This sounds a lot like the mind-reading computer: http://gearlog.com/blogs/gearlog/archive/2006/06/27/14519.aspx

The NY Times had this related article this morning (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/13/science/13brain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin). As I was reading it, I was thinking, if I'm controlling a computer with my brain, what if I could just think of the action I wanted to have happen instead of controlling a cursor to trigger it? Obviously, this tech is in the early stages and directional control is probably a necessary jumping-off point. But just imagine how much more fun using Photoshop would be if you could just think "Unsharp Mask" and voila! It's done! I was chatting about this with Erin, the PCMag.com art girl, and we decided shortcuts would be the way to go, and would be invaluable to bloggers and digital artists. I would think "Paste" and it would trigger Ctrl-V, and so on. Someday...

Applications could be incredible for Quadrapaligics, and people with motor neurone disease. Could mean the difference between comunication, and being trapped in ones body. May be deveoped further for motorized wheelchair control and voice machines. Imagine the possibilities!

Applications could be incredible for Quadrapaligics, and people with motor neurone disease. Could mean the difference between comunication, and being trapped in ones body. May be deveoped further for motorized wheelchair control and voice machines. Imagine the possibilities!

To some extent, I think Kyle's idea of controlling the action intself instead of the cursor is an interesting one, but I can think of one distinct problem: the human mind usually doesn't stay completely focused on one task. I'm sure that when you're working in photoshop, your mind is wandering and thinking about other things, even briefly: imagine the confusion your computer would be in if you're in photoshop thinking "paste" and then right afterwards your mind wanders and you think "I wonder what I'm going to have for lunch..." or "Look at all this work I have to do" or any other wandering thoughts you have thousands of times per day. It would be enormously difficult and require an incredible amount of processing power to even begin to interpret and process every thought the comuter recieves through the brain interface, and even if it could do that, I'm sure the computer's interpretation of your thoughts and whether they were valid instructions or not would be wrong as often as it would be right. For instance, the word "copy." What if you've got photoshop open, and the wandering thought crosses your mind "Oh, I need to 'copy' that report!" It's not a command, but the computer may interpret it as one. Or the "start" button on a windows pc. "Guess I'd better 'start' that project now..." Same situation. Either the computer looks for keywords that you think, in which case this problem presents itself, or the computer analyzes every single thought of yours that it can and then decides whether it was a command, or a thought not intended for interpretation by the computer, in which case any computer would be completely overwhelmed by the processing requirements. While it would be awesome and fun in theory, I don't see how this is possible, at least with today's technology, or even a ways into the future. Of course, there's always that theoretical someday, and I'm sure it will eventually happen, but not for a long time.

No worries Mike, the great thing about using the cerebellum is that it is for motor control and your wandering thoughts wouldn't make it to the mouse. Only when your brain actually wanted to physically do something would the cerebellum get involved. Now if they stuck the electrodes on your prefrontal cortex, the "wandering" area of your consciousness, then ya, you'd be downloading porn, ordering from pizza hut and emailing nasty messages to your boss instead of unsharp masking. Now if you could input data through the prefrontal cortex, then resistance would be futile!

I recon you guys have nearly got it all, why not just implant 2 electrodes one into the cerebellum the other into the prefrontal cortex. This way allowing your motor control and also giving in to inspiration and imagination (just think it in your minds eye and take a type of screenshot) then work with the computer as a team to complete the project?...

Could this be used to help stroke victims communicate?

I find this all very exciting and scary at the same time.I too, love the idea of being able to use my mind to carry out tasks. And lets say that the computer will learn to understand real directive thoughts opposed to mindless thoughts that flow through our brains at any given moment and figures out what we really want--and when the computer thinks it has a total handle on how our particular individual brain works, will it start arguing with me on what it thinks I really want or worse yet, starts deciding whats best altogether... And then theres the trust issues concerning government.

Kyle wrote "what if I could just think of the action I wanted to have happen instead of controlling a cursor to trigger it? ... and would be invaluable to bloggers and digital artists. I would think "Paste" and it would trigger Ctrl-V, and so on. Someday..." Kyle if you and Erin are thinking future, why not take it to the next level. If the electrodes could evaluate a Paste command and execute Ctrl-V, why not think of the finished .psd and have the computer analyze, evaluate and compose your creation simply by seeing the finished product in your mind?

Yikes! Katherine is right! Last thing we need is Dick Cheney's Secret Borg Army lurching around.

^ | | haha, you can't even say Dick Cheney's name. I guess Cheney's name is evil and should be banned.

Science Fiction has been there, done that, for years, even long before the Borg. Wireheads, plug-ins, etc., are old news. What is wonderful about this is that reality is catching up with 20-40-year-old SF. This is a much better concept for fingerless computer work than voice-activated computers. I dread the day when people in an office can speak to their computers. The roar of babble would destroy the work environment, yet no one seems to consider that. At least one's thoughts are, hopefully, quieter than one's mouth. Plus, talkie though I am, I can type faster than I can talk, especially in giving directions to a machine. However, the brain-operated computer might really be the way to go. I wonder if Stephen Hawking would be interested?

Science Fiction has been there, done that, for years, even long before the Borg. Wireheads, plug-ins, etc., are old news. What is wonderful about this is that reality is catching up with 20-40-year-old SF. This is a much better concept for fingerless computer work than voice-activated computers. I dread the day when people in an office can speak to their computers. The roar of babble would destroy the work environment, yet no one seems to consider that. At least one's thoughts are, hopefully, quieter than one's mouth. Plus, talkie though I am, I can type faster than I can talk, especially in giving directions to a machine. However, the brain-operated computer might really be the way to go. I wonder if Stephen Hawking would be interested?

Rachel, your last comment is a perfect lead-in to a story in the latest issue of PC Magazine (we just put it online yseterday, it's here: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1988149,00.asp) about technology that got its start in sci fi. The article's by David Gerrold, who wrote the famous "Tribbles" Star Trek episode. I'm not really a sci-fi fan, but this story was fascinating! Definitely worth a quick read.

So does this computer have a "Do What I Think I Mean" key?