Background to this slightly weird question: I found one of my old an English exams on science fiction and dystopian literature from the 11th grade in North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany (ca. 2004) and found a similar question. The idea back then was to discuss the pro- and cons of a BCI (and I objectively did not do to well back then) . I am interested about people’s opinions.

  • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    Entirely depends on how it’d work. If it’s a good one and makes me able to access all of humanity’s combined knowledge… Sure, why not? If it’s a bad one and makes me hooked on some virtual world, or I have a goid chance of getting hacked and walk around like a zombie or ends me in a scifi dystopia… No. I don’t think I can decide without knowing more details.

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    If it was secure and safe being the key words there. I’m not sure how that could be demonstrated to a high enough degree for me to feel comfortable with it.

  • themachine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Assuming the implementation is done in such a way that I am not indirectly owned by the manufacturer of the BCI and am capable of maintaining its software and firmware myself…yes yes absolutely yes stick that shit in my head.

    But if it is not open source and I’m expected to be tied to some corporate entity just to utililze it, no, absolutely not.

    • Boozilla@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      Similar feelings. I’m far less worried about the tech than the corpos behind the tech. There are other concerns, like immune system going haywire, constant EM radiation, etc. But the capitalist tech bros would be my chief concern.

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    That depends on what it could do, and how granular it could be programmed.

    I don’t want any active interface, it should just be passive.

    If I had a small chip in my head that I could program to reward a healthy lifestyle but nothing else, then yes I would be interested.

    I mean something that would give me a slight dopamine hit when making healthy choises would be fantastic.

    Now, that would be impossible to make, but that is the only kind of BCI I would accept

  • HipsterTenZero@dormi.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    No, i don’t need that. It was a fun fantasy when I was younger, but unless I end up losing use of my limbs or something, cyborging it up seems like a bad move in our nonfictional world.

  • Tazerface@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    The way the world is moving towards the subscription model - no way. Imagine some company having the ability to remotely disable the chip.

    If the BCI was implanted with no external communication, perhaps. Depends on how it will benefit me.

  • Crackhappy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    There is no such thing as a secure brain-computer interface. That’s like asking if there is a safe tiger-butt interface.

  • Laristal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    No, one need only look at the windows recall debacle to see how corporations would abuse the chip, not to mention the potential for advertising beamed directly to your brain and the possibility of malware. Hell even discounting all of that, not that you should by any means, how would upgrading work?

  • HEXN3T@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Like a Focus? As long as it’s 100% local, I think it’d be cool and probably not dystopian. Maybe. Possibly.

  • Kyrgizion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Depends on the capabilities. If i can automatically open my garage door with my mind or draw a bath, or control a cursor on a screen, then no. If it enables entire new ways of experiencing sensations or memories, or ways to share them, or fully immerse you in a virtual world indistinguishable from reality, then maybe. If it’s not from a company Musk has any hand in.

  • technomad@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    I don’t think that I would ever trust this, considering the state of everything currently. But yeah, if it was secure and safe. I think it would be cool to have things like better storage capabilities, eyesight enhancements, auxiliary sensations, etc.

    It probably wouldn’t be cheap either though, which already puts the concept out of my reach.

    shrugs