Live data from Hacker News

Monkey MindPong

neuralink.com

201–210 of 291 posts

Re: Monkey MindPong

#201
post #150

For those who don’t know much about this field, this seems incredible. The reality is that this a tech demo that Neuralink is using to practice the basics. For other research groups in this field, this is tech from 20 years ago. The current state of the art is humans, mostly quadriplegic people, with chips which let them control robot arms with enough accuracy to pick up small delicate objects, play games, and type b…

I think that's a little unfair. I guess what they are doing is achieving the basics, but with a different interface. This is an important proof of concept.

Remember, Musk is all about scalable manufacturing and products. If this was other's tech from 20 years ago, where's the massive commercialization? They failed. Musk is focused on this aspect, and he will (given his past achievements) succeed.

Re: Monkey MindPong

#202
post #178

Human/animal ethics is a minefield of hypocrisy. Why are we mostly comfortable with performing these types of experiments on other lower-IQ species but would baulk at doing them on intellectually-handicapped children for instance? I believe our morality base for these types of decisions is mostly based on the religious traditions of humans somehow being 'special' in the scheme of things. Domestic pets also partially…

Out of all animal experiments this is the one where you take a stance? Or are you tooting your moral superiority everywhere? Feel free to stop using everything stemming from animal experiments. They're more or less a necessity, at least until we can model the animal kingdom with AI. Maybe you should start trying to cope with the fact instead of fighting it.

I simply observed the situation as it stands. It's curious that you feel affronted by this.

Re: Monkey MindPong

#203
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zoos are bastions of conservation. They are usually only filled by rescue animals, and their funds are often used in conservation and animal welfare programs.

is that really always the case? do you have some data about it I can look into? I stopped going to zoos because I didn't want to contribute to keeping animals like that, but would like to read information to the contrary if that's the case.

I think it depends on the individual zoo. It's up to them to take part in conservation programs or to stick to keeping animals exclusively for display.

The one where I live has historically been a bunch of very desolate animal display cases, but they've committed to doing what amounts to a slow U-turn, and they have done quite well in that regard.

The old enclosures were clearly built to keep animals in plain view at all times. They've remodelled a lot of them since, and they're completely rebuilding some. There are times where you don't see a single great ape during a whole visit, because their new habitats have some caves and comfy areas hidden from view, with the result that especially the gorillas now appear to have quite a bit of fun interacting with visitors at the four separate points in their enclosure where that is possible and definitely seem much more relaxed than the previous generations (as far as I can tell, I'm no gorilla myself).

Certainly still worse than a life in their natural habitat, but they are part of a multinational conservation project and all their current gorillas were essentially sent to them via this project, with the end-goal of (as I understand it) having a viable captive gorilla population in zoos around the world so there is a "backup" in case the natural populations collapse. The living conditions they provide have earned praise from experts (for what that's worth, seeing they're not gorillas themselves, either).

They still keep their lions in a tiny, cruel pen, but they're building a new one currently that is supposed to be state of the art. Most monkeys have gotten new accomodations last year I think and they're pretty involved in keeping Kunekune pigs from going almost extinct a second time and they're breeding Visayan Warty Pigs (which are absolutely amazing things, and critically endangered); I guess for a relatively provincial central European zoo with a limited budget, that's quite decent.

They've also recently completed a pretty big section with heirloom breeds of common farm animals and they do a lot of education programs and events for schools, which I feel is something my generation missed out on big time, not necessarily from a zoo, but some kind of getting in contact with animals other than the occasional cat or dog might have been quite helpful. I feel there are some really weird misconceptions about animals that are pretty widespread among people my age.

For what it's worth, I've been quite opposed to that zoo in the past, but their efforts over the last decade or so have been enough to convince me to pay for a year pass. Some zoos are much slower adopting this approach, I surely wouldn't be as supportive of one of those.

Re: Monkey MindPong

#204
post #150

For those who don’t know much about this field, this seems incredible. The reality is that this a tech demo that Neuralink is using to practice the basics. For other research groups in this field, this is tech from 20 years ago. The current state of the art is humans, mostly quadriplegic people, with chips which let them control robot arms with enough accuracy to pick up small delicate objects, play games, and type b…

Would it be possible to control an extra arm somehow? Or brain plasticity doesn't go that far?

I bet it is possible but that does not mean that it is going to be easy. Try training yourself to wiggle an ear or to lift a single eyebrow if you cannot do that yet. It's possible but it takes quite some time.

Re: Monkey MindPong

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To counter with an extreme example: plenty of medical progress was made via Nazi and Japanese experiments on live subjects during the second world war. So no, categorically the ends does not always justify the means.

>plenty of medical progress was made via Nazi and Japanese experiments on live subjects during the second world war [citation needed]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_cover-up_of_Japanes...

http://www.bu.edu/articles/2019/learn-from-nazi-medical-rese...

Re: Monkey MindPong

#206
post #50

This seems to be very similar to the early 2000s demos at Brown University/Cyberkinetics[1]. In 2008 they demonstrated it in humans[2] after lots of work getting FDA approval. The core difference here (from my non-expert reading) seem to be electrodes are along a thread rather than on a chip. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJJPbpHoPWo for a video of the pong demo in humans. The motor cortex seems to have a clear…

I'm curious - does taking a signal straight from the brain reduce reaction times? Is there a big loss of time sending the signal down to the arm, or is the reaction time mostly cognitive anyway?

Yes. Nerve signals travel at about 50-60 m/s through the limbs, so it takes about 20-30ms for a signal to travel from brain to the hand muscles.

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity

Re: Monkey MindPong

#207

"What better reward for a monkey, than a banana"? what about FREEDOM? I am not a vegan/whatever/animal activist, but maybe we should allow terminally-ill or death-row volunteers for this kind of experiment... With good money for the family, and I think some people would like to help mankind in the end. It is better than dying without accomplishing anything in life. So, you have at most one year with an inoperable tum…

You said you’re not a vegan, so to be clear your okay with factory farms crushing pigs to death but minimally invasive surgery on monkeys so they can play pong is too far? I don’t care about your stance on animal consumption particularly, but don’t you find that a little hypocritical?

Yep, I agree this sounds hypocritical,but everybody has different "lines" to cross. I guess mine is how close they are to humans. (98%), and I also differentiate "food" from "experiment".

Re: Monkey MindPong

#209
post #150

For those who don’t know much about this field, this seems incredible. The reality is that this a tech demo that Neuralink is using to practice the basics. For other research groups in this field, this is tech from 20 years ago. The current state of the art is humans, mostly quadriplegic people, with chips which let them control robot arms with enough accuracy to pick up small delicate objects, play games, and type b…

I think that's a little unfair. I guess what they are doing is achieving the basics, but with a different interface. This is an important proof of concept. Remember, Musk is all about scalable manufacturing and products. If this was other's tech from 20 years ago, where's the massive commercialization? They failed. Musk is focused on this aspect, and he will (given his past achievements) succeed.

This is really basic. Here is a harder task from 2015 in monkeys with only 96 implanted electrodes (Utah array): https://youtu.be/lVFWIv5lupo?t=1673

Here is a video from 2014 of someone controlling a quadcopter with their mind with zero implanted electrodes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsraC04Mm8w

Re: Monkey MindPong

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the source of wonder here is that neural networks are very un-CPU like, in the level of correlation between the units. I'm not sure you could probe a CPU in a similar manner and be able to recover meaningful information. A binary 101X10 are entirely different numbers depending on what X is, for example, and you woulnd't necessarily expect X to correlate with the place values elsehwere (e.g. 1st and 5th bit).…

Funny you should compare understanding biological neural networks to a microprocessor. Check out this paper ( https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/jo... ), which systematically addresses how applying traditional neuroscience methods to analyzing a microprocessor would get you.

I've read that paper years ago. I'm afraid I find it unimpressive. It is not so hard, really, to fail, when you fail to try. I have a computer science degree; I've built CPUs (from all the sequential and combinational circuits on up); I also work in neuroscience, and do some of the kinds of analysis this paper tries to criticize.

For example, a very basic approach is design experimental tasks that have contrasting conditions, or events to be predicted. They don't do that. Even something as simple as pressing the controller left vs right vs not moving at all in donkeykong would have been more interesting.

In any case, brains and traditional computer circuits work on different principles as I noted in my OP. Furthermore, there is quite a lot more redundancy in brains--and partial-redundancy is a bit of how it works; for example, if you have a population of neurons with different tuning curves, then the output in response to a stimulus can be integrated, and a likelihood distribution obtained for the actual value of a stimulus; that's just fundamentally different than how, say, a 5-stage pipelined RISC cpu works.

Post reply on HN