[extropy-chat] A more advanced neural interface chip

[Adrian Tymes]

--- Sahyinepu <sahynepu at concentric.net> wrote:
> I assume people are thinking of developing the
> technology for purposes 
> other than helping the disabled?

Some are, but unfortunately this doesn't get as much
funding, especially outside of military projects.
Then again, no one's yet come up with a way to do
human-equivalent control cheaply enough to make
enhancement economically practical - yet.  It
currently only makes sense when natural capabilities
aren't an option - i.e., for the disabled.  I hope
that changes, and that phrasing things that way helps
illustrate exactly what would need to happen for that
change to occur.

> I
> have never 
> understood some people's attachment to their form,
> even when such 
> attachment prevents them from improving their
> condition.

Nostalgia, fear that the "upgrade" would in truth be a
downgrade (which happens from time to time with
poorly-planned deployments of more mundane
technology - and has been shown to be avoided with
proper planning), awareness that enhancement currently
is not viable combined with a lack of imagination (or
even just logical prediction based on ancient but
still just as relevant historic trends), warped senses
of "fairness", worries that only the rich would be
able to afford enhancements (which, again, blatantly
ignores history's lessons)...there are many reasons.
None of them truly justified or justifiable, but they
still exist.