Saturday, December 12, 2015

For later reading (Stuff that will affect your life in 2025)

Weyl Fermion:

Proposed by the mathematician and physicist Hermann Weyl in 1929, Weyl fermions have long been regarded as possible building blocks of other subatomic particles. If applied to next-generation electronics, the fermions could allow for a nearly free and efficient flow of electricity and thus greater power. Hasan led an international team that reported their discovery...(of) the Weyl fermion in a synthetic metallic crystal called tantalum arsenide (TaAs)... 

more HERE.

No, I'll have to read up on it. I know about Tantulus, but wasn't aware there was an element called Tantalum...

and apparantly this metal is used in bone repair implants.


a futurist scientist on ArtBell the other day was mainly discussing multiverses, but he also mentioned the Brain initiative, saying that in the future, our brains will be connected by the internet. Alas, I was called away and didn't hear the rest.

Here is an article about Brain 2.0.

There is a lot of basic research going on, not only about how the brain is wired, but how it works and how you can read thoughts and how you can change memories and how you can manipulate how a person thinks.

I had heard the Brain initiative was exploring ways to treat PTSS in veterans, but don't  know much more.

Here is a technology Review paper from 2013 about it.
and an article originally on the Atlantic again in 2013 why some people think it's scary.

But the implications of the President's BRAIN project are a bit scarier than you might think. You can only go so far mapping the brain before you get into some ethically questionable territory.Esquire's Luke Dittrich did some early tea leaf reading to preview the project last month and noticed something questionable: In an academic journal article written by many of the BRAIN project scientists, Dittrich noticed one of the proposed technologies the team may use would essentially be able to remotely and wirelessly control the human brain, if developed. While the intentions of this technology when used by the BRAIN team would be wholesome and for the good of human science, it's not hard to see how that technology could go horribly wrong if it ended up in the wrong hands. Dittrich adds:
I'm not saying that the President's brain-mapping project is a bad idea. As he put it in his State of the Union address, it could help "unlock the answers to Alzheimer's," among other worthy goals. But I do think it's worth considering that this same project is also a DARPA-associated endeavor that could lead to the development of the first truly sci-fi caliber mind-control technology.
Which is probably why the President is also ordering an ethical study of any new developments the team comes up with throughout the ongoing work of the BRAIN team.
That part that he is ordering an ethical study doesn't comfort me, because, to paraphrase a sardonic Nat Hentoff, they tend to be apologists for death...and you can always hire an ethicist who will okay your project...

just to confuse matters, the Europeans have a "brain project" and Obama has a "brain initiative" and Japan has their own Brain/Minds study.

Kavli Foundation interviews here.

the WAPO has a happy article on Obama's project HERE

BBC future article on keeping brain memories alive after you die.

and this article discusses how mapping the brain and figuring out how to manipulate it  links to transhumanism.

The name “transhumanism” is the basic concept that tells it all. Its followers want to go beyond the present human condition. At its core it means to overcome the “natural” limitations inherent in human existence, which is to be born, live relatively short, half-conscious lives, and then die. The supporters of “human enhancement” and “transhumanism” intend to break through these current physical and cognitive (and perhaps even spiritual) barriers. In order to do that, they will pursue biotechnological upgrades to the human body and thus, conceivably, try to eliminate the negative effects of ageing and eventually (at least in their aspiration) even death.
more HERE

No comments: