaulted_in_paris_mcdonalds.html]guy is a cyborg, none of that hearing colours crap.
 

MrGalactus

Elite Member
Sep 18, 2010
1,849
0
41
A) Why and how are any of his rights being infringed upon here?

B) Does he really count as a cyborg? He can't control any machinery with his mind, and without his enhancement, he'd only be colourblind, not dead. By this standard, anyone who's had lasik surgery, a stomach staple, or a pacemaker is a cyborg.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
Purposely giving people with a sense deficiency Synesthesia is a pretty awesome idea. I'll put this with the sensors that blind people can wear that administers a tiny tiny electrical shock to to their tongue. They then are teaching their brain how to see through an alternate sense organ. This is SCIENCE!

OniaPL said:
Rather than developing this kind of technology, wouldn't it be more effective to dump that cash in something like gene therapy and gene research? Being able to use a vector to put a properly working, dominative allele in the place of one of the recessive alleles that cause achromatopsia (or being able to find the recessive gene and deal with it during the embryo/fetus phase) would be far better than just sticking a machine into someone's head and make them "hear" sounds.

That'd be a future where I'd like to live.
I don't know if this has been addressed already: There is actually so little known about the genome and the epigenetic landscape, it just doesn't make sense not seek out other ways of solving problems. That is what nature did in evolution. Our brains, for instance has many systems that overlap and do the same or similar things. Take our sense of sight for instance, it's the newest sense in the grand scheme of life on this planet. The sense of sight is only about 900 Million years old, and in a lot of ways a lot more powerful than other senses. Olfaction, conversely, is the oldest and has a lot more connections in our brain. Olfaction predates the corpus callosum and is tied to our memory, our perception of the world independent of our phrenological sense of what the brain does and how it handles information. It literally has neurological connection to our brain stem. Unlike our sense of Sight.

But, back to Genes. There is only a handful of conditions out of potentially millions, many of which we don't know even exist (this number is compiled from the nearly uncountable ways a system can break down and perform incorrectly or detrimentally) that have direct genetic links to specific genes. For instance, Sickle Cell Anemia is tied to one or few known gene mutations. In the case of Sickle Cell Anemia, the genetic factor was known years before the human genome project finished what it started. If you were to dump the lions share of all research money into genetic alterations, perhaps designer virus' that can change the function of cell in an already living person (still only really the stuff of modern science fiction), or to research what is wrong with someone before they are born, or even just to understand exactly what can go wrong, we are talking decades of research. People are somewhat misinformed about the state of our understanding of genetics. Really, we probably know 1000th of 1 Percent, if we are lucky. But the media and science magazines, research papers and collegiate science centers give the impression of more than what has been accomplished. Really, the most fantastic things are still to come, some things that I doubt anyone can even imagine at this point in time. It's all very exciting.

That said, it only makes sense for people to research direct ways of helping the afflicted on what is known. It was through the aforementioned idea of giving blind people site by sensor and electrical shock on their tongue or a harness on the back that this idea was probably birthed. Or, it follows the same thought, even if it's not based off of that idea directly. Modern Neuroscience has shown us that the eyes are sense organ and it's the brain itself that sees. This is a logical extension of that very idea.

But, I digress. The subjects of genetics and neuroscience have been the bulk of my reading in recent years. I'm obviously no expert. But I wanted to put my two cents into your comment.
 

Nieroshai

New member
Aug 20, 2009
2,940
0
0
TheVampwizimp said:
kyogen said:
The key criterion for being a cyborg is the visibility of the implant? Interesting. So everyone with a pacemaker so well integrated into their bodies that they don't notice it is not a cyborg, or is it just that old folks who spend most of their time ignoring the tech implants aren't cool?
Exactly. We've had cyborgs for decades now, no matter which way you want to define it. The first person with an artificial heart; the first person with a brain implant that allows them to control a mechanical apparatus, like an arm or a computer cursor; that guy who put a chip in his wrist that can open electronic doors; the first person with a cochlear implant; hell, even our pets are cyborgs with the tracking systems we put in them. And what about pirates, huh? With their peg legs and hook hands? Anyone who has integrated technology with their body is a cyborg, this guy is not new.

Ah, but of course, his passport says he's a cyborg, so he must really be the first one. After all, the law says so.
A minor nitpick: unless the modification is cybernetic, one is not a cyb(ernetic)org(anism). A peg leg does not do it.
 

Nieroshai

New member
Aug 20, 2009
2,940
0
0
MrGalactus said:
A) Why and how are any of his rights being infringed upon here?

B) Does he really count as a cyborg? He can't control any machinery with his mind, and without his enhancement, he'd only be colourblind, not dead. By this standard, anyone who's had lasik surgery, a stomach staple, or a pacemaker is a cyborg.
I'll do this for the whole thread if I have to. Lasik surgery and stomach staples are not cybernetic. Therefore, no cyborg.
 

MrGalactus

Elite Member
Sep 18, 2010
1,849
0
41
Nieroshai said:
MrGalactus said:
A) Why and how are any of his rights being infringed upon here?

B) Does he really count as a cyborg? He can't control any machinery with his mind, and without his enhancement, he'd only be colourblind, not dead. By this standard, anyone who's had lasik surgery, a stomach staple, or a pacemaker is a cyborg.
I'll do this for the whole thread if I have to. Lasik surgery and stomach staples are not cybernetic. Therefore, no cyborg.
What would we count as cybernetic?
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
Good, now get on on working of putting my brains in robotic body, i grow tired of this bag of meat.
 

Do4600

New member
Oct 16, 2007
934
0
0
kyogen said:
The key criterion for being a cyborg is the visibility of the implant? Interesting. So everyone with a pacemaker so well integrated into their bodies that they don't notice it is not a cyborg, or is it just that old folks who spend most of their time ignoring the tech implants aren't cool?
So if I glue my cellphone to my face, I'm a cyborg?

O.T.

Interesting, but there are far more advanced techs that are more credibly cybernetic than this, Cochlear implants are the first to come to mind, second are the thought controlled cybernetic arm prostheses that we are using right now for amputees. within 30 years at present rate we'll be using integrated iris implants that can not only make the blind see but can also provide a HUD that monitors blood chemistry and heart rate as well. We will begin genetically engineering humans eventually to never be blind, but the repercussions of such an act will have some serious moral implications.(Gattaca)
 

Nieroshai

New member
Aug 20, 2009
2,940
0
0
MrGalactus said:
Nieroshai said:
MrGalactus said:
A) Why and how are any of his rights being infringed upon here?

B) Does he really count as a cyborg? He can't control any machinery with his mind, and without his enhancement, he'd only be colourblind, not dead. By this standard, anyone who's had lasik surgery, a stomach staple, or a pacemaker is a cyborg.
I'll do this for the whole thread if I have to. Lasik surgery and stomach staples are not cybernetic. Therefore, no cyborg.
What would we count as cybernetic?
Logic-driven mechanisms, such as circuitry. The definition can easily be looked up, how is it hard to do one's own learning instead of prompting further forum dialogue?
 

cthulhlu

New member
Feb 21, 2011
39
0
0
it seems silly, but its probably for the best that we get this all sorted out right now before we get to the point were the guys with tanks for arms get angry at us.
 

TAdamson

New member
Jun 20, 2012
284
0
0
Worlds first Cyborg?

What about Steve Mann? Cochlear implants? Pacemakers? Robotic limbs with nerve-muscle grafts? All existing long before this.
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,489
0
0
I see nothing wrong with this. We should take a page out of the book of...Bannakaffalatta.


In all seriousness, it's all coming to pass as I predicted. The most-likely future-development of the technology age is Ghost in the Shell. Cyberization will be treated cautiously at first, maybe even argued about constantly, but eventually it will be embraced. To what end? I don't know. Perhaps it will serve evolution in the same way our tool-using helped us grow from slumped hairy mammals to clothes-wearing beings who stand tall and operate complex machines on a daily basis. Human adaptivity may change for the better, on the physical/instinctual level.